HAN FEIZI: The Totalitarian Legalist Philosopher: An Introduction | Philosophy of Han Feizi (法家)

[@roundninja]

America schools tend to gloss over legalism. It's unfortunate, because when you look closer you see that it was ahead of its time in certain ways. Few people in the ancient world had such a clear understanding of the role of incentives and environment in shaping human behavior.

[@christophmahler]

Famine and plenty are not 'constructs', but _material_ *circumstances* or *'structure'* that shift 'values' and _norms_ ... That is why ancient Chinese 'legalism' fits well with Western 'Historical Materialism' in which the *'mode of production'* modifies the customs and beliefs. The difference to Pavlow could be that the West thinks that any behaviour can be manipulated into _any_ direction - but in classical Chinese philosophy there's still a notion of natural laws and rythms as a frame of reference (agriculture, crafts, trade), similar to Greek notions of an archetypal society, resting on a baseline of minimum of natural conditions that constitute a meaningful existence of subsistence and reproduction. The West however seeks the 'rat utopia' of Calhoun where there is no natural drive and no reproduction in an urban environment of surplus. To Han Feizi, understood properly (arguably claiming that he is either _inconsistent_ or that his writings have been corrupted), rules would always be arbitrary in contrast to material _circumstances_ - and it is the manipulation of the latter - not of individual behaviour as in Confucianism - that will shift the course of a society (and that manipulation of circumstances toward a growing society is arguably the purpose of 'Dengism' - which could be balanced with Tao, knowing that too much growth will lead to scarcity, strive, collapse and another cycle of renewal, just as the act of balance may be immanent, but also transcendental, shaping the realm of ancestors)... To call Han Feizi 'totalitarian' is arguably also a _politicized_ , anchronistic bias as his argument is completely in line with the Greek concept of *_monarchy_* - of which 'tyranny' would be a deviant _corruption_ due to personal vices, likely caused by circumstances (a 'destiny' which could be educated and treated by Confucian asceticism, concluding *a circle of political theories, supporting another* in a dynamic adaption to life)...

[@LeDerp25]

Excellent statement. The information in the video was presented well, but I found the leap from explaining Han Feizi's principles to drawing the conclusion that the ideal Legalist society is one where a tyrant governs according to their uninformed whims and oppresses indiscriminately to be a leap of logic; potentially the product of the automatic condemnation of anti-democratic systems prevalent in today's times.

[@christophmahler]

@@LeDerp25 "Excellent statement." Thank You for the feed-back. It was the merit of the video to show lesser known, 'exotic' concepts in their local, *geographical* and longer, *historical, 'organic' **_context_* - an approach that inspired my contemplation on the topic - wich appears awfully relevant - with *Western parliaments 'systematically' undermining their own legitimacy* among the population...

[@alebassista]

Thankfully, in my opinion, historical and dialectical materialism is not a (nowadays neglected, despite a recent although still timid revival) prerogative of the West, but thrives (not without endogenous and esogenous obstacles arising and addressed through praxis) in the East via the constant process of 'spiralic' dialectical development... Which includes the relation and evolving synthesis with previous outlooks including legalism, mohism, and confucianism to remain on the original topic and your comment (much appreciated)

[@redotter00]

When you went into Pavlov's dogs study I was confused as to what that had to do with Han Fei's philosophy... But then you drew the parallel and it all clicked for me. You did a great job explaining his reasoning.

[@lyceumofphilosophy9392]

Yeah that’s my fault LOL I should’ve made the transition more apparent and smoother. I’ll do better on the future ones

[@KW-gt5zt]

Pavlov's study explored classical conditioning. For your purposes, a more apt example would be Skinner's study of operant conditioning in rats (the former is stimuli + association, the latter is punishment vs. reward).

[@harbingerization]

This is excellent content. Great description of a lesser known philosopher in the west that deserves much more attention. Thank you

[@lyceumofphilosophy9392]

Thank you! Hope you continue to enjoy the future videos.

[@Castle3179]

Reminds me of Thomas Hobbes and his support for monarchy.

[@ksan8913]

Visuals in your vids always calm me 😌

[@TheRealReaper93]

Very well made video, you deserve much more subs!

[@TheRealReaper93]

Also, don't get disheartened if your channel grows very slowly or even not at all, in the beginning. Quality will get recognition sooner or later.

[@lyceumofphilosophy9392]

Thank you! I put in a lot of times to make these videos so I appreciate someone out there enjoying them. I initially didn’t expect a lot of people, if any, to enjoy them since the topics that I cover is less well-known and less entertaining so I won’t be disappointed. Your comment is a good reminder there are still people who likes what I am doing.

