Abstract
This essay argues that political realism is an effective heuristic for understanding The Book of Lord Shang (Shangjun Shu 商君書), which it compares to the political thought of Machiavelli and Hobbes. It first lays out the premises of political realism as they emerge from this comparison: the real is the guiding heuristic of political realism; historical change is the fundamental condition; the nature of human beings is selfish but can also form customs favorable to political order. Based on these premises, the essay then discusses the major propositions of political realism: the purpose of central authority is to provide the multitude with the benefits of order and to reward the ruler; the benefits of order warrant the commission of cruel deeds, also called the reason of state in the West; legal and extra-legal actions are the means by which the central authority imposes order and counters contingency; punishment is the primary means to make the laws prevail. The essay closes with considering the question of whether a fully implemented realist order could put an end to historical change.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ames, Roger T. 1994. The Art of Rulership: A Study of Ancient Chinese Political Thought. Albany: State of New York University Press.
Analects. 1979. In Confucius: The Analects. Trans. by D.C. Lau. London: Penguin Books
The Book of Lord Shang: A Classic of the Chinese School of Law. Trans. by J.J.L. Duyvendak. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Cheng, Chung-Ying. 1981. “Legalism versus Confucianism: A Philosophical Appraisal.” Journal of Chinese Philosophy 8.3: 271-302.
———. 2011. “Preface: Understanding Legalism in Chinese Philosophy.” Journal of Chinese Philosophy 38.1: 1-3.
Creel, Herrlee. 1961. “The Fa-chia—Legalists or Administrators?” In Studies to Tung Tso Pin on His Sixty-Fifth Birthday. The Bulletin of the Institute of History and Philology. Academia Sinica 4: 607-36.
Duyvendak, J.J.L. 1963. “Introduction.” In The Book of Lord Shang: A Classic of the Chinese School of Law. Trans. by J.J.L. Duyvendak. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Fu, Zhengyuan. 1996. China’s Legalists: The Earliest Totalitarians and Their Art of Ruling. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.
Fung, Yu-lan. 1952. “Han Fei Tzu and the Other Legalists.” In A History of Chinese Philosophy, Vol. I: The Period of the Philosophers (from the Beginnings to Circa 100 B.C.), 312-336. 2nd ed. Trans. by Derk Bodde. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Goldin, Paul R. 2011. “Persistent Misconceptions about Chinese ‘Legalism.’” Journal of Chinese Philosophy 38.1: 88-104.
Graham, A.C. 1989. Disputers of the Tao: Philosophical Argument in Ancient China. La Salle, IL: Open Court.
Hanfeizi. 1939/59. In The Complete Works of H an Fei Tzu: A Classic of Chinese Legalism. Trans. by W.K. Liao. 2 vols. London: Probsthain.
Hobbes, Thomas. 1994. Leviathan. Edited by Edwin Curley. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett.
Hsiao, Kung-chuan. 1979. A History of Chinese Political Thought, vol. I: From the Beginnings to the Sixth Century A.D. Trans. by F.W. Mote. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Hsieh, S.Y. 1985. “The Legalist Philosophers.” In Chinese Thought: An Introduction. Edited by Donald H. Bishop. Columbia, MO: South Asia Books.
Hulsewé, A.F.P. 1985. Remnants of Ch’in Law: An Annotated Translation of the Ch’in Legal and Administrative Rules of the 3 rd Century B.C. Discovered in Yün-meng Prefecture, Hu-pei Province, in 1975. Leiden: E.J. Brill.
Kraynak, Robert P. 1990. History and Modernity in the Thought of Thomas Hobbes. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Kroker, Eduard Josef. 1951. Der Gedanke der Macht im Shang-kün-shu: Betrachtungen eines alten chinesischen Philosophen.Wien-Mödling: St.-Gabriel-Verlag.
Lee, Gong-Way. 1996. “A Comparative Study Between Shang Yang and Niccolo Machiavelli: Their Views on Human Nature and History.” Chinese Culture 37.1: 39-54.
Lévi, Jean. 1981. “Introduction.” In Le Livre du Prince Shang. Trans. by Jean Lévi. Paris: Flammarion.
Lewis, Mark Edward. 2003. “Custom and Human Nature in Early China.” Philosophy East & West 53.3: 308-22.
Machiavelli, Niccolò. 1988. Florentine Histories. Trans. by Laura F. Banfield and Harvey C. Mansfield, Jr. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
———. 1992a. “Dell’ Ambizione.” In Niccolò Machiavelli: Tutte le Opere, 983–87. Edited by Mario Martelli. Florence: Sansoni.
———. 1992b. “L’Asino.” In Niccolò Machiavelli: Tutte le Opere, 954–76. Edited by Mario Martelli. Florence: Sansoni.
———. 1992c. “Di Fortuna.” In Niccolò Machiavelli: Tutte le Opere, 976–79. Edited by Mario Martelli. Florence: Sansoni.
———. 1996. Discourses on Livy. Trans. by Harvey C. Mansfield and Nathan Tarcov. Chicago: University of Chicago Press
———. 1998. The Prince. 2nd ed. Trans. by Harvey C. Mansfield. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Martinich, A.P. 2011. “The Sovereign in the Political Thought of Hanfeizi and Thomas Hobbes.” Journal of Chinese Philosophy 38.1: 64-72.
Moody, Peter R., Jr. 1979. “The Legalism of Han Fei-tzu and Its Affinities with Modern Political Thought.” International Philosophical Quarterly 19.3: 317-31.
Parel, Anthony J. 1992. The Machiavellian Cosmos. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Pines, Yuri. 2009. Envisioning Eternal Empire: Chinese Political Thought of the Warring States Era. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press.
Pines, Yuri, and Gideon Shelach. 2005. “‘Using the Past to Serve the Present’: Comparative Perspectives on Chinese and Western Theories of the Origin of the State.” In Genesis and Regeneration: Essays on Conceptions of Origins, edited by Shaul Shaked, 127-63. Jerusalem: Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities.
Rubin, Vitaly A. 1976. Individual and State in Ancient China: Essays on Four Chinese Philosophers. Trans. by Steven I. Levine. New York: Columbia University Press.
Scharfstein, Ben-Ami. 1995. Amoral Politics: The Persistent Truth of Machiavellism. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Schneider, Henrique. 2011. “Legalism: Chinese-Style Constitutionalism?” Journal of Chinese Philosophy 38.1: 46-63.
Schwartz, Benjamin I. 1985. The World of Thought in Ancient China. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
Vandermeersch, Léon. 1965. La Formation du Légisme: Recherche sur la Constitution d’une Philosophie Politique Caractéristique de la Chine Ancienne. Paris: École Française D’Extrême Orient.
Waley, Arthur. 1982. Three Ways of Thought in Ancient China. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Walzer, Michael. 1973. “Political Action: The Problem of Dirty Hands.” Philosophy and Public Affairs 2.2: 160-80.
Xu, Zhen Zhou. 1995. L’Art de la Politique chez les Légistes Chinois. Bordeaux: Economica.
Xunzi, 1988-1994. In Xunzi: A Translation and Study of the Complete Works. Trans. by John Knoblock. 3 vols. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Fischer, M. The Book of Lord Shang Compared with Machiavelli and Hobbes. Dao 11, 201–221 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11712-012-9269-y
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11712-012-9269-y