UDK: 16(510)
COPYRIGHT ©: WANG ZUOLI
New Investigations in the School of Names1
WANG Zuoli*
Abstract:
Studies of names and argumentation from the pre-Qin period represent a precious inheritance left behind by ancient Chinese thinkers. As one of the schools from the pre-Qin period, nomenalism made a great contribution to the study of names. Modern research on nomenalism has been greatly affected by the Han Dynasty historians. However, their introduction to the school is vague. In respect to nomenalism, there are some unsolved problems that still need to be clarified and have not been noticed by many scholars. The present thesis analyses the characteristics and functions of nomenalism; it discusses the relations between nomenalists and sophists and epitomises their contributions to the study of names.
Key Words: nomenalism; school of names, the sophists, the study of names
In the pre-Qin period, a school that would be called "Nomenalist"(M«g jia did not exist. Originally "nomenalism" was used by the scholars of the Han Dynasty (206 B.C - 220). Sima Tan ^Mt^ was the first person to use this phrase to indicate the pre-Qin school, and regarded it equally important to Confucianism, Daoism, Moism, legalism etc. The practice of Sima Tan was adopted by his successors, and is still used today. Nowadays, nomenalism is generally regarded as an independent school of the pre-Qin period in the research of the history of Chinese philosophy and Chinese logic. However, compared with other pre-Qin schools, nomenalism is rather peculiar.
1 The present article is a slightly changed version of a previously published article in 2005 titled "An Analysis of the pre-Qin Nomenalism." in Asian and African Studies 9(2): 125-144. * Wang Zuoli, Associate Professor, Department of Philosophy, Nankai University, Tianjin. E-mail: nkwangzuoli@gmail. com
85
Firstly, Confucianism, Moism, Daoism and legalism all had their distinctive political or ethic stands. Deng Xi	Hui Shi and Gongsun Long A^fl,
are usually taken as the main representatives of the nomenalist school. From the records found on these three men in the pre-Qin books, we learn that they did not have any common political or ethical thought which would differ from that of all other schools.
Secondly, it seems that the nomenalists had no specific research subject. Deng Xi, Hui Shi and Gongsun Long had only one thing in common, and that was that they were all famous for being good in argumentation. However, being good at argumentation is not an adequate reason for confirming a separate school, for there were also many members from other schools that were good at argumentation. Deng Xi compiled the first Chinese legislation, which was called the "bamboo law" (^ff'J), while Hui Shi interpreted various natural phenomena Gongsun Long argued about unusual topics such as "Hardness and Whiteness" (M fi) or "White Horses" (fiM). There are remarkable differences among their interests and thoughts, from which we cannot summarise a single common subject. If a "school" has no particular political or ethical thought, nor a common research subject, it is questionable whether it can be regarded as an independent school.
Is "nomenalism" really one of the schools of the pre-Qin period? If it is, then who are the representatives of the school? And what are its principles? In the continuation I will try to offer an answer to these questions.
1 What is Nomenalism
In the pre-Qin period, Confucianism and Moism were famous, and they were already commonly regarded as philosophic schools, while most other schools were labelled as such by later historians of the Han dynasty, who arranged and classified the academic thought of the pre-Qin period. Due to the different methods of classification and due to the various perspectives, the results of their research also differed. For example, Sima Tan divided the pre-Qin thought into 6 schools, while Ban Gu divided them into 10. The term "nomenalism" was firstly
86
used by the Hans2, so it is only natural to begin our research by discussing their works. Let us start with a look of Sima Tan's opinion.
Nomenalists made people watch their words but also made it easy for them to stray away from the truth. However, their theories of correct names and
actualities should not be neglected....... Nomenalists were excessively
critical and often beat about the bush (when debating with others); they made others unable to oppose their opinions. They were focused merely upon the names and neglected the human sensibilities. That is why I said they "made people watch their words but also made it easy for them to stray away from the truth". Nomenalism advocated that the process of rectifying names should ascertain actualities (shi M)3 according to names in order to avoid mistakes in comparing names and actualities with each other. This (contribution) should not be neglected. (Sima 1997: 915)
On the other hand, Ban Gu described them in the following way:
iwrnwa.
