View source for Logic in China

{{Short description|none}}

China is a special case in the [[history of logic]], due to its relatively long isolation from the corresponding traditions that developed in Europe, India, and the Islamic world.

== Background: comparison with other traditions ==
[[Christoph Harbsmeier]] identifies the "only really productive period" for the native tradition of logic in China as spanning between the lifetimes of [[Confucius]] and [[Wang Chong]]{{snd}}i.e. from {{circa|550&nbsp;BC}} until {{circa|AD&nbsp;100|lk=no}}.{{sfnp|Needham|Harbsmeier|1998|p=1}} This largely coincides with the period during which the classics of Chinese literature were written; the style exemplified in these works is known as ''[[Classical Chinese]]''. Almost all formal [[written Chinese]] from the Classical period until the early twentieth century consciously emulated this form of the language, in what is referred to as ''Literary Chinese''.{{sfnp|Needham|Harbsmeier|1998|p=27}} The native Chinese tradition did not conceive of a system of [[formal logic]] separable from language as otherwise written.{{sfnp|Willman|2016|loc=Introduction}} Notably, [[syllogism]]s{{snd}}arguments fundamental to classical [[Term logic|Hellenistic]] and [[Indian logic]], where a necessary conclusion is deduced from two propositions assumed to be true{{snd}}are almost entirely absent from premodern Chinese writing.{{sfnp|Gunn|1991|p=7}}

There was no Chinese word with a meaning akin to Ancient Greek [[wikt:λογῐκός|{{tlit|grc|logĭkós}}]] prior to the modern period. As in many other languages, the modern Chinese word for "logic" ({{zh|s=逻辑|t={{linktext|邏輯}}|p=luójí|l=patrol-gather|first=t}}) is a [[loanword]] stemming ultimately from the Greek term. It was coined in 1902 by [[Yan Fu]] to correspond phonemically to the English word ''logic'' for his translation of ''[[A System of Logic]]'' by [[John Stuart Mill]]; its characters were not chosen via [[phono-semantic matching]] or as a purely semantic [[calque]] like some other Chinese translations of the term that appeared during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries.{{sfnp|Kurtz|2011|pp=264–265, 271}}

== Mohist logic ==
{{History of science and technology in China}}
[[Mozi]] ({{circa|470|391&nbsp;BC}}), a near-contemporary of [[Confucius]] ({{circa|551|479&nbsp;BC|lk=no}}), is credited with founding the [[Mohist]] school, whose canons dealt with issues relating to valid inference and the conditions of correct conclusions.  However, they were nonproductive and not integrated into Chinese science or mathematics. The Mohist school contained an approach to logic and [[argumentation]] that stresses  rhetorical analogies over mathematical reasoning, and is based on the three ''[[Fa (philosophy)|fa]]'', or methods of drawing distinctions between kinds of things. As classical Chinese philosophical logic was based on analogy rather than [[syllogism]], fa were used as benchmarks to determine the validity of logical claims through comparison.

The [[School of Names]], a school that grew out of Mohism, is credited by some scholars for their early investigation of [[formal logic]].

== Taoist skepticism ==
Although Taoist skeptics such as [[Zhuang Zhou]] agreed with the Mohist perspective about object relations regarding similarities and differences, they did not consider language to be sufficiently precise to provide a constant guide of action.{{sfnp|Willman|2016}}

== Official repression of the study of logic ==
During the [[Qin dynasty]], the rule of [[Legalism (Chinese philosophy)|Legalism]] repressed the Mohist line of investigation, which has been said to have disappeared in China until the introduction of [[Indian philosophy]] and [[Indian logic]] by [[Buddhists]].{{sfnp|Nakamura|Wiener|1981}}  A prominent scholar suggests that the version assembled for the Imperial Library of the Han dynasty would probably have been as disorganised as the current extant text, and thus would have only been 'intermittently intelligible', as it is for current readers who do not consult a critical edition. Disagreeing with [[Hajime Nakamura]], [[A. C. Graham]] argues the school of [[Neo-Taoism]] maintained some interest in the Canons, although they may already have some of the terminology difficult to understand.{{sfnp|Graham|1978|pp=65–66}} Before the end of the [[Sui dynasty]], a shortened version of ''Mozi'' appeared, which appears to have replaced the Han edition. Although the original ''Mozi'' had been preserved in the Taoist,{{clarify inline|date=September 2024}} and became known once more in the 1552 Lu edition and 1553 Tang edition, the damage was done: the dialectical chapters (as well as the military chapters) were considered incomprehensible.{{sfnp|Graham|1978|pp=68–70}} Nevertheless, with the rise of Chinese critical textual scholarship, the book benefited from explanatory and critical commentaries: first, by Bi Yuan, and his assistant, Sun Xingyan; another commentary by [[Wang Chong]], which has not survived; "the first special study",{{sfnp|Graham|1978|p=70}} by Zhang Huiyan; a republication of Part B by Wu Rulun.  However, the summit of this late imperial scholarship, according to Graham, was the 'magnificent' commentary of [[Sun Yirang]], which "threw open the sanctum of the Canons to all comers".{{sfnp|Graham|1978|p=70}}  Graham summarises the arduous textual history of the Canons by arguing that the Canons were neglected throughout most of China's history; but he attributes this fact to "bibliographical" accidents, rather than political repression, like Nakamura.{{sfnp|Graham|1978|p=72}}

