tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13378665.post112728740252757809..comments2024-03-01T16:32:41.076+08:00Comments on Sun Bin: Misnomer of the legalist Shang Yang, and how to fix the mess in China's legal systemSun Binhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08093210384069958083noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13378665.post-1127407754015974802005-09-23T02:49:00.000+10:002005-09-23T02:49:00.000+10:00Sun Bin, I tried to cross post my comment on your ...Sun Bin,<BR/> <BR/>I tried to cross post my comment on your site but Blogger would not let me in (for some reason my Firefox browser would not read the Chinese characters on your comments page - funny, because it reads Chinese characters on other pages...). In any event here is my comment. <BR/> <BR/> Sun Bin,<BR/>I like your work to differentiate the particular ideas of Shang Yang from a more abstract category of "Legalist". You certainly know Shang Yang better than I, and I do not doubt that there may be elements of market-oriented, or proto-market, thinking in his work. It was just the category of "Legalism" that made me question things. And my understanding of Legalism is drawn mostly from Han Fei Tzu. I look forward to learning more about Shang Yang from you.<BR/>And, regarding, market-like thinking in ancient Chinese philosophy, Mencius has a quite sophiticated notion of the division of labor that I have been meaning to blog about for some time.... <BR/> <BR/> Best,<BR/> <BR/> Sam CraneSun Binhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08093210384069958083noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13378665.post-1127349105102610562005-09-22T10:31:00.000+10:002005-09-22T10:31:00.000+10:00Follow up on Sam's comment: (see trackback)Hi Sam,...Follow up on Sam's comment: (see trackback)<BR/><BR/>Hi Sam,<BR/><BR/>Thanks for the discussions and the nice introduction. <BR/><BR/>I probably didn't write it with good clarity, my apologies :) So this was what I tried to say. I did not try to pretend Legalists as market believers. I was actually trying to single out Shang Yang from the rest of the 'legalists', and tried to argue that the later legalists probably have mis-understood Shang's spirit and believes. in other words, calling Shang a legalist is a misnomer.<BR/><BR/>Yes, as indicated in your link, Monopoly of Salt and Iron was a Legalist concept. But it was not part of Shang's ideas. It was first introduced by Han Wu Di around 100BC (200 years after Shang), as proposed by a later legalist Suan Hong Yang, Shang Yang has no idea of that. he actually only tried to impose tax on the salt trading as a revenue source for the state. see wiki on <A HREF="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_salt" REL="nofollow">salt</A>, <A HREF="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emperor_Wu_of_Han_China" REL="nofollow"> han wu di </A><BR/><BR/>I am not an expert of Shang Yang, so he might also have some other anti-market ideas. But I think its was his deep insight into economic principles (and human nature) that made his reform successful.<BR/><BR/>Yes, I agree with your second point. the tragedy of China is that Li-ji 礼记 (which is not wirtten by confucius himself) was more "conveniently" used by the interested parties than Mencius. And Confuciusm' emphasis on authority was not helping the Mencius school regarding this split issue.Sun Binhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08093210384069958083noreply@blogger.com