Nomenalists probably originated from officials who administrated ceremonies. In ancient times, there were various titles and ranks, and ceremonies varied accordingly. Confucius said: "It is necessary to rectify names. If the names are not correct, then speeches will not run smoothly. If speeches do not run smoothly, then jobs will not be done successively". This was their important contribution. When fastidious people did it, they only analysed wordy disorders. (Ban 1993: 771)
As we can see, the descriptions of nomenalism given by Sima Tan and Ban Gu differ from each other. Sima Tan thought nomenalist theories were mostly about tactics of governing a country just like those of the other philosophic schools of the pre-Qin period, whereas Ban Gu seems to think that the development of nomenalism should be divided into two stages. In the first stage, its concern was
2	Here, this term refers to the people of the Han dynasty.
3	Here, the Chinese character M is not translated with "reality", because I want to make it clear that the character M can be used to refer not only to things in the natural world but also to things in human society, such as rank, duty, ceremony, law, etc. These two notions are completely different. The first cannot be adjusted according to names, whereas the second can.
87
focused on politics and ethics. The names it rectified were those of social ranks. However, in the second stage the school was only a group of fastidious people. They no longer cared about the political or ethical significance of rectifying names and were merely indulged in the analysis process.
The opinion, according to which the representatives of the nomenalist school were only "focused upon names and neglected human sensibilities" (^^^^M AAfi) was based upon an abstract discussion of the relationship between names and reality. This discussion already departed from the discussions on political and ethical problems of the time. Most theories of the period were related to political and ethical problems. However, this does not mean that all theories from the pre-Qin era dealt with the tactics of ruling a country. Due to his understanding of the pre-Qin philosophy, which was profoundly influenced by his social and cultural backgrounds, Sima Tan viewed the nomenalist theories as tactics of ruling a country, which is quite understandable. However, we do not need to take Sima Tan's view as a basis and regard the nomenalist theories as a system of ideas that directly served the politics of the time.
Ban Gu's statements can probably be understood as a viewpoint, according to which the nomenalist ideas sprang out from the Confucius' theory of rectifying names in order to rectify politics. But the true nomenalists (in the late period of Warring States) were only a group of fastidious people. According to him, they betrayed the original aim of the school and focused their attention upon the analysis of language. Ban Gu's statement about nomenalists "probably originating from officials administrating ceremonies" should not be taken too seriously. In Ban Gu's opinion, the nine schools (AM) of the pre-Qin period all originated from the officials of special duties in ancient times. Perhaps he reached his conclusion using certain sources that were known to him but are unknown or merely arbitrarily known to us. It is most probable that this is the case. We are not obliged to take Ban Gu's statements as the evidence of the origin of nomenalism.
However, Sima Tan's and Ban Gu's statements about nomenalism also have certain things in common. Firstly, the content of the theory of nomenalism is about rectifying names (i.e. rectifying names and actualities or rectifying names and social ranks). Secondly, the methods used by the school are those of detailed examination and careful analysis. Thirdly, nomenalism focused especially on language. I will take these three points as the main characteristics of nomenalism and base the following analysis of the school upon them.
