Chapter 8 chapter eight

When translated into English, the name "Master" is sometimes translated as "sophists (sophists)", sometimes translated as "logicians (logicians)" or "dialecticians (dialecticians)".It is a fact that a master is somewhat alike to a sophist, a logician, and a dialectician; but it is even more true that they are not exactly the same.In order to avoid confusion, it is best to translate it literally as theSchoolofNames.This kind of translation can also remind Westerners to pay attention to an important issue discussed in Chinese philosophy, that is, the relationship between "name" and "realness".

Logically speaking, the opposition between name and reality in ancient Chinese philosophy is very similar to the opposition between subject and object in the West.For example, "This is a table" and "Socrates is a man", in which "this" and "Socrates" are both "substances", while "table" and "man" are both "names".This is very obvious.But if we try to analyze more precisely what name and reality are, and what their relationship is, we can easily get into some very strange problems, the solution of which will take us into the heart of philosophy.

Famous people were known as "debaters" in ancient times.In the "Autumn Water" article, Gongsun Long, a leader of famous schools, was mentioned. He said that he himself "has a different contract, but Li Jianbai, otherwise, it's okay. It's difficult to know the knowledge of a hundred schools of thought, but to argue with the poor."These words are completely applicable to the entire famous family.Famous people put forward some strange theories and are willing to debate with others. They tend to affirm what others deny, and they prefer to deny what others affirm. They are famous for this.For example, Sima Tan said in his "On the Essentials of the Six Schools": "Famous scholars are harsh in their investigations, so that people will not contradict their ideas." ("Historical Records Preface to Tai Shigong")

Xunzi, a Confucian in the third century BC, said that Deng Xi (died in 501 BC) and Hui Shi were "good at treating strange theories, playing with Qici" ("Xunzi · Fei Twelve Sons"). "Lu Shi Chunqiu" also said that Deng Xi and Gongsun Long were the generation of "separation of words and meanings" and "separation of words and hearts" ("Shen Yinglan · Li Wei · Obscenity"), they are famous for their paradoxes .After listing the famous paradoxes of the time, Hui Shi, Huan Tuan, and Gongsun Long were mentioned in the article.So these people seem to be the most important leaders of famous families.

About Huantuan, we know nothing else.Regarding Deng Xi, we know that he was a famous litigator at that time, and his works are lost today, and the book titled "Deng Xizi" is a fake one. "Lu's Spring and Autumn Annals" said: "Zi Chan ruled Zheng, and Deng analyzed the affairs. It is difficult to make an appointment with the people who have prisons. The big prison wears clothes, and the small prison wears pants. There are countless people who learn to litigate by offering clothes and pants. There is a story in "Lu Shi Chun Qiu", which says that it is Weishui There was a flood and a rich man in the state of Zheng was drowned.The body was taken away.The family members of the rich asked for the redemption of the corpse, and the person who got the corpse asked for too much money, so the family members of the rich asked Deng Xi for advice.Deng Xi said: "Don't worry, he won't sell it to you. Who will he sell it to?" The person who recovered the body was anxious, and also went to Deng Xi for advice.Deng Xi replied: "Don't worry, if he doesn't ask you to buy it, who else can he look for?"

It can be seen from this that Deng Xi's ability is to stick to the words of the legal provisions, and to make different interpretations at will in different cases.This is how he can "observe and circumvent so that people will not contradict his intentions".He specializes in interpreting and analyzing legal provisions in this way, regardless of the spirit of the provisions, regardless of the connection between the provisions and the facts.In other words, he only pays attention to "name" and not "reality".Such is the spirit of famous artists. It can be seen from this that the advocates were originally litigators, and Deng Xi was obviously one of the earliest litigators.But he was only the beginning of the analysis of names, and made no real contribution to philosophy itself.Therefore, it was Hui Shi and Gongsun Long who really created famous families later.

