• The Journal of Korean Philosophical History
• /
• no.32
• /
• pp.251-276
• /
• 2011

In old days when there were no developed producing devices like today, all the scholars insisted that we should economize products and that will lead to economic stability of a nation. But the in case of Mozi, he criticized the ruler's extravagance and wastefulness. He tried to prove the result and its' effect on national economy and people's usual life. He also tried to protect and improve people's fortunes and productivity through his theories. He is one of the first scholars who thought about the relationship between labor cost, price theory and product circulation. His theories are in the book of Mojing. He thought that material condition makes a great impact on the people's ethical life and social systems. He devoted his life to improve his theory- if the nobility do not waste and exploit; the national economy will be developed. In Mozi's Economical theory, we can find out his love for the people and desire for the people's welfare.

• The Research Journal of the Costume Culture
• /
• v.20 no.5
• /
• pp.766-774
• /
• 2012

Ancient Chinese philosophy has had a profound influence on Chinese clothing culture. The researchers reviewed five ancient Chinese philosophical thoughts on Chinese clothing culture. The results show that they had different view of point. The Confucianism advocated "being elegant and refined in manner". Dong Zhongshu believed "Interaction between heaven and mankind is the center of Dress rules". Mohist insisted "Clothing should meet warm first, and then seek for beauty ". Taoism believed "Although a gentleman wears coarse clothes, he has gem in his chest". Legalism believed "Clothing should focus on quality rather than decoration". These philosophy thoughts all have had a profound influence on Chinese clothing culture.

• (The)Study of the Eastern Classic
• /
• no.67
• /
• pp.297-325
• /
• 2017

In this paper, the ideological features of Mohism were examined through the analysis into the viewpoint of Mohism on justice and benefit and "universal love" based on it. Even before the viewpoint on justice and benefit became a main agenda in Confucianism, Mohism and the Hundred Schools of Thought, there had been discussions on it, and the relation between "justice" and "benefit" was generally understood as that of means and ends(本末) or that of the thing and its functions(體用). What succeeded to this tendency and set it as an individual's moral standard was the viewpoint of Confucianism including Confucius. Of course, the Confucian view was focused on the politicians or leaders of those times. Compared to which, Mohism represented the stance of their group members and pursued the interest of groups and the society rather than that of individuals. Accordingly, while Confucianism considered "justice" more important than "benefit", Mohism could understand both of them unificatively. The crucial reason why Mohism could be most active during the Warring States Period is that it had its metaphysical basis on "the disposition of Providence." Accompanying this, the viewpoint of Mohism on justice and benefit was internally reflected in its key arguments including "universal love." That is so-called "Jianxiangai, Jiaoxiangli", that is to say, "that loving each other is namely benefiting each other." On the other hand, the fact that the viewpoint of Mohism on justice and benefit, and furthermore, the ideological foundation of its ten main arguments including universal love was "the disposition of Providence" became a double-edged sword. It was because it could be easily accepted by the laborers, farmers, and craftsmen consisting of Mohism of those times, but it instead became the reason for falling into ruins since the establishment of the feudal empire of Qin and Han(秦漢). In the feudal empire, the ideology and activities of Mohism as an individual group couldn't be embraced. For example, the way to set "Heaven"(the heavenly king) above "the sovereign ruler" might be a decisive limit to the legitimacy and rationality of the regime. Moreover, the arguments by Mohism, such as "Jieyong", "Jiezang", "Feiyue" and others couldn't be taken easily by the privileged class. Therefore, Mohism couldn't do any activities as an academic school until Seojedongjeom(西勢東漸) during the Qing dynasty later, and it was different from Confucianism. In brief, ideas of Mohism including universal love ended up as an utopian idea historically, but the conception of sharing mutual interest along with mutual love and consideration with Confucianism from the position of the relatively disadvantaged in the society has a value worthy of being appreciated even today.

• (The)Study of the Eastern Classic
• /
• no.35
• /
• pp.275-295
• /
• 2009

The aim of this paper is to reject Graham's interpretation of bi (必) and xianzhi (先知) of Later Mohists' Mojing ("墨經") as logical necessity and a priori knowledge respectively. Graham's interpretations of them are based on his beliefs that Mojing distinguishes lun (論), the art of description from bian (辯), the art of inference in the Mohist disciplines and that the latter art should be seen as such a rigorous proof as Euclidean geometry even though it is not a Western formal logic. His beliefs also start from his distinguishing 'knowledge of names' from 'knowledge of conjunction of names and objects' according to the objects of knowledge. In my reading, the art of description and the art of inference, however, can't be sharply distinguished each other in Mojing and bi and xianzhi should be taken as suggesting both a normative necessity and an empirical necessity. A normative necessity is derived from 'normative theory of definition' which comes form the theory of rectification of names in China. The normative theory of definition, unlike the descriptive theory of definition, defines terms normatively rather than descriptively. For example, although such a definition of father, 'father is beneficient', has the form of being descriptive, but it actually is prescriptive and therefore means 'father should be beneficient'. Through this normative theory of definition, empirical knowledge, as long as it is a knowledge, is seen as necessary and so can't be wrong. To conclude, for Mohists an empirical knowledge is always a basis of an inferential knowledge or a priori knowledge, so Mohists' a priori knowledge is not really a fundamental knowledge and its necessity therefore is nothing but both a normative necessity and an empirical necessity.