Which of the following Is True regarding Legalism in China

These states fought against each other again and again, but none of them could gain the advantage over the others until King Ying Zheng adopted Qin Han Feizi`s philosophy of legalism and Shang Yang`s concept of total war and conducted national and military campaigns in this direction to achieve victory. The ancient rules of chivalry that Chinese armies had always considered were ignored by the Qin as they destroyed one state after another. When the last of the free states was conquered, Ying Zheng declared himself the first emperor of China: Shi Huangdi. Wanting his Dao (mode of government) to be both objectively and publicly projectable,[14][14] Han Fei argued that catastrophic results would occur if the ruler made arbitrary and ad hoc decisions based on relationships or morality that are «peculiar and fallible» as a product of reason. Li or Confucian customs and government are also simply too inefficient. [73] [157] [158] The manager cannot act on a case-by-case basis and must therefore establish a comprehensive system that acts through Fa (administrative methods or standards). The Fa is not biased towards nobles, does not exclude preachers, and does not discriminate against ordinary people. [158] But the story has been cruel to the legalists. The Qin Dynasty (221-207 B.C.) Chr.), which was to rule for «countless generations» (Shiji 6:236), collapsed shortly after the death of the founder, who was brought down by a popular rebellion of unprecedented scale and cruelty. This rapid collapse – which occurred just a few years after Li Si`s infamous biblioclasm – shaped Qin`s image for millennia to come. The dynasty was no longer a success, but a story of dismal failure; And the ideas that guided their policymakers have also been discredited. Already in the first generations after the Qin, a consensus was reached: their collapse was due to excessive activism, abnormal assertion of its administrative apparatus, excessive use of punishment, senseless expansionism and paralyzing distrust between emperors and their entourage (Jia Yi 賈誼 [200-168 BC] quoted in Shiji 6: 276-284; Xin yu 4:62).

All this policy could usefully be attributed to the legalists, whose intellectual legacy has therefore been discredited. At best, it was reduced to Sima Tan`s assessment: «a one-off policy that could not be applied all the time». Based on the above statements, Shang Yang gained notoriety as an advocate of oppression; But in fact, his attitude towards people is much more balanced than is often imagined. Lord Shang`s book frequently speaks of «love/care of the people» (ai min 愛民) and «benefit of the people» (li min 利民) and repeats other contemporary texts that proclaimed the welfare of the people as the ultimate goal of policy-making (Pines 2009:201-203). The people are not only the potential enemy of the sovereign: they are his greatest asset. Without their hard work in the fields or their courage on the battlefield, the state is doomed. But people will not accept ploughing and war just for fear of coercion. A more complex system is needed: one that introduces attractive positive incentives as well as impressive negative incentives. Shang Yang explains: In practice, this means that the leader must be isolated from his ministers. The elevation of ministers endangers the sovereign, with whom he must be strictly separated.

The punishment confirms its sovereignty; The law eliminates anyone who exceeds its bounds, regardless of their intent. The law «aims to abolish the selfish element in man and the maintenance of public order» by making the people responsible for their actions. [242] However, the days of the predominance of legalism in China were over. Koller writes, «The long-term effect of the legalistic emphasis on laws and punishments has been to strengthen Confucianism by making legal institutions a vehicle for Confucian morality» (208). The vacuum left by the rejection of legalism was filled by Confucianism, which gave Chinese culture a much more convenient and comprehensive view of humanity and the peaceful coexistence of peoples. Legalism is sometimes compared to modern social sciences (Schwartz 1985), and this comparison captures some of its characteristics. Angus C. Graham (1989:269) notes that legalists were the first political philosophers in China «who assume not how society should be, but as it is.» In fact, it was the most practical of all pre-imperial intellectual currents. Their stated goal was to create a «rich state and a powerful army» (fu guo qiang bing 富國強兵)[2] which would be the prerequisite for the future unification of the entire subcelestial empire.

Thinkers focused on how to achieve this goal rather than philosophical speculation. Therefore, their writings are generally free from overriding moral considerations or conformity with the divine will—topoi that recur in the writings of the disciples of Confucius 孔子 (551-479 BC) and Mozi墨子 (c. 460-390 BC). Cosmological determinations of the political order, which became extremely popular after Laozi 老子 (fourth century BC), are of somewhat greater importance to legalists than morality or religion: they are mentioned in some fragments of Shen Buhai and Shen Dao and especially in several chapters of Han Feizi. However, these speculations are not essential to the reasoning of these thinkers: therefore, Pace attempts to consider Han Fei`s cosmological digressions as the foundations of his political philosophy (Wang and Chang 1986), it would be more accurate to see them as argumentative means that have not been «fully assimilated» into Han Fei`s thought (Graham 1991: 285; cf. Goldin 2013: 14-18). [3] In general, legalistic thinkers exhibit considerable philosophical sophistication only when they have to justify their deviations from conventional approaches of other intellectual currents. In this regard, their views on historical development and human nature are very engaging. Another example of Shu is Chuan-shu, or «political maneuver.» The concept of ch`uan or «weighing» numbers in the legalistic writings of the earliest times. It also appears in Confucian writings as the centerpiece of moral action, including in the Mencius and the doctrine of the center. Weighing is compared to the «norm».

Life and history often require adjustments in human behavior that must match what is required at any given time. It is always a matter of human judgment. A judge who must rely on his subjective wisdom in the form of reasonable consideration relies on Ch`uan. The Confucian Zhu Xi, who was remarkably not a restorer, emphasized AIDS as compensation for incomplete norms or methods. [184] Other philosophies advocating man`s inherent goodness have been considered dangerous lies that would mislead people. The beliefs of philosophers such as Confucius (l. 551-479 BC), Mencius (l. 372-289 BC), Mo-Ti (l. 470-391 BC) or Lao-Tzu (l. c. 500 BC), with an emphasis on seeking and expressing the inner good, were seen as a threat to a belief system that claimed otherwise. Scholar John M.

Koller, writing on legalism, notes that the system of 20 (initially minus) «merit ranks» introduced by Shang Yang was one of the boldest acts of social engineering in human history. This system became the cornerstone of social life in Qin. The lowest ranks were distributed for military service, especially for the beheading of enemy soldiers, or could be purchased in exchange for additional grain yields; Successful rank holders could be integrated into the military or civilian administration and then promoted up the social ladder. Each rank granted its holder economic, social and legal privileges; and since ranks were not entirely hereditary, the system generated considerable social mobility (see details in Loewe 1960 and 2010; Pines et al., 2014: 24-26; Pins, 2016b).