Regarding these two people, "Lu Shi Chunqiu" tells us: "Huizi was King Hui Hui of Wei (reigned 370-319 BC) and made the law, and the law has been accomplished, to show the people that all the people are good." ( "Shen Yinglan · Obscene Ci" also said: "Qin and Zhao made an appointment, and the appointment said; since now, what Qin wants to do, Zhao assists; what Zhao wants to do, Qin assists. There is no geometry. Qin Xingbing attacked Wei, and Zhao wanted to rescue him, but the King of Qin didn't say anything, so he asked the King of Zhao to say: "As promised, Zhao will help him to do what Qin wants to do; Qin will help him to do what Zhao wants to do. Now Qin wants to attack Wei. But because Zhao wants to save him, this is not an agreement. The king of Zhao told Pingyuan Lord. Pingyuan Lord told Gongsun Long. Gongsun Long said: "You can also send an envoy to let the king of Qin say, Zhao wants to save him. Today, the king of Qin alone will not help Zhao." , This is not a covenant." (Ibid.) "Han Feizi" also tells us: "Strong white, no thick words, but the law of the constitution." ("Ask and Debate") We will see below, "Strong white" It is the theory of Gongsun Long, and "no thick" is the theory of Hui Shi.

From these stories, we can see that Hui Shi and Gongsun Long were all related to the legal activities at that time to some extent.Gongsun Long's explanation of the agreement between Qin and Zhao is indeed completely in accordance with Deng Xi's spirit. "Han Feizi" believes that the "words" of these two people about the law have very bad effects, as bad as Deng Xi's.It may be strange that Han Fei himself was a legalist, so he objected to the "words" of famous scholars who originated from litigators, thinking that it violated the law.But in Chapter Fourteen we will understand that Han Fei and other legalists are actually politicians, not jurists.

Hui Shi and Gongsun Long represent two tendencies among famous people, one is to emphasize the relativity of reality, and the other is to emphasize the absoluteness of name.This difference becomes obvious when we start to analyze the name from the relationship between name and reality.Let's look at a simple sentence: "This is a table", in which "this" refers to a specific object, which is changeable and has birth and death.But "table" in this sentence refers to an abstract category, namely the name, which is unchanging and will always be what it is. "Name" is absolute, and "real" is relative.For example, "beauty" is the name of absolute beauty, while "beautiful things" can only be relative beauty.Hui Shi emphasized the fact that real things are changeable and relative, while Gongsun Long emphasized the fact that names are invariable and absolute.

Huishi (350-260 BC at its peak) was a native of Song State (in present-day Henan Province).We know that he used to be the chancellor of King Wei Hui and was famous for his great knowledge.Unfortunately, his work has been lost. "Zhuangzi · Tianxia" contains Huishi's "ten things", and Huishi's thought as we know it is only deduced from this "ten things". The first thing is: "When the greatest has no outside, it is called the Great One; when the smallest has no inside, it is called the Small One."These two sentences are what are now called "analytic propositions".They are not sure about reality, because they are not sure about what is the largest and what is the smallest in the actual world.They only deal with abstract concepts, which are names: "the greatest", "the smallest".In order to fully understand these two propositions, it is necessary to compare them with a story in "Zhuangzi Qiushui".It is evident from this comparison that Huishi and Zhuangzi have much in common in one respect.