88
2 Who Were Nomenalists?
Sima Tan regarded nomenalism as one of the six schools in the pre-Qin period, but he did not point out the individuals who belonged to the school. In his encyclopedia Han Shu's Yi Wen Zhi	Ban Gu listed seven names
from the school: Deng Xi Yin Wen Gongsun Long	Cheng
Shenggong	Hui Shi Huang Gong ^^ and Mao Gong There
are no records on Cheng Shenggong, Huang Gong and Mao Gong in the ancient books, so their writings must have been lost. We have no references and hence no knowledge about them, so we have no way of truly knowing whether they were members of the nomenalist school. The Yiwen chapter in the encyclopaedia Han Shu stated, that
«T-m. »mi,
Yin Wenzi is composed of one piece of writing. Yin Wen once gave advice to
Qi Xuan Wang and was prior to Gongsun Long. (Ban 1993: 771)
The above-mentioned composition in Yin Wenzi has been lost. In today's edition of Yin Wenzi there are two compositions, i.e. Da dao shang	and Da dao
xia ^ ^ T. The content of the two compositions is miscellaneous and the language they use is simple to understand. It is very unlikely that they are from the pre-Qin period, thus today's edition of Yin Wenzi is generally considered to be a fake. It is thus not qualified to be the basis of researching the thought of Yin Wen. In the chapter Zheng Ming in Lu Buwei's work Lu shi chun qiu § there is a record of Yin Wen discussing scholars (shi dr) with the king Qi Min Wang ^^i. From the record we learn that Yin Wen was eloquent and good at detailed analysis. In addition, according to Gongsun Longzi's	essay Ji
Fu when debating with Kong Chuan Gongsun Long cited the event of Yin Wen discussing Shi with Qi Wang ^i. This is probably why Yin Wen was regarded as being "prior to Gongsun Long" and was listed as a member of the nomenalist school in the Han Shu encyclopedia. However, Song Xing ^^ listed him under the School of Tiny Proverbs (Xiao shuo jia J^^).
According to him, Yin Wen	Song Xing	Peng Meng	Tian
Pian BB W and Shen Dao 'RM^ all studied together in the academic palace of Ji Xia which was located in the State of Qi In the chapter Tian Xia A
89
T of the book Zhuangzi we can find a passage, in which Yin Wen and Song Xing are mentioned simultaneously. Nowadays, most researchers think that Song Xing and Yin Wen represent members of one of the three sub-schools of Huang Lao at Ji Xia (fiT^^HM) and that the sub-school represented by Song Xing and Yin Wen mingled the thoughts of Daoism, Moism and legalism. In this event, Yin Wen cannot be noted as a member of nomenalism.
Most contemporary researchers of the pre-Qin studies of names and arguments (^M^) are of the opinion that nomenalism is represented by Deng Xi, Hui Shi and Gongsun Long. The basis for such a viewpoint can also be found in the Yi Wen zhi chapter of the Han Shu encyclopedia. Here, these three philosophers were defined as representatives of the nomenalist school. From the analysis of other texts that mention Yin Wen, it can be concluded that if someone is regarded as a member of a certain school by the Han Shu encyclopedia, this is not a reliable evidence that a certain person is indeed a member of the school. Which one of them - Deng Xi, Hui Shi or Gongsun Long - was truly a member of the nomenalist school? In order to answer this question, we need to make a broader analysis.
Deng Xi, who was a contemporary of Confucius and lived in the late period of Spring and Autumn (770-476 B.C.), originated from the state Zheng Today's edition of Deng Xizi	includes two pieces of writing, Wu Hou and
Zhuan Ci ttl. Most researchers regard it to be a fake, thus it cannot be used as a basis for our study. There are two reasons why Deng Xi is regarded to be a member of the nomenalist school. Firstly, Deng Xi established the Theory of two possibilities	and secondly, he liked making strange arguments and
playing with unusual statements (^f^pf^^, ^H). I will try to analyse whether these two points can be used as evidence that Deng Xi belonged to the nomenalist school. In Lu Buwei's book Lu shi Chunqiu we can find the following statement:
^¿aAtif.	rnxmm-z. RA^«. &
When the Wei river flooded, a rich person from the state of Zheng drowned.
Someone found the remains. The rich person's relative wanted to buy the
remains from him, but he demanded too much money. The relative told this to
90
Deng Xi and Deng Xi said: "Take it easy. He cannot sell the remains to others." The person who got the remains was anxious and told the story to Deng Xi. Deng Xi said: "Take it easy. He cannot buy the remains elsewhere." (Lu 1989: 157)
This is an example of Deng Xi's Theory of two possibilities, based upon double fitting expositions. This method consists of taking different standpoints that result in different conclusions. As a technique of argumentation, Deng Xi's double fitting expositions exerted great influence on the sophists of the late Warring States period. However, this is not necessarily related to linguistic analysis and it cannot be considered as evidence that Deng Xi belonged to the nomenalist school. Su Qin MM and Zhang Yi ^^ were also both skilled at making double fitting expositions, yet no one considers them to be members of the nomenalist school.
