Legalism Group

[Rob_Hugo@PortNW]

Work with your team in this thread.

[Anonymous]

What's up Legalists!

So how are we going to do this? Should we divide sections and have each person specialize in one area or argument against 1 specific philosophy, or are we going to just read up on everything?

[Anonymous]

1. Are people fundamentally good?
2. How should children be raised and educated? What should they be taught?
3. How should society be governed? Who should rule? What goals should the government seek to achieve?
4. Describe the perfect society.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
*People are not fundamentally good, in fact, they're selfish
*Children should learn all about current laws and the consequences of following and breaking said laws; they should also focus on 'agriculture' and disregard trivialities such as: business, crafts, and philosophies--they don't matter!
*Society should be ruled by a ruler or a select few, the fewer the better. The ruler should not be selfish because under Legalism, the state is the most important entity, not the individual/families. The ruler must clearly lay out the rules AND enforce them. The leader must rule base on fact and not theory. There must be a rewards/punishment system. Those who break laws will be severely punished , and those who follow rules will be honored.
*The perfect legal society will have a ruler who shows his people what the laws and expectations are. In a legally educated society, the lawmakers will not break laws and turn corrupt--treating the people unlawfully because the people know all about the laws. On the other hand, the people will not break laws because they know about the consequences and are suppose to fear them.

If the ruler and the people follow laws, work hard on building the state through agriculture and taxes, building a large and disciplined army, ignore things that might distract them from working--pastime stuff. And if they believe in the power of the state, then they could challenge other states or governments and easily defeat them because their own state is collectively unified in promoting the well-being of a WHOLE instead of selfishly looking out for the individual's needs.

[Edit by="ssamel on Feb 27, 9:51:35 PM"]**Kindness and honesty has no place in the court; and these people are working towards hegemony, thus the need for uniform laws, hard work, and strong military**[/Edit]

[Anonymous]

Hey Legalists,

Just finished reading through all the philosophies, and while I originally picked Legalism because it sounded the most outlandish and fun to argue, upon comparison it really seems to be the most logical.

Its fundamental basis is on punishments and rewards - the way we teach our children, students, the way companies foster a hard working environment, etc. It also focuses on developing economic wealth which will lead to military strength - sound familiar? Our U.S. government is a bit Legalist!

Plus, there are way too many holes in the other philosophies; it makes them impractical. Confuscianism is elitist, sexist, thus dated, Mohists are just silly with the whole idea of "universal love," and Daoism looks down on scholarly discussion (not to mention it thinks morals are "opressive").

Can't wait to hear their defense!

[Anonymous]

Yes! Our government does have some legalist characteristics--we invest in the future, promote hard work, have the biggest army in the world, and like to usurp other territories, and have established rules, punishments, and rewards. (but we do have a bit of confucianism, too--we have a bureaucracy which is largely controlled by the elitist, and our society is certain not gender-equal).

But I agree, I see more of the legalists teachings in the United States government.

By the way, that avatar of the leprachaun gave me the chills...

[Anonymous]

Yup!!!

Legalism is the most logical of all...
We do not take emotions or feelings or rituals in to consideration. Its all about having a civilized society that is governed by law and order!!!

The end justify the means!!!

[Anonymous]

It is hard to pick just one philosophy as a cure all. Truth is people are born with different gentics and different llife experiences, which makes them react differently to life's obstacles.
While Daoism and Confucianism seem to be good ideas, it kind of works on the assumption that people are given the same circumstances in life. If that were the case, they might work for the majority of people, but even then, there will always be those exceptions wanting more.

On the other hand you have Legalism which is the belief that everyone is out for themselves. While I don't believe that is entirely true, most people given their own "threshold cirumstance" will succumb to this philosophy.
For some it doesn't take much to become selfish, for others their life or that of their child's may be at stake before they succumb to selfishness, but ultimately most people will fall to it. Perhaps because it is our nature to survive.
In an ideal world, I think it best starting out with Legalism, teaching right from wrong, forming habits, then in young adult years swicth to a more liberal philosophy.
While Legalism seems harsh, for many it is the only way to keep them in line, which is not only important for the sake of keeping them in line, but keeping others safe.
Ultimately people will rebel against a Legalist view of life, so in the end it can in fact cause much damage, which is why a change would be needed.

