Mohism
1) Mozi and Mohism
Mozi, originally named Mo Di, was a seminal figure in ancient Chinese philosophy and the founding thinker of Mohism, a school of thought that offered a distinctive alternative to Confucianism and Daoism. Born around 470 BCE during the tumultuous period of the Warring States, Mozi’s philosophy was shaped by his deep concern for the social and political chaos of his time. He was a man of humble origins, believed to be from the state of Lu, and his practical skills as an engineer and artisan significantly influenced his philosophical outlook. Mozi’s commitment to addressing the moral and social issues of his era led him to develop a comprehensive system of thought that emphasised universal love, meritocracy, and pragmatic governance.
Central to Mozi’s philosophy was the concept of “universal love” (jian ai), which stood in stark contrast to the Confucian emphasis on hierarchical and familial relationships. Mozi argued that partiality in love and favouritism were the root causes of conflict and injustice in society. He believed that if individuals could extend their love and concern equally to all people, regardless of their social status or relationship, it would lead to harmony and peace. This radical idea challenged the established social norms and called for a more egalitarian approach to human interactions.
Mozi’s contributions to Mohism extended beyond his ethical teachings. He was also a strong advocate of meritocracy, proposing that leaders should be chosen based on their abilities and virtues rather than their lineage or social connections. This was a direct challenge to the hereditary aristocracy that dominated the political landscape of his time. Mozi believed that a meritocratic system would ensure competent and just governance, as leaders would be selected for their skills and moral integrity. This principle of meritocracy was not only applied to political leadership but also to the broader societal structure, promoting the idea that everyone should have the opportunity to rise based on their capabilities.
In addition to his ethical and political ideas, Mozi made significant contributions to the philosophy of utilitarianism. He posited that actions should be evaluated based on their consequences, specifically in terms of promoting the general welfare and reducing harm. This pragmatic approach to ethics was a departure from the more abstract and ritualistic moral frameworks of other schools of thought. Mozi’s utilitarianism was closely linked to his advocacy for frugality and simplicity in both personal conduct and government administration. He argued that excessive rituals and luxuries were wasteful and diverted resources away from more productive and beneficial uses.
Mozi’s influence extended into the realm of military strategy and defensive tactics. He was an accomplished engineer and is credited with the development of various fortification techniques and siege warfare methods. His practical expertise in these areas was documented in the “Mozi” text, which includes detailed descriptions of defensive strategies and mechanical devices. These contributions highlight Mozi’s pragmatic approach to solving real-world problems and his commitment to protecting communities from external threats.
The legacy of Mozi and Mohism endured for centuries, although it gradually declined in prominence after the rise of the Qin Dynasty. Nevertheless, Mozi’s ideas continued to influence Chinese thought and were periodically revived by later scholars. His emphasis on universal love, meritocracy, and utilitarian ethics provided a unique perspective within the landscape of Chinese philosophy. While Mohism did not achieve the same level of institutional support as Confucianism or Daoism, its principles resonated with many who sought practical solutions to the social and political challenges of their time.
Mozi’s life and work represent a remarkable blend of ethical idealism and pragmatic problem-solving. His teachings challenged the status quo and offered an alternative vision of a just and harmonious society. By advocating for universal love, merit-based governance, and utilitarian ethics, Mozi left a lasting impact on Chinese philosophy and demonstrated the power of philosophical thought to address pressing societal issues.
2) Main Principles of Mohism
Mohism, founded by Mozi, is a philosophical school that emerged during the Warring States period in ancient China. It presents a distinctive set of principles that stand in contrast to the dominant Confucianism of the time. Mohism’s main principles encompass a range of ethical, social, political, and practical doctrines, aimed at creating a harmonious and just society.
At the heart of Mohist thought is the principle of “universal love” (jian ai). Unlike Confucianism, which emphasises filial piety and loyalty to one’s family and ruler, Mohism advocates for an impartial and all-encompassing love. Mozi argued that social discord and conflict arise from partiality and the preferential treatment of one’s own kin and friends. Universal love, according to Mozi, would lead to the elimination of conflict and the promotion of social harmony. This principle calls for individuals to extend their care and concern to all people equally, fostering a sense of solidarity and mutual aid throughout society.