Xun Kuang ^ ^ always mentioned Deng Xi and Hui Shi in the same breath, and criticised them for making strange arguments and playing with unusual statements. But Xun Kuang's simultaneous mentioning of Deng Xi and Hui Shi cannot prove that Deng Xi belonged to the nomenalist school, for whether Hui Shi belonged to it or not is still questionable. Neither can Xun Kuang's statements prove that Hui Shi's thought was inherited from Deng Xi, because all the books by Deng Xi and Hui Shi have been lost and the ancient books that remain available do not provide enough material for us to know their thought in detail. Qian Mu MBB analysed Xu Kuang's statements on Deng Xi and Hui Shi and wrote:
MMfA	A^M,	MA«. &-A
rn-Awms&nm.
To say Hui Shi and Deng Xi is like saying Chen Zhong and Shi Qiu, Da Yu and Mo Di, Shen Nong and Xu Xing or Huang Di and Lao Zi. In every single one of these parallelisms, one person lived in the respective period, while the other person, mentioned together with the first one, was taken from the ancient times and was mentioned as a model. (Qian 1985: 19)
Deng Xi lived about two hundred years before Hui Shi. I think Qin Mu's analysis is convincing. According to him, Xun Kuang's mentioning of Deng Xi only serves as a model. Living in the late Spring-Autumn period, when travelling in order to study and find arguments was not yet popular, Deng Xi perhaps never heard of the topics that the sophists argued about. However, we have no evidence to prove this. Deng Xi liked creating strange arguments and playing with unusual statements. Even though this was the case, we can at most say that he was a sophist, rather
91
than a member of the nomenalist school. I will discuss the relationship between the sophists and the nomenalists later. So far we have no real reason to connect Deng Xi with nomenalism.
According to the records of the classical books from the pre-Qin period, Deng Xi once compiled a law, which was called "Bamboo Law". The Zheng rulers adopted the law, but killed Deng Xi later. Deng Xi also helped other people with their lawsuits in return for rewards. Qian Mu wrote:
^m MAi^^n, nnrnztmr^^. g^^&Mffi m,
Whether Deng Xi was an able and virtuous person is not known, nor are the details of his Bamboo Law. In principle, his behaviour was different from that of Yang and Qi, but their interests were the same. Deng Xi was also a talent in the power vicissitude of the aristocracy and common people. (Qian 1985: 19)
Yang and Qi refer to Shang Yang ^^ and Wu Qi ^fe, who changed the laws of the Qin 00 and Chu states M0 respectively. I think Qian Mu's comment on Deng Xi is accurate. In the late Spring-Autumn period, i.e. on the threshold of the 5th century BC, the society was unstable. Deng Xi wanted to change the political system with the use of law, and should thus be regarded as a pioneer of legalism rather than a member of nomenalism.
Hui Shi, a man from the Song state, who lived in the period of Warring States (475-221 BC), was a close friend of Zhuang Zhou. At a certain stage he also served as the Prime Minister of the Wei state M 0 and was known for being good at argumentation. According to Han Shu's Yi Wen Zhi, Hui Zi consisted of one composition, which had been lost. We can only obtain a spot of knowledge about him from the classical books of the pre-Qin period.
In the chapter Jie Bi M of his book, Xunzi ^ T described him in the following way:
Huizi was blinded by words and did not know reality. (Zhuzi jicheng I 1999: 198)
From the comment of Xun Kuang, we know that Hui Shi emphasised language analysis, which is one of the characteristics of the school of nomenalism. But to
92
make sure that Hui Shi is a representative of nomenalism, we need to know whether he took the rectification of names or the relationship between names and reality as his main subject of research.
Xun Zi's Bu Gou said that Hui Shi and Deng Xi can argue about strange and difficult statements. In the chapter Tian Xia of the book Zhuangzi we can find Hui Shi's ten statements on nature (M^A^) and twenty-one sophist statements, and Zhuangzi says that
m^mmmm-mm,
the sophists argued about them with Hui Shi all their lives. (Zhuzi jicheng I 1999:372)
Because the writings of Hui Shi are lost, we have no clue of how Hui Shi proved and expounded the statements recorded in Xunzi and Zhuangzi. We also have no clue as to the relationship between the discussion of these statements and the one of rectifying names. Thus, we do not have the evidence to say that Hui Shi was a member of the nomenalist school.