[Anonymous]

My leprechaun rules! 😛

I thought the debate last night went really well. The questions Prof. Dube posed made us really think about our position.

What I regret not bringing to the forefront was the fact that China was first united under the Legalist ideology. And even though it fell (due to a ruler's strict adherance to the rules by unfortunately punishing a prince who later became king and had him killed) , for centuries unified China was run with Legalist principles.

Although it seems superficial and power-hungry, Legalism had the right idea. The ideology was to be strong economically so it could be strong militarily. That combination was and still is the recipe for any powerful and successful empire throughout the history of time and today.

[Anonymous]

Asarnoff--

I absolutely agree with you. All the great modern civilizations of the past have had a strong economy and military (Rome & Britain, to name a few). With the strong money and defense, they also wanted to spread hegemony in order to create a more powerful empire. However, like all civilizations that ignore its people, they eventually fail. (I can't imagine living in a Machiavellian-based state for very long and supporting it.) I think a strong society would have a mixture of legalism and confucianism. A nation cannot expect to stay on top of the world if it is strictly militaristic. True, there needs to be laws established to set order in a government; to put people in line. But there will also need to be a hierarchy, people overseeing others, to make sure that they are productive and do their jobs in society for society. The arts also have to prevail in this society because like Confucius, I also believe music and art express the emotion of the people; an outlet for happiness and frustration. With a mixture of these ideologies, the subjects, the ruler, and the empire will most definitely live in a more joyous time. After all, the goal is to build a great nation, and without the approval of the majority, no order can last for very long.
😐

[Anonymous]

I am shocked by the points of view expressed in this forum. It's interesting and shocking to learn that people think empires are a good thing when they entail oppressing other groups and countries. I am also amazed to see nationalistic imperialist policies expressed here...people mentioned the U.S. maintaing its position as an empire and the most powerful country in the world. I am an internationalist and would never say "god bless America" but instead think about the whole world and not maintaining "our" superiority which was achieved through theft and murder. One thing I liked about the Mohist philosophy was that it was anti-imperialist over 2000 years ago. In the reading it mentioned how one should care about other states as it does its own.

I was re-reading the entries and saw that I was a bit to harsh on what people said, but I do feel their were some responses that implied some of what I wrote in the top paragraph.

More elaboration on what I said: I think we should want to learn more about East Asia because we are unfamiliar with Eastern thought, all we get is Western thought. We should not want to learn about East Asia because China is rising and we have to know our competition or our enemy. I think to look at it this way is completely wrong....

I don't know what do people think???[Edit by="esanchez on Mar 11, 9:22:57 PM"][/Edit]

[Anonymous]

ESanchez--
I understand about promoting a universal love idea and about being concerned of other states, as well as that of your own. Mohism does sound like a great philosophy. Realistically speaking though, not everyone is going to treat everybody else the same way. For example, would you treat another person's mother the same as your own mother? What if it came down to helping one or the other? (Personally, I would choose to help my own mother). Theoretically speaking, IF everyone is raised in a communal society from the very beginning or birth, they might treat others on a more equal basis, but they will probably still have their own favorites.

I think that my colleagues and I are just expressing that based on the readings, in order for a country to be nationally unified and militarily strong enough to maintain an empire, they need to follow a more legalistic approach. It is not my intention to promote nationalism and glorify the past roles of any imperialistic country and their politically incorrect roles in human history.
:~

[Anonymous]

Thanks for the clarafication...I edited my previous entry because I felt I was a little unfair.. I hope you read my edit

[Anonymous]

Yah, I did.

[Anonymous]

I am not saying that Legalism is the best philosophy but, it is the most logical of the four. It does incorporate other philosophy too. Such as the rituals, which must be observed for law and order of the land.

Legalism take in to consideration the "good and dark" side of human nature. It is a philosophy that we see all over the world. "Rewards & Punishments" are what we use in the classroom and what countries use to maintain law and order.

[Author]

Posts