Another core tenet of Mohism is its utilitarian approach to ethics and governance. Mozi proposed that actions should be judged by their consequences, particularly in terms of how they contribute to the overall well-being and happiness of the community. This pragmatic stance emphasises the importance of practical outcomes over rigid adherence to rituals or traditions. Mohism advocates for policies and behaviours that maximise collective benefit and minimise harm, aligning moral action with the broader good of society.
Mohism also places a strong emphasis on meritocracy. Mozi criticised the hereditary aristocracy and the nepotism that characterised the political systems of his time. Instead, he argued that leaders should be chosen based on their abilities, virtues, and contributions to society, rather than their birth or social connections. This principle of merit-based selection aims to ensure that the most competent and morally upright individuals are in positions of power, leading to more effective and just governance. By promoting meritocracy, Mohism seeks to create a fairer and more efficient political order.
A significant aspect of Mohist philosophy is its opposition to wasteful expenditure and extravagant rituals. Mozi condemned the lavish rituals and ceremonies that were prevalent in the aristocratic society of his era, viewing them as unnecessary and detrimental to the common good. He argued that resources should be directed towards practical and beneficial uses, such as aiding the poor, strengthening defences, and promoting education. This principle of frugality aligns with Mohism’s utilitarian ethics, emphasising the importance of resource allocation for the greatest possible benefit.
Mohism also advocates for defensive military strategies and technological innovation. Mozi himself was an accomplished engineer and strategist, and he applied his practical skills to the development of fortification techniques and defensive mechanisms. Mohists believed in the importance of protecting the state and its people from external threats, but they were generally opposed to offensive warfare and aggression. They argued that war should only be waged for defensive purposes and that efforts should be made to minimise harm and destruction.
In addition to these principles, Mohism emphasises the importance of social order and stability. Mohists believed that a well-ordered society is essential for the well-being of its members, and they advocated for the establishment of clear laws and regulations to maintain order. They also stressed the importance of education and moral instruction in cultivating virtuous behaviour and social cohesion. By promoting social order and moral education, Mohism seeks to create a stable and harmonious society where individuals can flourish.
Furthermore, Mohism includes a distinctive approach to religious and supernatural beliefs. While Mozi and his followers did not outright reject the existence of ghosts and spirits, they adopted a skeptical and pragmatic attitude towards such beliefs. Mohists argued that religious rituals and superstitions should be evaluated based on their practical benefits and their impact on society. This rational and utilitarian perspective reflects Mohism’s broader commitment to practical and evidence-based approaches to ethical and social issues.
3) Mohism against Confucianism
Mohism and Confucianism emerged as prominent philosophical schools during the tumultuous Warring States period in ancient China, each proposing different solutions to the socio-political issues of their time. While Confucianism, founded by Confucius, emphasised hierarchy, ritual, and familial duty, Mohism, established by Mozi, presented a starkly contrasting vision grounded in universal love, meritocracy, and practical governance. These divergent philosophies highlight the rich tapestry of Chinese intellectual history, showcasing the debate between tradition and reform.
One of the most fundamental differences between Mohism and Confucianism lies in their respective views on love and human relationships. Confucianism places a strong emphasis on filial piety and hierarchical relationships, advocating for a society structured around well-defined roles and duties within the family and the state. Confucians believe that social harmony can be achieved by individuals fulfilling their roles and obligations according to their status and relationships. In contrast, Mohism promotes the idea of “universal love” (jian ai), which advocates for equal and impartial love towards all individuals, regardless of their social status or familial ties. Mozi argued that partiality and preferential treatment lead to conflict and injustice, and that universal love would foster social harmony and cooperation.
Another key area of divergence is the role of ritual and tradition. Confucianism places great importance on rituals, ceremonies, and ancestral worship as means of cultivating virtue and maintaining social order. Confucius believed that rituals are essential for moral development and for reinforcing the social hierarchy that ensures stability. Mohism, however, criticises the excessive focus on rituals and ceremonies, viewing them as wasteful and ineffective in addressing the practical needs of society. Mozi argued that resources spent on elaborate rituals could be better utilised for practical purposes, such as aiding the poor and strengthening defences. This pragmatic approach underscores Mohism’s utilitarian ethics, which prioritises actions that promote the greatest good for the greatest number.