The criticism of Hui Shi recorded in Xunzi is written in rather stern terms, sometimes even in abusive language. Comparatively, because of the friendship between Hui Shi and Zhuang Zhou, perhaps Zhuangzi's comment on Hui Shi is more suggestive. In the chapter Tian xia of his book we can read the following:
M,
A man from the south, named Huang Liao, asked about why the sky does not fall and the earth does not sink, about the causes of wind, rain, thunder and lightning. Hui Shi answered with no hesitation and did not need to ponder on his own words and thoughts. (Zhuzi jicheng I 1999: 372)
He also comments, that Hui Shi has:
Mmnmm, rnrn^fo, MM,	UEAM*, mmm
AM^, m^m,
made theories about all things on earth, argued endlessly, still felt that this was not enough, added something to make his theory strange, took opinions opposing each other as truth, wanted to win reputation by defeating his
93
opponent, his theories were weak at virtue, strong at natural things. These were where he muddled. (Zhuzi jicheng I 1999: 372)
From Zhuangzi, we can conclude that Hui Shi was keen to study and discuss various natural phenomena. He might not have studied the problem of rectifying names. Even though he had studied the problem, it did not have much importance in his theory. Due to the above-mentioned reason, we should not view Hui Shi as a member of the nomenalist school.
Gongsun Long, a man who came from the Zhao state ffiffl, also lived in the late period of the Warring States and was once a retainer	of Ping Yuanjun
. According to the chapter Yi Wen Zhi, in the encyclopedia Han Shu, his main work, Gongsun Longzi, is composed of 14 volumes. Today's edition of Gongsun Longzi consists of only 6 pieces, which are Ji Fu Bai ma lun SM Zhi wu lun ffiffi^, Tong bian lun ffi^^, Jian bai lun MS^ and Ming shi lun ^M^. Among them, Ji Fu was written by his successors while the remaining 5 essays can be considered as the writings of Gongsun Long.4 We use these 5 essays as a basis for studying Gongsun Long's thought.
The chapter Min shi lun was arranged at the end of Gongsun Longzi. Pang Pu MS thinks that:
Ming Shi Lun is the preface to the book. It offers definitions to some basic categories, suggests the principle of rectifying names, and constitutes a theoretical system with other essays. People in the Qin and Han periods preferred to put prefaces at the ends of books, therefore Ming Shi Lun is also arranged in such a manner. (Pang 1979: 47)
I agree with Pang Pu's analysis. Ming shi lun, mainly discussing the relationship between names and reality and the problem of rectifying names, is the kernel of the whole book. The discussions in the remaining four essays are all closely related to the theory of rectifying names. These five essays of Gongsun Longzi constitute a complete theory of names. From the viewpoint of the philosophy of language, the theory of Gongsun Long is a theory of meaning. Since this is not the topic of the essay, I will not discuss it here. Gongsun Long put rectifying names at the centre of his theory and, during his study, paid great attention to the analysis of language. His theory is not directly related to the social or ethical problems of his
4 Today's edition of Gong Sun Long Zi was probably re-edited during the period of the Jin dynasty (317-420).
94
time. We can conclude that Gongsun Long deserves to be a representative of nomenalism.
Among the "members" of the nomenalist school listed in the Yi wen zhi chapter of the Han Shu encyclopedia, Gongsun Long is the only undoubted member of the school.
3 Nomenalism and the Sophists
The "nomenalist school" (ming jia	was often confused with the "sophists"
(bianzhe M^). Many people think that a member of the nomenalist school is a sophist and that every sophist is most certainly also a nomenalist. In fact, the meanings and the referents of these two names are different. In the Warring State period, many people liked to argue about strange statements. These people were sophists, also called cha shi (^i) or bian shi (Mi), ming Jia	while the
nomenalist school refers to a school from the pre-Qin period, or to member(s) of that school. Indeed, all members of the nomenalist school were sophists, but not all the sophists were members of the nomenalist school. At this point, I shall briefly analyse certain social phenomena in order to clarify the relationship between nomenalists and sophists.
