What are the contents of pre-Qin Chinese philosophy
Generally speaking, those who are interested in pre-Qin thought probably read the Analects, Mencius, Laozi, and Zhuangzi the most. Relatively slightly neglected are "Xunzi", "Han Feizi", and "Mozi".
Strengths. Didn't the subject listen to what he said? - "There is no first".
The "Treatise", "Meng", "Lao", and "Zhuang" listed by the subject are more perceptual and intuitive on the whole, while "Mo", "Xun", and "Han" are more rational and argumentative. As for cold or hot, there must be data to support it, and is there any basis for the claim of the main question? On the whole (emotionally), the first four books are relatively easy to understand and have more historical information.
Xunzi is the master of pre-Qin Confucianism (philosophy of life, political philosophy), and is very unique in terms of human nature, heavenly travel, righteous name, politics, and learning. The prose is rigorous, smooth and beautiful, and the logic is clear. Confucianism and Mencius side by side, or better.
Han Feizi was a master of pre-Qin jurisprudence (the art of monarchy governance or the science of rule), and the law, technique, and power each had its own use, twisted into a system, and metaphysically, which was called the philosophy of rule or more appropriate.
"Han Feizi's "Xie Lao" and "Yu Lao" are the first articles dedicated to discussing and explaining "Lao Tzu". Although he studied under Xunzi; The philosophical system is based on the Tao.
Mozi is the only logical system in China in terms of nominal argument (logic), which was scattered before and then severed.
The research value is very, very great (its theories in optics and mechanics are also in the six articles of "Ink Debate"). As for his articles on love, non-attack, virtue, and shangtong, his philosophy of life and political philosophy is discussed in a simple and easy to understand, but not easy to implement. Its technical articles on warfare and organization are almost cut off.
In terms of rhetoric alone, each is subtle:
The Analects of Confucius is subtle and meaningful, and the words are exquisite, and they seem to be ordinary words;
"Lao Tzu" has a deep rhyme, and every sentence is magical, not like there is one in the world;
"Zhuangzi" is dignified and wanton, like the wind turning to the water, without a trace, but also natural and subtle;
"Mencius" is majestic and mellow, like a mountain and a tall building, bright and upright, and full of vitality;
"Mozi" is simple and complex, like farmland and wilderness with hidden treasures;
"Xunzi" is liberal and steady, like the waves of the sea slowly advancing, and the island is in it; Like the sun rising layer by layer, and the white clouds surround it;
"Han Feizi" is sharp and sharp, like an army flying by, like a dangerous peak protruding, like an old tree giving birth to flowers, like a sword flying from the sky.
During the Spring and Autumn Period and the Warring States Period, hundreds of schools of thought contended, each with its own strengths.
Mozi was the first to stand up against Confucius.
The school founded by Mozi is called Mojia. In ancient times, Mozi and Confucius had the same status. The influence of Moxue is no less than that of Confucius. Of course, the later deposition of the hundred schools and the exclusive respect for Confucianism is another matter, not to mention for the time being.
There is a very important point of view in Moxue, which is love. This perspective is central to his profession and group.
Whether it is "Xunzi", "Han Feizi" or "Mozi", they basically can't distinguish between the good and the bad. Including you ask, which is better, "Analects" or "Mencius"?
From the perspective of theoretical value, it is more inclined to "Xunzi". He is a great Confucian whom I admire, and many of his ideas and theories are of great practical significance. Mencius followed the path of Confucius's "Inner King Learning", while Xunzi re-inherited and developed Confucius's "Outer King Learning".
Xunzi officially created the logical system of "benevolence-righteousness-propriety", which played an important role in re-occupying the ideological mainstream after the officialization of Confucianism and Legalism and Huang Lao's thought.
In particular, he gave full play to Confucius's idea of "etiquette", focusing on man's opening up of the external world, and at the same time formed his own materialist view of nature of "heaven and man are separated", emphasizing the handling of the relationship between man and nature and the relationship between man and society.
Contrary to Mencius, Xunzi did not believe that human nature was inherently good, so it needed to be corrected through the system of etiquette and music, so he put forward the famous proposition of "turning nature into falsehood". Xunzi believes that human nature is not what Mencius said. If human nature is inherently good, why advocate the correction of it through the order of etiquette and morality?
If Mencius and other Confucian descendants can be classified as exaltators of subjectivity, then Xunzi undoubtedly emphasized the objectivity of human beings.
He does not believe that there is a constant expansion of goodness in the human heart, but that goodness should be grafted into the human heart from the outside. Although his view of the object-oriented method of moral training is biased, it is undeniable that Xunzi's method is very effective in shaping moral personality.
The "royal road" constructed purely by moral ideals can only play the role of social criticism; And a single hegemonic politics aimed at practical utilitarianism will only sink society. Xunzi attaches equal importance to etiquette and law, and the king is both comprehensive and comprehensive, which implements Confucius's "foreign king's learning" in a real sense.
What about Han Fei, he was Xunzi's protégé, but it was a pity that he was "stabbed" by his fellow disciple Li Si and died young.