[@bobbymccullough3210]

@@lyceumofphilosophy9392 I really appreciate this video. My master's thesis was on Han Feizi's economic philosophy, so it's always great to see lesser-known philosophers that I work with getting screen time on platforms such as KZbin.

[@lyceumofphilosophy9392]

@@bobbymccullough3210 Thank you! It means a lot to me when I am getting support. As a small channel, I don’t get too many views. If you don’t mind though, can you direct me to any resources where I can learn Han Feizi’s economic philosophy? I might even make it a video since I intend to cover all aspects of Chinese philosophy and do what most universities aren’t willing to do.

[@lyceumofphilosophy9392]

@@bobbymccullough3210 Also, if you don’t mind me sharing your master’s thesis or tell me something where I can go read up on it, I’d really appreciate it! Oddly enough, I love reading thesis, especially on topics that I am not familiar with.

[@madman7544]

What a place to end up at the 02.00 at the night.

[@gonzalohouseoro6701]

I know that I am a bit late to the party, but late me tell you man, great video. You've won a sub and I hope that you'll get the success you deserve. Althuogh it's a great video, and unfortunately I'm not as well educated in this matter as I probably should, i cannot help but think that this subject should me more linked to Deng Xiaoping and his reforms than Mao Zedong. I understand that Mao may benefit from a philosophy that prioritizes a strong despotical rule, but as far as I know (I may be wrong) Mao many times had a more ideological approach to politics. In the cultural revolution, ideological purity, mob rule and innefficient organizations like comunes were more valued by Mao than competent and pragmatic party officials. However, in Deng's political rule, pragmatic individuals were encouraged to seek their selfinterest so they could develop China's economic structure. If I recall correctly Deng once said something like "We´ll all get richer, but some will get there sooner than others". This kind of pragmatical approach to politics had a very clear limit: Criticize the power of the all ruling monarch: The Communist Party. Anyway, sorry to bother you, but I have one little request. I've had troubles trying to locate Han Feizi text, in fact I arrived to this video looking for one. Could you mention and recommend one of his original works? Thank you very much.

[@lyceumofphilosophy9392]

Thanks for your support, and also your feedback! I always appreciate it and love seeing these kinds of discussions in the comment section. Feel free to do more when I upload more videos on Han Feizi when I will be analyzing him in detail or on any other videos that interests you. That is an interesting comparison, certainly something that I will have more time to give considerations for. I was indeed planning on releasing more videos to compare the two schools sometime in the future so it is great to see that there would be some people who are interested in the topic. As for the books, I was actually planning to put them up on the website when I have enough subscriber to have my own website so that people can read more into these but I can also link them here too for the time being. I would check these two out. I think they are quite decent in their translation. - Han Fei (Full-length Collection) www.amazon.com/Han-Feizi-Full-length-Collection-Fei/dp/7531731657/ref=pd_lpo_14_t_2/137-8989172-0849237?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_i=7531731657&pd_rd_r=d9982ff0-af16-411d-9037-e06e55ded3ac&pd_rd_w=W6012&pd_rd_wg=LhzMS&pf_rd_p=337be819-13af-4fb9-8b3e-a5291c097ebb&pf_rd_r=P26K6W2HVDC530G8WW1E&psc=1&refRID=P26K6W2HVDC530G8WW1E - Han Feizi: Basic Writings (Translations from the Asian Classics) www.amazon.com/Han-Feizi-Writings-Translations-Classics/dp/0231129696

[@Playwright-Lorde]

You have to understand Han Fei and Shang Yang's legalism as a justification to overthrow confucian governments. Mao hailed Han Fei mostly during the civil war, at a time where the chinese communists were fighting more "traditional" enemies. Even though legalism at its core is a philosophy of government, or so it would appear to be at first glance, it is also an ideology that supports opposition to the status quo, a rejection of conservatism and violent revolutionary action to propel historical change.

[@gonzalohouseoro6701]

@@Playwright-Lorde I guess I failed to see it as a tool to undermine chinese traditional values and institutions. Thx for the insight, very interesting.

[@اسامهالحرباجي]

Anyone has han feizi book? Please i need it

[@cristianmoisei9689]

Isn't Han Feizi the name of the texts written by Han Fei?

[@lyceumofphilosophy9392]

Yes. As you also probably noticed, all the philosophers that I’ve discussed on this channel also has the “zi” in their name, and that’s because ‘zi’ is an honorary term “master”. So ‘Yang Zhu’ became ‘Yangzi’ or ‘Master Yang’ and ‘Han Fei’ became ‘Han Feizi’ or ‘Master Han Fei’.

[@cristianmoisei9689]

That is cool. Thanks for explaining. So his book is essentially called 'Master Han Fei'?