In the Warring States period, the kings of different states solicited the able and virtuous men, hoping to make their countries rich and strong and to consolidate their position with the help of these people. The practice of the kings provided opportunities for ordinary people to be promoted. Once appreciated by a king, a common person could get hold of the main power of the state. For example, Shang Yang Su Qin M0, and Zhang Yi were all promoted to a high rank, after getting the appreciation of the kings through lobbying. Under this condition, lobbying became the main means of promotion for learned people. In order to acquire the necessary abilities and knowledge of lobbying, they needed to learn from teachers. Consequently, lobbying and studying with teachers became a kind of fashion. For example, Meng Ke had several hundred students, and even Tian Pian fflW had a hundred students. At that time, every slightly famous scholar would have his own students. One of the results of this fashion was that there were a lot of shi (i)5 in the society. These shi were knowledgeable, eloquent, but not
5 Shi refers roughly to educated or especially trained people.
95
engaged in production. They were lobbying between kings, teaching students or acting as retainers of the aristocrats. Su Qin and Zhang Yi were two outstanding men among them. Their teacher, Gui Guzi	was also renowned for them.
However, people like Su Qin and Zhang Yi were quite rare, for most Shi have been forgotten.
In the second half of the Warring States period, it was fashionable for the highranking officials and aristocrats to keep retainers. For example, Meng Changjun Tian Wen	from the Qi state M, Ping Yuanjun Zhao Sheng
MP from the Zhao state MH, Xin Lingjun Wei Wuji {f^MM^ from the Wei state MH and Chun Shenjun Huang Xie	from the Chu state M
0 were famous for keeping retainers. Each of them kept about 3000 retainers. Although some of these retainers possessed various kinds of talent and skill, most of them were eloquent and persuasive shis.
In the period of the Warring States, the shis were very active. To them, lobbying was the ladder to promotion; eloquence was the capital for getting the appreciation of kings, senior officials or aristocrats. This is why argumentation came into fashion. It is in such circumstances that the sophists came into existence.
Xunzi divided sophists into three types:
the trivial ones, the integer ones and the sages. (Zhuzi jicheng I 1999: 124)
Those who argued about strange topics, such as "thickness"	"hard and
white" (MS), or "white horse" (SM), were trivial sophists	They
regarded argumentation as a way to practice their eloquence and show their talent. Thus, they picked out statements, which were in contrast to common sense and debated them. While debating, they made full use of their ability to devise cunning and tricky plots, and tried to defeat their opponents through various methods. Zhuang Zhou criticised sophists by saying that they:
^fet'h, ^A^®, »A£n, ^«A^.
confuse the minds of others, change their meanings, are capable of defeating others in words, but cannot win their hearts. (Zhuzi jicheng I 1999: 372)
Zou Yan I^ftj criticised sophists by saying that they:
96
used complicated language to make use of the meanings of other words, use ingenious figurative speech to shift the meanings of statements, lead away the speeches of other people to make others not able to contact their meaning. (Du 1962: 82)
These criticisms are not unreasonable. The existence of numerous sophists and the emergence of various strange statements supplied sufficient conditions for the appearance of nomenalism.
Amongst sophists, there was no lack of sagacious and knowledgeable scholars. As retainers (or teachers), these scholars needed not to worry about their living, nor to work hard on political affairs. They had the ability and condition to engage in serious academic studies. Arguments conducted them to think about a series of problems related to argumentation. Some of them focused their attention on the relations between names and put forward their theories on names. These people were nomenalists.
They were all sophists, who took part in debates about strange statements and used sophistry sometimes. But they did not invariably use sophistry. Their research on the relationship between names and reality was serious. Their theories were abstract, profound and hard to understand. Their aim of "rectifying names and reality to guide and transform the world" was only a slogan. In fact, their theories were not related to politics and ethics.