The story says that when the autumn waters come, the river is flooded by hundreds of rivers, and the river is full of water.There he met Beihairuo (the god of the sea), and realized for the first time that although his river was big, it was really too small compared to the sea.He talked to Bei Hairuo with great admiration, but Bei Hairuo told him that he, Bei Hairuo himself, was just a grain of rice in Taicang.So we can only say that he is "small", not "big".At this point, He Bo asked Bei Hairuo: "But my world is big and the world is small, is it okay?" Bei Hairuo said: "No. . . It’s not like when it was not born. It’s too small to seek the limit of its largest area, so it’s confusing and you can’t get it. From this point of view, how can we know that the smallest thing is enough to determine the smallest thing, and how can we know the world? Is it enough to impoverish a great domain?” He then defined it, saying that the smallest is “invisible” and the largest is “unenclosed”.The definition of maximum and minimum is very similar to Huishi's. To say that the world is the largest thing and that the moe is the smallest thing is to affirm the "real".It does not analyze "name".These two sentences are now so-called "synthetic propositions", and both can be false propositions.They all have their basis in experience; their truths can therefore only be probable, not certain.In experience, big things and small things are relatively large and relatively small.It is quoted again: "Because it is big, it is big. Then everything is big; because it is small, it is small. Then everything is not small." (Ibid.) It is impossible for us to decide by actual experience what is the largest and what is the smallest practical thing.But we can be independent of experience, that is, leave experience, and say: it has nothing outside, it is the largest ("the greatest has no outside"); it has nothing inside, it is the smallest ("the smallest has no inside") . "Biggest" and "smallest".If defined like this, they are all absolute and unchangeable concepts. After analyzing the terms "big one" and "small one" in this way, Huishi can get what is an absolute and unchangeable concept.From the point of view of this concept, he sees that the nature and difference of actual concrete things are relative and changeable. Once we understand Huishi's position, we can see that although the ten things about Huishi mentioned in the book are always regarded as paradoxes, they are not paradoxes at all.Except for the first thing.They all use examples to show the relativity of things, and what they say can be called the theory of relativity.Let's study one thing at a time. "There is no thickness that cannot be accumulated, and it is thousands of miles away." This means that big and small are big and small, but they are relative.Something without thickness cannot be thick.In this sense, it can be called small.However, although the ideal "surface" in geometry has no thickness, it can be very long and wide at the same time.In this sense, it can be called big. "The sky and the earth are humble, the mountains and the mountains are flat."That is to say, high and low are only relative. "The side of Japan looks at the side of China, and things live and die".This means that everything in the real world is changeable and changing. "Great unity with small similarities and differences; this is called small similarities and differences. All things are completely the same but different; this is called great similarities and differences."We say that all human beings are animals.At this time we realize: all people are people, so all people are the same; they are all animals, so all people are the same.but.Their identity as human beings is greater than their identity as animals.Because being a human means being an animal, and being an animal doesn't necessarily mean being a human, there are all kinds of other animals, and they're all different from people.So Huishi's so-called "small similarities and differences" is precisely this kind of similarities and differences.But if we take "all things" as a general class, we thereby recognize that all things are the same, because they are "all things."However, if we regard each thing as an individual, we also realize that each individual has its own personality and is therefore different from other things.This kind of similarity and difference is exactly what Huishi calls "great similarities and differences".Thus, since we can say that all things are the same as one another, and that they are different from each other, this shows that their similarity and difference are relative.This debate by famous scholars was very famous in ancient China, and it was called "the debate on contract differences". "The South is endless but poor". "The South is infinite" was a common saying at that time.At the time, the South was largely unknown, much like the American West two hundred years ago.The Chinese at that time felt that the south was not limited to the sea like the east, nor was it limited to the desert and quicksand like the north and the west.Huishi's words are probably just expressing his extraordinary geographical knowledge, that is to say, the south is ultimately limited by the sea.But it is more likely to mean that finiteness and infinity are also relative. "Today's words are more and more past."This sentence means that "now" and "past" are relative nouns.Today's yesterday is yesterday's today; today's today is tomorrow's yesterday.The relativity of the present and the past is here. "A series of chains can be solved."The chain cannot be solved, but when it is destroyed, it will be solved naturally.From another point of view, destruction can also be construction.For example, making a wooden table is destruction from the point of view of wood, but construction from the point of view of the table.Since destruction and construction are relative, there is no need for people to destroy the chain, and "the chain can be solved". "I know the center of the world, the north of Yan and the south of Yue."In the countries at that time, Yan was the