[@lyceumofphilosophy9392]

Yeah pretty much. I have a feeling that he didn’t name the book but someone else’s did or else it’ll be a bit weird. Lol

[@100monotheist-fkeroffalseg8]

@@lyceumofphilosophy9392 which is readable? hanfezi book or book of shang yang?

[@noahpeng1689]

He didn't title his own books, only other people compiled his writings and named them after him. This method was very popular in China at that time.

[@alanhu4145]

You have an incorrect character in the title, 发 should be 法

[@lyceumofphilosophy9392]

天呐！我居然弄错了 😅，哈哈哈，十分感谢您的指正！

[@alsetalokin88]

legalism also has a lot of dark notions like in machiavellism. it suited its time, but couldn't last as society and mentality progressed.

[@semprequeleroscomentariose8916]

It is quite the contrary.

[@goingmonotheist783]

This does infact explain alot of Chinese politics.. But how did all this lead to a belief in Marxism? You don't have to be a Marxists to be totalitarian, or a culturally a collectivist.

[@lyceumofphilosophy9392]

Good question. As Buddha would say there are multiple causes and preconditions that must exist before producing one effect. For example, for an apple to drop from the tree, there must be sun, a ground, rain, gravity, the right degree of earth tilting, the right distance that earth must be at where it’s not too far from the sun and not too close to the sun, etc. you get the point. Likewise, you can consider Han Feizi and legalism as one of the preconditions that allow the existence of Marxism in China. It is not the sole factor that led to the establishment of CCP. To understand a belief in Marxism is to look at the period of instability between the fall of Qing dynasties and the establishment of CCP. There were multiple groups with competing ideologies that were looking to establish a strong nation state that can resist against western imperialism and not become one of the colonies. Despite competing ideologies, MANY (not all) of them shared the same belief that the old ways must be changed and believed that the failure of the dynasty rest upon Confucianism which played an influential role in the past but is simply now holding China back from developing into an industrial might. Chairman Mao had an intense dislike of Confucianism, and it turns out there was a period in history when Confucianism was severely criticized and that was Han Feizi and the legalist philosophers. So despite a huge gap in time between the two, they both disliked the Confucians for various reasons. You’re right that you don’t have to be an authoritarian to be a Marxist but Marxism requires authoritarian approach in some aspects, obviously the economy, so I think you can agree that there is an overlap between the two. Legalism is also very authoritarian in their approach to many aspects of government and society, and because many Chinese people believe that a strong government is necessary in order to unite the country with the world’s biggest population, many of the modern Chinese tend to like the Legalist approach over the Confucian approach. So in short, the politics in the 20th century, the culture, the history and the pre-existing attitudes led to a belief in Marxism.

[@watermelonprom7197]

​@@lyceumofphilosophy9392 do you have to be authoritarian to be a Father? If you say yes then your ideals will fall under Neo Confucianism & Legalism. & If you say no then your Ideals will fall under Confucianism & Daoism. The reason why Socialism never truly caught on & why Communism failed is because there is a Fundamental misunderstanding of Xiao or Filial Piety. A better translation would be Reverence or Respect & Responsibility. Family is not a one way thing it is not a top down or a bottom up system but rather a circular conversation. The Parent should have just as much respect for the Child as the Child has for the Parent for that is the definition of Equality. Respect & Responsibility are not given they are earned through Virtue & Cultivation.

[@Playwright-Lorde]

Adding to what lyceum says, you must understand that at every historical breaking point in China, say post Qin, Three Kingdoms, the fall of the Qing, the dominant confucian way of thinking found challenges to its inability to sustain its own paradigm. Legalism is the OG anti-status quo ideology and confucianism's nemesis, so in its tenets Mao found philosophical foundations from which to build the structures of what is a very-chinese, very particular branch of marxism. We have to remember that marxism is based in dialects, dialects being a concept not too alien to the chinese mind; in fact, one could argue that the daojia and the yin yang schools of thought have delved into these concepts thousands of years before Hegel even thought of it (Hegel, by the way, had a decent knowledge of Chinese philosophy and history from his travels before coming up with the concept of dialectics. Coincidence?). Mao saw in marxism an inherent "chinese" ideology, one that was an echo of times past in which people could find justification. From the white lotus and taiping lunatics to the yellow turban peasant revolts, there was no reason why the common folk could not adapt and understand communism as yet another ground breaking, bottom-up ideology similar to the ones that had spawned before. And Mao made sure to show himself as a successor to these revolutionary movements.