4 Nomenalism and the Study of Names
The nomenalists studied names, but they were not the only philosophical direction to do so. In the pre-Qin period, most of the schools were to some extent concerned with the problem of rectifying names. Even the Daoists, who advocated "effortlessness" (^M), discussed the problem of names, although their attitude was negative. The studies of names of the schools in pre-Qin period involved many problems, such as rectifying names, the formation of names, the kinds of names, the relations between names and reality and the relations between names and arguments, etc. The thoughts of different schools opposed, influenced and permeated each other. Here I will briefly discuss the main developing threads of
97
the pre-Qin study of names, and then explain the position of nomenalism in the study of names in the pre-Qin period.
There are three main trends in the development of the study of names in the pre-Qin period. They are: a) rectifying names and status (A^iji), b) rectifying legal codes and names (Affile) and c) rectifying names and reality (A^i^).
In the late Spring-Autumn period, the positions of social classes had changed greatly and the duchies fought each other. This lead to a social turbulence in ancient China and the dukes (kings of deferent states) acted arbitrarily. Ceremonies and music were abused (used not complying with the old regulations). Common shis criticised politics recklessly. The patriarchal clan system of the Zhou dynasty, which was based upon blood relationships was destroyed. Confucius, longing for peace and prosperity of the past Western Zhou dynasty (H ^ 1066-771 BC) and worshipping its systems, attributed the social instability to the unconformity of names and reality, the instance of which was that kings and courtiers were only titular. Confucius regarded the restoration of li }§ as his major duty and took rectifying names as the first work to rectify politics. The names that Confucius wanted to rectify were those related to social or family positions, such as "king" (®), "courtier" (£), "father" (A) and "son" (A). Although the scope of Confucius' discussion of names was limited to politics and ethics, he was the first person to put forth the problem of rectifying names and started the pre-Qin study of names. His thought of rectifying names in order to rectify politics went through the entire pre-Qin study of names and argumentation.
The thought of rectifying legal codes and names (Affile) came into existence very early, and can probably be traced to Deng Xi. The thought was later adopted and developed by the school of legalism. The difference between Deng Xi and legalism is that Deng Xi was hostile to rulers while legalism gave them power. This is why Deng Xi is not regarded as a member of the school of legalism by the present researchers. Han Fei , living in the late Warring States period, incorporated legalist theories and established a complete theory of politics, which can be called The tactics of ruling or The art offacing south	In Han Fei's
tactics of ruling, rectifying legal codes and names was very important. In the chapter Er Bing of his main book Han Feizi	he wrote:
98
When a master of the people wants to prohibit deceit, he needs to examine the consistence between legal codes and names. "Legal codes" and "name" refer to what the legal codes say and do (through the people who bear names of official posts). (Zhuzi jicheng I 1999: 305)
And in the chapter Nan Er ffi—, he pointed out:
Msm^, ±; ^fRfl*-
Though a master can employ people, he must measure them with norms, examine them with legal codes and names. When a thing is consistent with the law, it should be allowed; when it is inconsistent with the law, it should be forbidden. If an exploit done by a certain person conforms to the words of the legal codes, the person should be rewarded, otherwise he should be punished. (Zhuzi jicheng II 1999: 437)
In Han Fei's opinion, whenever a person has done things that he should not do according to the legal codes, he must be punished, even though he has achieved a certain exploit. Han Fei developed the theory of rectifying legal codes and names to its summit.
The third trend in the development of the pre-Qin study of names is rectifying names and reality. The theories of rectifying names and status and rectifying legal codes and names both directly served the politics. In opposition to them the theory of rectifying names and reality wanted "to examine the account of names and reality" ^¿S). The names it tried to rectify were not those related to social status or law, but names of material things. Thinkers of the pre-Qin period were all, to a certain extent, concerned with the problems related to language. With the development of the study of names and argument, the theory of rectifying names and reality gradually matured and became an important constituent of the pre-Qin studies of names. Since the end of the Qing dynasty (1644-1911), many Chinese scholars have regarded the pre-Qin studies of names as the theory of logic of ancient China. In fact, the theories of names that have been regarded as Chinese ancient logic are those belonging to the study of rectifying names and reality, which is only one of the branches of the studies of names from the pre-Qin period. In the late period of the Warring states, Xun Kuang, the late Moists and nomenalists made the highest achievements in examining the account of names and reality.