northernmost, and Yue was the southernmost.The Chinese at that time believed that China was the world, that is, the world.Therefore, the common sense statement should be that the center of the world is in the south of Yan and the north of Yue.Sima Biao in the third century A.D. explained Hui Shi's contrary statement very well. He said: "There is no direction in the world, so the place is the middle; there is no reason for the cycle, so the place is the beginning." and also".The above propositions all say that all things are relative and constantly changing.There is no absolute difference, no absolute boundary between all things.Everything is always becoming something else.So the logical conclusion is: all things are one, so we should love all things without distinction.It is also said in the book: "If you look at it from its differences, it will be more and more courageous; if you look at it from its similarity, everything is one." ("De Chong Fu") Another major leader of the Ming family was Gongsun Long (heyday 284-259 BC), widely known in his day for his sophistry.It is said that once he passed the customs on horseback, the customs official said: "Horses are not allowed to pass." Gongsun Long replied: "I am riding a white horse, and a white horse is not a horse."As he said that, he even passed by with the horse. Gongsun Long does not emphasize that "realness" is relative and changeable like Huishi, but emphasizes that "name" is absolute and unchanging.From this he got the same concept as Plato's Ideas or Universals, which are extremely famous in Western philosophy. In his book "Gongsun Longzi", there is a "White Horse Treatise".Its main proposition is "a white horse is not a horse".Gongsun Long tried to prove this proposition through three arguments.The first point is: "A horse is named for form; a white one is named for form. Those who order form are not named for form. Therefore, it is said: A white horse is not a horse." If we use the terms of Western logic, we can say that this point It is to emphasize that the connotations of "horse", "white" and "white horse" are different. The connotation of "horse" is an animal, the connotation of "white" is a color, and the connotation of "white horse" is an animal plus a color.The connotations of the three are different, so a white horse is not a horse. The second point is: "If you ask for a horse, you can get both yellow and black horses. If you ask for a white horse, you can't get a yellow and black horse. ... Therefore, there are yellow and black horses, and you can have horses, but you can't have white horses. This is the judgment of whether a white horse is not a horse. carry on". "Horses have no way to go because of their color, so yellow and black respond to them. White horses have no way to go because of their color, and yellow and black horses go because of their color, so only white horses can respond to ears. No way to go, there must be no way to go. Therefore. Said: "A white horse is not a horse".If we use the terms of Western logic, we can say that this point is to emphasize the difference in the extension of "horse" and "white horse". The extension of "horse" includes all horses, regardless of the difference in color. The extension of "white horse" only includes white horses, with corresponding color differences.Since the extension of "horse" and "white horse" are different, a white horse is not a horse. The third point is: "Horses inherently have color, so there are white horses. Let the horse be colorless, and have horses like your own ears. How do you choose a white horse? Therefore, a white horse is not a horse. A white horse is also the horse and the white, and the white and the horse." Hence the saying: A white horse is not a horse.” This point seems to emphasize the difference between the universal of “horse” and the universal of “white horse”.The universality of horses is the essential attribute of all horses.It doesn't include color, it's just "horses as horses".The commonality of such a "horse" is different from that of a "white horse".That is, a horse being a horse is not the same as a white horse being a white horse.So a white horse is not a horse. In addition to the horse as a horse, there is also white as white, that is, the universal aspect of white. "White Horse Theory" said: "White is not sure what it is, but you can forget it. A white horse speaks white. It is white. It is white. It is not white." Determined white is the specific white, which is seen in Various actual white objects.The whiteness seen in various actual white objects is determined by these objects.But the universality of "white" is not determined by any actual white object.It is the commonality of undecided whiteness. "Gongsun Longzi" has another "Jianbai Lun".Its main proposition is "Lijianbai".Gongsun Long's proof has two parts.The first part is, assuming that there is a hard and white stone, he asks: "hard, white, stone: three, is it possible? He said: no. He said: two, is it possible? He said: yes. : There are two actions to get white without firmness; two actions to get firm without whiteness.” "Those who can't see what is strong but get what they want are not strong. If they can't get what they want but get what is firm, they can get what is firm, and there is no white." This dialogue proves firmness and whiteness from the perspective of knowledge theory. are separate from each other.There is a solid white stone, if you look at it with your eyes, you can only "get its whiteness", and you can only get a white stone; if you touch it with your hands, you can only "get its firmness", and you can only get a solid stone.You can't feel firm when you feel white, and you can't feel white when you feel firm.Therefore, from the perspective of knowledge theory, there are only "white stones" or "hard stones", but not "hard white stones".This is the meaning of "If there is no firmness, there are two actions; if there is no whiteness, there are two actions". The second part of Gongsun Long's debate is a debate on metaphysics.The basic idea is that firmness and whiteness, as a universal, are