Moralism Or Utilitarianism

"Tao" is the most important word for ancient China's political thought and political practice. As the mainstream of Chinese traditional political culture, the Confucianists has a wealth discussion of "Tao". Broadly speaking, there are two different interpretations of "Tao" in the Confucianists, one is the explanation of moralism, it regards "Tao" and its practices as moral idealism, and believes that outer kingship is based on inner sainthood, and only by this can the kingly way of political order be safeguarded and its political legitimacy be relized; the second is the explanation of utilitarianism, which treating "Tao" itself and its practice as a contingency utilitarianism, taking a realism view of "Tao" and its application in historical and realistic politics, thinking that a kingly way of utilitarianism is that the current problems can be solved, the unity of the country, the stability of social order and non-foreign aggression can be realized. These two different explanations of "Tao" are basically around the problem of "Wang Ba Yi Li" and the essence of them is the different paths for the Confucianists to solve governance problems.The debate of moralism and utilitarianism has a long history. In the Southern Song Dynasty, the debate of "Wang Ba Yi Li" around Xia-Shang-Zhou period, and Han-Tang dynasty between Chu Hsi who is the leader of Taoism and Ch'en Liang who is an excellent representative of utilitarianism is a typical head-to-head confrontation case of moralism and utilitarianism. Although this debate was happened eight hundred years ago, the content of this argument and its significance in the history of political thought remains its necessity which is not affected by the change of the times. The core problem to be researched in this paper is the debate of "Wang Ba Yi Li" between Chu Hsi and Ch'en Liang, and its significance in the history of political thought. So this paper tries to put Chu Hsi's ideology as moralism, put Ch'en Liang's ideology as utilitarianism, and regard them as two different ways to solve the problems of governance. According to digging the resources of ideological history, studying the historical context of Chu Hsi and Ch'en Liang's debate and teasing a comprehensive review of the debate content, this paper attempts to explore its substantive significance, limited significance and model significance in the history of political thought.Firstly, by using a research method of ideengeschichte which emphasizing on an intrinsic logic analysis, this paper want to tracing the Confucianists's discussion on the problem of "Wang Ba Yi Li" before Chu Hsi and Ch'en Liang's debate happened. The reason why this paper illustrate Confucius, Mencius, Xuncius, Tung Chung-shu, Wang Tong and Cheng Hao's thoughts at the beginning is that both Chu Hsi and Ch'en Liang share these views in spite of their different cognition about these views. Through analysis, this paper outlines two evolution routes about the view of "Wang Ba Yi LI", one is the route of moralism from Confucius to Mencius, Tung Chung-shu and Cheng Hao; the second is the route of utilitarianism from Confucius to Xuncius and Wang Tong.Secondly, by using the research method of "Historical Contextualism", this paper studies the history context of Chu Hsi and Ch'en Liang's debate from macro-level, meso-level and micro-level. The macroscopic context means a political and cultural macro-historical structure which needs a long-term transition to be formed. And it shaped the bottom color of the thinking and temperament of Chu Hsi and Ch'en Liang. Thereinto, the political context mainly refers to the continuation of absolute monarchy and the endless of the cycle of turbulent history; the ideological context refers to the institutionalization and involution of the the Confucianists. The mesoscopic context points to the word history where Chu Hsi and Ch'en Liang exposure themselves to. The influence of this mesoscopic history structure is more direct and powerful for both Chu Hsi and Ch'en Liang. Thereinto, the political context mainly refers to Confucian scholars'pursuit of Xia-Shang-Zhou under the background of government's centralization and the southern migration of Song Dynasty; the ideological context is focused on the diversification development of Confucianism and the autocracy and orthodox of Taoism under the revival of Confucianism in the Song Dynasty. The microscopic context indicates the living world and political world where Chu Hsi and Ch'en Liang facing to. This microscopic history structure can show their individual differences vividly by emphasizing on their life, learning, social intercourses and official experiences.Thirdly, this paper discusses the debate of "Wang Ba Yi Li" between Chu Hsi and Ch'en Liang from three levels:The first level is to analyze Chu Hsi and Ch'en Liang's debate of " Yi Li", which based on their perspective of heavenly principles and physical desire. The second level is to analyze their debate of "Wang Ba" based on their view of history. The third level is to analyze their conception of Confucian orthodoxy which is the basis of their discrimination of "Tao" and evil. Chu Hsi's view of "Wang Ba Yi LI" which inclined to moralism is motivation-based when distinguishing between the three dynasties of Xia, Shang and Zhou and the Han and Tang dynasties, and he takes the view that the essential difference between "kingly way" and "rule by force of dictators" is whether the sovereignty is just or not and whether the sovereign accumulate the sincerity and upright his mind or not. He holds that "kingly way" puts justice first while profit begins to take precedence in "rule by force of dictators". Ch'en Liang's view of "Wang Ba Yi LI" which inclined to utilitarianism demonstrate that there are no essential differences between the three dynasties of Xia, Shang and Zhou and the Han and Tang dynasties by the standard of results, the only difference between them is the degree. He holds that "rule by force of dictators" comes from "kingly way" and what the Emperor Gaozu of Han and Emperor Taizong of Tang have done also can be associated with morality and justice. When Chu Hsi and Ch'en Liang make a debate of "Wang Ba Yi Li" of the three dynasties of Xia, Shang and Zhou and the Han and Tang dynasties, they also dispute for the power of interpretation of "Tao" and then strive for the rights of possession and monopoly of Confucian orthodoxy, which means the difference in their thought to solve the problem of governance. The differences between them in constructing Confucian orthodoxy further strengthen their discrepancy in the problem of "Wang Ba Yi Li". However, both of them have accepted the tradition of confucianist that distinguishing between heavenly principles and physical desire, the dual view of history and the elaborating of Confucian orthodoxy.Lastly, this article discusses the significance of the debate between Chu Hsi's moralism and Ch'en Liang's utilitarianism in the history of Chinese political thought. To begin with, in terms of its substantive significance, the debate between moralism and utilitarianism highlights the opposition between political idealism and political realism as well as the tension between the virtue ethics and the utility ethics. Then in terms of its limited significance, epistemologically speaking both of them has not get rid of the traditional thinking of totalitarianism epistemology. The moralism holds an omnipotent theory of knowledge based on the knowledge of moral life while the utilitarianism based on the knowledge of country-management and utility. Last in terms of its model significance, the conflict between Chu Hsi's moralism and Ch'en Liang's utilitarianism which highlighted by their debate has not come to an end along with the end of their debate. However, in late Ming and early Qing and the late Qing dynasty, when the moralism had become mainstream, it also witnessed the rebound of utilitarianism.By the analysis of the debate between Chu Hsi's moralism and Ch'en Liang's utilitarianism, we can discover that in imperial China both the moralism and the utilitarianism had failed to resolve the issue well which has been haunting Confucianism all the time because of no alternative choice of regime and no referenced knowledge resources; in modern society, to be off the hook, the establishment of democratic politics is needed to construct the valid foundation of the system, besides, it is the moralism that highlighting the moral basis of political legitimacy and then we can fully realize "external king" and lay the foundation of performance legitimacy led by the moralism in the frame of democratic politics.