99
Xun Kuang bitterly hated the strange statements. He thought people of noble character should not take part in debates on such statements, but should stop them. However, he could not shut the mouths of others. So, he took the theory of rectifying names as a means to stop the strange statements. He wrote a thesis named Zheng ming IE^i in which he discussed the problems of the origin of names, their kinds and functions, principles of their formation, and the relations between names and the argument. He established a complete theory of the study of names.
The thoughts of names from the late Moism period are concentrated in Mo Bian S^.6 The scope of discussion in Mo Bian is broad, involving mechanics, optics, geometry, epistemology, ethics, logic, linguistics, etc. With regard to the study of names, Mo Bian discussed the problems of the function of names, the relations between names and reality, the types of names, etc., and explained the meanings and use of a number of concrete names. Mo Bian's discussion of names is integrated with its discussion of argumentation. The authors of Mo Bian took "examining the account of names and reality" as one of the functions of argumentation, "showing reality with names" as an important means of argumentation. It is evident that the late Moists' study of names is closely related to its study of argumentation.
Compared with the thoughts on names of Xun Kuang and late Moism, the nomenalist study of names has a number of distinguished characteristics. Take Gongsun Long as an example. Late Moists said that "hardness and whiteness were compatible" (MS®), while Gongsun Long said that "hardness and whiteness are separated" (M S^t). Late Moists said that "a white horse was a horse" (SM M •&), while Gongsun Long said that a "white horse was not a horse" (SM#M). Xun Kuang was concerned as regards the social function of language, while late Moism was concerned as regards the communicating function of language. (See Cui 1997: 210, 322) Unlike Xun Kuang and Late Moism, Gongsun Long studied a series of problems related to the relationship between names and reality and suggested a distinct theory of names. Many people think that Gongsun Long's theory is about logic. If we change the angle and view it from the standpoint of the philosophy of language, the research into the theory of nomenalism will perhaps become more interesting.
6 Mo Bian refers to six pieces of writing in Mozi concerning argument, i.e. Jing Shang, Jing Xia, Jing Shuo Shang, Jing ShuoXia, Xiao Qu and Da Qu.
100
References:
Ban, Gu JjfUl (1993) ^^ -T®. (The History of the Han Dynasty - Vol.2) Changsha: Yuelu shushe.
Cui, Qingtian -gin 0 (1997)	. (Study of Names and Study of Arguments)
Xi'an: Shanxi jiaoyu chuban she.
Du, Guoxiang ttH^ (1962) ftg^^^. (Collected Works of Du Guo Xiang) Beijing: Renmin chuban she.
Lu, Buwei n (1989) n	. (The Spring and Autumn Annals of Lu Buwei)
Shanghai Shanghai guji chuban she.
Pang, Pu MS (1979)	. (Research on Gong Sun Long Zi) Beijing:
Zhonghua Shuju.
Qian, Mu MM (1985) ^^Mi^^. (The Chronological Investigation into the Scholars of the pre-Qin Period) Beijing: Zhonghua Shuju.
Sima, Qian ^^ (1997) j£J5. (HistoricalRecords) Beijing: Taihai chuban she.
Xu, Shen WW (2001) ^^^^. (The Shuowen Jiezi Encyclopedia) Beijing: Jiuzhou chuban she.
Zhongguo luoji shi ziliao xuanbian - xian Qin juan	(1986)
(Selected Materials from the History of Chinese Logic, Pre-Qin Volume). Lanzhou: Gansu renmin chuban she.
Zhuzi jicheng i^i^^ (— ) (1999) (The Collection of the Classics, Vol. I), ed. by Guan Shuguang. Changchun: Changchun chubanshe.
Zhuzi jicheng i^i^^	(1999) (The Collection of the Classics, Vol. II), ed. by
Guan Shuguang. Changchun: Changchun chubanshe.
101