The two philosophies also differ significantly in their approach to governance and political authority. Confucianism advocates for a hierarchical political structure where rulers are seen as moral exemplars who lead by virtue and benevolence. The Confucian ideal ruler is a sage-king who governs through moral persuasion and sets a moral example for the people to follow. In contrast, Mohism supports a meritocratic system where leaders are chosen based on their abilities, virtues, and contributions to society rather than their lineage or social connections. Mozi argued that a merit-based selection process would ensure that the most capable and morally upright individuals govern, leading to more effective and just governance.
Mohism’s utilitarian approach to ethics and policy also contrasts with Confucianism’s more deontological and virtue-based ethical framework. Confucianism focuses on the cultivation of personal virtues such as righteousness, propriety, and benevolence, and emphasises the importance of moral character and the fulfilment of one’s duties. Mohism, on the other hand, evaluates actions based on their outcomes and their impact on the overall well-being of society. Mozi’s utilitarianism advocates for policies and behaviours that maximise collective benefit and minimise harm, aligning moral action with the broader good of the community.
The two schools of thought also diverge in their attitudes towards warfare and military strategy. Confucianism generally promotes the idea of moral governance and the minimisation of conflict through virtuous leadership and moral education. While Confucian texts do discuss military strategy, the emphasis is on maintaining harmony and order through non-violent means. Mohism, while advocating for defensive strategies, also acknowledges the practical necessity of military preparedness. Mozi himself was an accomplished engineer and strategist, and Mohist texts include detailed discussions of fortification techniques and defensive measures. However, Mohists opposed offensive warfare and aggression, arguing that war should only be waged for defensive purposes and that efforts should be made to minimise harm and destruction.
Religious and supernatural beliefs present another area of contrast between the two philosophies. Confucianism incorporates a significant element of ancestor worship and reverence for heaven (tian) as part of its ritualistic and moral framework. Confucians believe that maintaining proper rituals and honouring one’s ancestors are essential for moral cultivation and social harmony. Mohism, while not outright rejecting the existence of supernatural entities, adopts a more skeptical and pragmatic attitude towards religious practices. Mozi argued that religious rituals and superstitions should be evaluated based on their practical benefits and their impact on society, reflecting Mohism’s broader commitment to rationality and utilitarian ethics.
4) Political Order in Mohism
In Mohism, political order is envisioned through a distinctive set of principles that emphasise meritocracy, practicality, and universal welfare. Mozi’s ideas on governance were shaped by his concern for the social and political instability of his time, and he proposed a model of political organisation that sought to create a more just and effective state. This model contrasts sharply with the hierarchical and ritualistic approaches of other contemporary philosophies, offering a pragmatic framework for political administration.
A cornerstone of Mohist political thought is the principle of meritocracy. Mozi argued that political leaders should be selected based on their abilities, virtues, and contributions to society, rather than their social status or hereditary lineage. He believed that a merit-based system would ensure that the most capable and morally upright individuals are in positions of power, thereby improving the quality of governance. This principle directly challenges the hereditary aristocracy prevalent in Mozi’s time, which often led to nepotism and corruption. By advocating for meritocracy, Mohism seeks to promote fair and effective governance, where leaders are chosen for their competence rather than their background.
In terms of governance structure, Mohism emphasises the importance of practicality and efficiency. Mozi proposed that the primary role of government is to promote the welfare of the people and to address their practical needs. This focus on practicality is reflected in the Mohist critique of excessive rituals and ceremonies, which were seen as wasteful and detracting from the government’s ability to address pressing social issues. Instead, Mohism advocates for a streamlined and efficient administration that prioritises the allocation of resources towards initiatives that directly benefit the public, such as infrastructure, defence, and social welfare.
Another significant aspect of Mohist political theory is its emphasis on social order and stability. Mozi believed that a well-ordered society is essential for the well-being of its members, and he advocated for the establishment of clear laws and regulations to maintain order. In Mohist thought, the role of the state is to ensure that social norms and legal standards are upheld, thereby preventing disorder and chaos. Mozi’s focus on legalism and order reflects his belief that a stable society is necessary for achieving the greater good and promoting social harmony.