Han Fei carried forward Xunzi's idea of "law" and brought it to an extreme. After reading "Han Feizi", you may feel his deep distrust of "human nature", and even make you doubt life.
Han Fei believes that people are fundamentally unreliable, and they must be controlled and controlled by law. He regarded the reality of the monarchy as the only standard of value, and the "law" as the only code of conduct for the whole society, so as to demand all members of society. According to him, the subjects are properly reduced to the tools of the monarchy, and the value of existence is completely ignored.
This is the most characteristic and unrealistic point of his thinking. He does not understand the meaning of transcending the pursuit of society and life. Societies guided by such values often find it difficult to avoid tension and conflict, and in the long run, they cannot develop soundly and healthily.
But I have to say that Han Fei has a few brushes. In the face of the current situation of war and strife at that time, he expounded the theory of historical evolution of "ancient and modern", and put forward the thinking methodology of "reference" and the political philosophy of the unity of "law", "technique" and "potential". These are all quite progressive ideas and theories.
The establishment of the Qin dynasty and the establishment of the Qin dynasty as the first centralized form of rule in Chinese history represented the triumph of the political philosophy of Han Fei and his Legalists.
As for "Mozi", it will be divided into two parts. Among them, the "Mojing" ("Mojing"), which is composed of six chapters, namely "Jing Shang", "Jing Xia", "Jing Shuo Shang", "Jing Shuo Xia", "Datori", and "Xiaotori", is one part, while the other part mainly expounds Mozi's thoughts by recording his words and deeds.
Hu Shi spoke highly of Mozi:
"Mozi is perhaps the greatest person that China has ever seen, a great scientist, a logician, and a philosopher."
It seems to be a bit exaggerated, but it also shows the value of Mozi and his Mohist thoughts. Although Mohism declined rapidly after the Qin and Han dynasties, the contribution of epistemology in Mohist philosophical thought to the history of Chinese thought cannot be ignored.
Mozi attaches great importance to sensory experience and knowledge of hearing and seeing, and rejects the transcendental theory of idealism. He affirmed the records of ancient documents, especially emphasizing that social effect is an important criterion for judging the merits of various theories. His "three-table method" was very positive at the time.
What is the "Three Tables Method"? That is, there should be three bases for arguing that the issue should be based on historical facts, second, it is based on historical facts, second, it is the original observation of what the people have seen and heard, and third, it is the verification of observing political practice. That is to say, it is necessary to cite historical facts, ancient documents, and the actual experiences of the common people, and test them with the practical effects of realpolitik. In the words of the whole day, it is what we often say, "Practice is the only criterion for testing truth." ”
Obviously, this is a summing up of historical experience and practical experience, and it is a great development of the rational spirit in practice. This method of argumentation is not only unprecedented in the previous generation, but also rare in the same generation, which can be said to be a great progress and development of logical thinking.
And the physical achievements of the "Eight Optical Strips" of the "Book of Ink" can also be seen. You've probably heard of small hole imaging, right? The Book of Ink not only studies this, but also plane mirrors, convex mirrors, and concave mirrors. There are also acoustics, mechanics, and mathematical studies. Shocked or not shocked? Do some people say that people in that era would only engage in feudal superstition?
From the perspective of literary style, the article of "Xunzi" is also unique.
It is not like "Lao Tzu", which uses the dialectical idea of positive and negative and contradictory unity throughout; It is not like "Mozi", which uses rigorous and thoughtful formal logic to reason; It is not as romantic as "Zhuangzi"; It is also not like "Mencius", the language is sharp, majestic, and eloquent.
Xunzi is very honest and reasonable. His essays are simple, detailed and rigorous, with neat sentence structures, and he is good at using a variety of metaphors to illustrate profound truths.
Someone once summarized the book "Xunzi" as "a scholar's essay", which is a very appropriate comment.
The articles in "Han Feizi" are precise in reasoning, sharp in writing, incisive in their arguments, reasoning about facts, and to the point; The concept is exquisite, the language is humorous, and it has an intriguing and warning artistic effect.
Han Fei is also good at using a large number of simple fables and rich historical knowledge as argumentation materials to illustrate abstract truths and vividly reflect his Legalist thought and his profound understanding of social life. Many of the fables that appear in his articles, such as "self-contradiction", "waiting for the rabbit", "indiscriminately", etc., which even elementary school students have heard, contain profound philosophies and are of high literary value.
In comparison, it may be that "Mozi" will be slightly inferior. The articles of "Mozi" attach importance to practicality and do not emphasize literary style, which is somewhat similar to the "white drawing" that is now said. In fact, this is in line with his own thinking of advocating quality, being realistic, pertinent and utilitarian. However, the logic of the writing is rigorous, and in terms of analysis, discussion, and refutation, it has had some influence on "Xunzi" and "Han Feizi".
As for the last question, which book has the highest status in the history of Chinese thought, as I said at the beginning of the answer, this question is basically inconclusive. If you have to say one, "Xunzi".
Who made Confucianism the mainstream of China's traditional value system?