[@watermelonprom7197]

@necrodeath7726 ngl it's been amazing seeing how I have changed from a Month ago to now :] I COMPLETELY agree with both of you lol... I recognize that I did have a reason to say what I said BUT I did not voice my opinion very well XD so now that I am much more knowledgeable let me redefine my position lol I am a very Leftist Thinker... Socialism, Anarchy, the whole SHABANG... But the reason that I am is BECAUSE of my belief in the 3 philosophies of Buddhism, Daoism & Confucianism... (Also before I continue I just wanted to say- it's REALLY funny because the more you look into Western philosophers the more you see that they were inspired by Eastern minds like how Laissez Faire was inspired by Wuwei & Hegal was one who I didn't know about XD so thanks for sharing lol) Anyways the point I trying to make is that Socialism is inherently Buddhist, Daoist & Confucian... & That the idea that Marx believed that Socialism needs to be based on control & hierarchy is absolutely wrong... It's like saying that Confucianism is a Hierarchical & that Subjects should never disobey their masters... But that's NOT what Confucius said AT ALL! "An oppressive government is to be more feared than a hungry tiger" Confucius... He Advocated for those to rise up against oppression & to build a better society for all... Which is the point of using Family... Familes are not perfect... you are born into them with out your consent & have to live with them untill you can live on your own... & Confucius knows that... & The point is that it's easy to be good with good people but it's not easy to be good with bad people... If you can sit across the table from your Racist Uncle but still find a way to be a good person to them despite that then you are a TRUE Gentleman :] now the thing is that I know that neither one of you said that this wasn't the case but at the time I felt compelled to make the point be clear XD anyways the Broader stroke is that Society is like One Big Family :] you are going to live with a Bunch of Bad People... But if you can't still find a way to show compassion in the face of adversity then you are truly a Good Person :] & from my own experience you might start to get that Racist Uncle of yours to open up alittle :> anyways BACK to Socialism... The way that I view Marxism (well as Leninism & Maoism) is the same way that I view the Confucian Xunzi... Aka people who took good philosophy & decided to try & do whatever it takes to apply it despite the consequences... In Daoism this is called "forcing the way" in the words of Xunzi "you have to beat iron to mold it" & funnily enough look who was the inspiration for Han Feizi XD (it was Xunzi) just like how Communism inspired the Fascism of both Stalin & Hitler... All comes full circle don't it lol... Basically my point is Socialism, just like Confucianism... Isn't a top down or a Bottom up system... But rather a Circular Conversation... No matter what status you have in society you should treat everyone as if they were an Emperor :] "Virtue is like the wind & people are like the grass ... Whichever way the Wind Blows the Grass will bend in said direction" Confucius... The issue with Socialism is that if you are not a virtuous person then you will never be able to implement it properly... It's like an apprentice welding a sword... Without the proper training you will never be able to use it properly... (Which is why Democracy is failing in the US because we have Politicians who have NO idea what they are doing & are just in it for the Political Power & Money) so uh... Yeah... Hope I was able to explain myself better XD & I also hope that this gives you a different perspective on both Socialism & Confucianism :] aight Peace-

[@MarcDufresneosorusrex]

These legalists have no siblings or families; the institution takes them in, they become bitter and their view of human relations becomes disfunctional. Then we let them or (their students) rule our societies. The power they seek is a function of the people letting them get away with what they do. They impose taxes because they have no way to make money on their own effort, because they have no original ideas and routine monotonous work disgusts them. They then join a political cuause in order to avoid "the boring hand life has dealt them". That's why they are all monks and recluse who come up with these manichean notions. Obviously it's not only China ... that's my spontaneous rant ...

[@pierren___]

The first Realist Materialist i guess

[@100monotheist-fkeroffalseg8]

no, it is charvaka from india or kesakambali also from india 1000 BCE

[@pierren___]

@@100monotheist-fkeroffalseg8 Nice

[@johnweber4577]

Han Fei was indeed a realist, but I don’t think he was a materialist per se. Legalism seems to be based upon the idea of doing whatever needs to be done once you have decided that you can’t take any of the larger truth claims made by the competing schools of philosophy for granted, particularly with respect to the political sphere. And to him that was figuring out how to best promote the well-being of the community without appealing to any presumed philosophical ideals which is why he emphasized enforcing strict laws and regulations to maintain order instead.

[@pierren___]

@@johnweber4577 what was his relation to religion

[@johnweber4577]

@@pierren___ I’m not really sure. I was just getting at that it wasn’t necessarily the case just because of his realism. After all, Otto Von Bismarck was both a political realist and a committed Lutheran. If I were to guess, Han Fei probably didn’t think that you could make definitive claims on the matter one way or the other but he did seem to believe the Dao, granted there is considerable variety in how that concept can be understood, was a factor. However, I am completely open to being corrected.

[@jwang9053]

First