Mozi also proposed that the government should actively work to prevent and mitigate conflict. His principle of universal love extends to the political sphere, where it implies that leaders should act with concern for the welfare of all people, not just their own subjects or allies. This approach suggests that a government’s policies should be designed to reduce conflicts and promote peace, both internally and externally. Mozi’s ideas on defensive warfare and military strategy, which emphasise protection rather than aggression, align with this principle, advocating for a defensive stance that minimises harm and fosters stability.
In addition to these principles, Mohism advocates for a pragmatic approach to political and military strategy. Mozi himself was known for his expertise in engineering and defensive tactics, and his political thought reflects a focus on practical solutions to real-world problems. This pragmatic approach includes the development of fortifications and defensive mechanisms, as well as strategies for resource allocation and public welfare. By emphasising practical and effective measures, Mohism seeks to address the immediate needs of society and enhance the overall well-being of its members.
Mozi’s vision of political order also incorporates the idea of leadership by example. While Mohism does not place the same emphasis on moral exemplars as Confucianism, it does advocate for leaders who are capable and virtuous. In Mozi’s view, effective leadership involves not only the ability to govern wisely but also a commitment to the public good. Leaders are expected to act in ways that reflect their competence and dedication to improving society, thereby setting a positive example for others to follow.
5) Its Criticisms
Despite its innovative approach to governance and ethics, Mohism has faced various criticisms throughout history. These critiques often focus on the limitations of its principles, practical implementations, and philosophical coherence. Understanding these criticisms provides insight into the broader context of Chinese philosophical debates and the challenges faced by Mohism as a school of thought.
One major criticism of Mohism concerns its principle of universal love. Critics argue that while the idea of extending love equally to all individuals is idealistic, it is impractical and may undermine the importance of personal relationships and social bonds. In traditional Chinese society, Confucianism emphasised the significance of familial and hierarchical relationships, which many believed were essential for maintaining social order and stability. By advocating for impartial love, Mohism is seen by some as neglecting the nuanced and hierarchical nature of human relationships, which can lead to a breakdown in social cohesion and family structures.
Another significant critique of Mohism is its emphasis on utilitarian ethics. Critics argue that the utilitarian approach, which evaluates actions based on their consequences and overall benefit, can lead to morally questionable outcomes. For instance, the focus on practicality and collective welfare may justify actions that infringe upon individual rights or personal freedoms if they are deemed to contribute to the greater good. This raises concerns about the potential for moral relativism and the ethical implications of prioritising aggregate benefits over individual rights.
The Mohist principle of meritocracy also faces criticism, particularly regarding its feasibility and potential implications. While meritocracy is intended to promote fairness and competence in leadership, critics question whether it can be effectively implemented in practice. In historical contexts, there have been challenges in accurately assessing and validating merit, and the risk of corruption or manipulation remains. Moreover, some argue that meritocracy, if not properly regulated, can lead to the exclusion of those who may not have had equal opportunities to demonstrate their abilities, perpetuating inequality in a different form.
Additionally, Mohism’s practical focus on efficiency and resource allocation has been criticised for potentially undermining cultural and moral values. By prioritising practical outcomes over traditional rituals and ceremonies, Mohism is seen as disregarding the cultural and symbolic significance of these practices. Critics argue that rituals and traditions play a crucial role in shaping social norms, fostering community cohesion, and preserving cultural heritage. The Mohist rejection of elaborate rituals is viewed by some as a reductionist approach that fails to appreciate the deeper social and cultural functions of these practices.
The Mohist approach to military strategy, while practical, has also been subject to scrutiny. Mohism’s emphasis on defensive warfare and the development of fortifications reflects a pragmatic stance on military matters. However, critics argue that this approach may not adequately address the complexities of warfare and conflict in a broader context. For example, the Mohist focus on defensive measures may overlook the potential benefits of offensive strategies or diplomatic solutions in certain situations. This limited perspective on military strategy may constrain the flexibility and effectiveness of a state’s response to external threats.
Furthermore, Mohism’s sceptical attitude towards supernatural beliefs and religious rituals has been criticised for its potential dismissal of cultural and spiritual dimensions. While Mozi’s rational and utilitarian approach is aimed at addressing practical concerns, critics argue that it may neglect the importance of spiritual and metaphysical aspects of human experience. The rejection of religious rituals and superstitions, while grounded in practicality, may overlook the role of such practices in providing psychological comfort and fostering a sense of meaning and community.