the firmness that is uncertain, and the whiteness that is uncertain.Solid and white are manifested in all solid objects and all white objects as universals.Of course, even if there are no solid or white objects in the real world.And firm is still firm, and white is still white.Such firmness and whiteness, as common features, are completely independent of the existence of solid white stones and all solid white things.Firmness and whiteness are independent universals, which is proved by facts.The fact is that in the real world some things are solid but not white, and others are white but not solid.So firmness and whiteness are clearly separate from each other. Gongsun Long used these epistemological and metaphysical debates to establish his proposition: the separation of solid and white.This is a famous proposition in ancient China, and it is famous all over the world as "the debate of Li Jianbai". "Gongsun Longzi" also has a "Referring to Things".Gongsun Long used "things" to refer to specific individual things.Use "finger" to represent abstract universals. The meaning of the word "zhi" has the meaning of a noun, which means "finger"; and the meaning of a verb, it means "specify".The reason why Gongsun Long used "zhi" to express universality is precisely because of the combination of these two meanings.A common noun, in the terminology of famous scholars: it is "name".Take a certain kind of specific thing as an extension.The connotation is based on the common attributes of such things, but not an abstract noun, which only expresses attributes or universals.Because Chinese is not an inflectional language.So there is no difference in form between a common noun and an abstract noun.Thus.In Chinese, what Westerners call common nouns can also express common features.Also, there are no articles in Chinese.Therefore, the word "horse" means both a general horse and a specific horse; it means both a certain horse and this horse.But look carefully. The word "horse" basically refers to the general concept, that is, the universal, while a certain horse and this horse are just the individualized application of this general concept.From this we can say that in Chinese, a universal is what a name "refers to".This is why Gongsun Long called the universal phase "finger". Gongsun Long used "Zhi" to represent the universal, and another reason is that the word "Zhi" is connected with the word "Zhi", and "Zhi" has the same meaning as "idea" and "concept".For this reason, when Gongsun Long talks about "zhi", its meaning is actually "idea" or "concept".However, judging from his debate above, the "idea" he mentioned is not the subjective idea mentioned in the philosophy of Barclay and Hume, but the objective idea mentioned in the philosophy of Plato.It is universal.The article also contains 21 debates by "debaters in the world", but does not refer to who they belong to.But it is clear that some are based on Hui Shi's thinking and others are based on Gongsun Long's thinking, and both can be interpreted accordingly.It is customary to say that they are all paradoxes, but as long as we understand the basic ideas of Hui Shi and Gongsun Long, they will no longer be paradoxes. Philosophers of famous schools have discovered the world called "beyond image" in Chinese philosophy by analyzing names and the relationship or difference between names and reality.In Chinese philosophy, there is a distinction between "inside the image" and "outside the image".What is within the image is "real".For example, big and small, square and circle, long and short, black and white, are all a kind of image.All that can be the object of a certain experience, or the possible object of a certain experience, has an image, or it can be said that it is all in the image, and all exist in the real world.It can also be said conversely that everything that has an image, that is within an image, or that exists in the actual world is an object of some kind of experience.or its possible objects. When Huishi preaches the first and tenth of his things, he is talking about the world beyond the image.He said: "There is nothing outside the Greatest, which is called the Great One." This is what the Greatest is like in terms of its original appearance. "To love all things, the heaven and the earth are one." This is to say what is made of Zhida.This sentence contains the meaning of "all is one, one is all". "Everything" is "one", so "everything" has no exception. "Everything" itself is the greatest "one", and since "everything" has nothing outside, "everything" cannot be the object of experience.This is because the object of experience always stands opposite the experiencer.If it is said that "everything" can be the object of experience, then it must also be said that there is an experiencer standing opposite to "everything".In other words, it must be said that "everything" has no outside and at the same time has outside, which is an obvious contradiction. Gongsun Long also discovered the world beyond the image, because the universals he discussed cannot be the object of experience.People can see a certain white object, but they cannot see the white universal.All universals that can be named are in the world beyond images, but not all universals in the world beyond images have names.In the world beyond the image, the commonness of firmness is the commonality of firmness, and the commonality of white is the commonality of whiteness. This is what Gongsun Long said, "Independence and righteousness" ("Gongsun Longzi · Jianbai Lun"). Hui Shi said, "Love all things", and Gongsun Long also "wanted to reason and argue to rectify the name and reality, and transform the world" ("Gongsun Longzi Jifu").It can be seen that these two people obviously believe that their philosophy contains "the way of the inner sage and the outer king".But it is left to Taoism to make full use of the masters' discovery of a world beyond images.Taoism is the opponent of the famous school, but also the real successor of the famous school.The fact that Hui Shi was a really good friend of Chuang Tzu exemplifies this.