== Buddhist logic ==
{{Main|Buddhist logico-epistemology}}

The study of logic in China was revived following the transmission of [[Buddhism in China]], which introduced the Buddhist logical tradition that began in Indian logic. Buddhist logic has been often misunderstood by scholars of Chinese Buddhism because they lack the necessary background in Indian logic.<ref>See Eli Franco, "Xuanzang's proof of idealism." Horin 11 (2004): 199-212.</ref>

== Western logic ==
In 1631, [[Li Zhizao]] and Francisco Furtado translated an abridged [[commentary on Aristotle]], published through the [[University of Coimbra]].

In 1886, [[Joseph Edkins]] published the Chinese translation of [[William Stanley Jevons]]'s ''Elementary Lessons in Logic''. In 1905, [[Yan Fu]] published the translation of [[John Stuart Mill]]'s ''[[A System of Logic]]''. In the early 1930s, the Department of Philosophy of [[Tsinghua University]] was the center of philosophical study. Many of the scholars at Tsinghua University at the time were strongly influenced by [[Bertrand Russell]], who visited China in 1920.

Outside of the PRC, [[Hao Wang (academic)|Hao Wang]], a mathematical logician who was a close friend of [[Kurt Gödel]], and [[Mou Zongsan]], one of the [[New Confucian]] scholars and a translator of Ludwig Wittgenstein's ''[[Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus]]'' were active. Inside the country, [[dialectical logic]] was actively discussed during the [[Cultural Revolution]], while [[formal logic]] stagnated. However, in 1979, after the Cultural Revolution, the Chinese Association of Logic was established with [[Jin Yuelin]] as the first chairman and studies of mathematical logic began.

== References ==
{{Reflist|20em}}

=== Bibliography ===
{{Refbegin|30em}}
* {{Cite book |last=Chmielewski |first=Janusz |title=Language and Logic in Ancient China: Collected Papers on the Chinese Language and Logic |publisher=Komitet Nauk Orientalistycznych PAN |year=2009 |isbn=978-83-925392-4-7 |editor-last=Mejor |editor-first=Marek |location=Warsaw}}
* {{Cite journal |last=Fraser |first=Chris |title=Language and Ontology in Early Chinese Thought |journal=Philosophy East and West |publisher=University of Hawaiʻi Press |volume=57 |issue=4 |year=2007 |issn=0031-8221 |jstor=20109423 |pages=420–456}}
* {{Cite book |last=Fraser |first=Chris |title=Late Classical Chinese Thought |publisher=Oxford University Press |year=2023 |isbn=978-0-19-885106-6 |series=The Oxford History of Philosophy |author-mask=3}}
* {{Cite book |title=Dao Companion to Chinese Philosophy of Logic |publisher=Springer |year=2020 |isbn=978-3-030-29031-3 |editor-last=Fung |editor-first=Yiu-ming |series=Dao Companions to Chinese Philosophy |volume=12 |issn=2211-0275}}
* {{Cite book |last=Graham |first=Angus Charles |author-link=A. C. Graham |title=Later Mohist Logic, Ethics, and Science |publisher=Chinese University of Hong Kong Press |year=1978 |isbn=962-201-142-X}}
* {{Cite journal |last=Greniewski |first=Henryk |last2=Wojtasiewicz |first2=Olgierd |year=1956 |title=From the History of Chinese Logic |journal=Studia Logica |volume=4 |issue=1 |pages=241–243 |doi=10.1007/BF02548917 |issn=0039-3215}}
* {{Cite book |last=Gunn |first=Edward |title=Rewriting Chinese:Style and Innovation in Twentieth-Century Prose |publisher=Stanford University Press |year=1991 |isbn=978-0-8047-6622-7}}
* {{Cite book |last=Hansen |first=Chad |title=Language and Logic in Ancient China |publisher=University of Michigan Press |year=1983 |isbn=0-472-10020-3 |location=Ann Arbor}}
* {{Cite book |last=Kurtz |first=Joachim |title=The Discovery of Chinese Logic |publisher=Brill |year=2011 |isbn=978-90-474-2684-4 |series=Modern Chinese Philosophy |volume=1}}
* {{Cite journal |last=Lucas |first=Thierry |date=1993 |title=Hui Shih and Kung Sun Lung: an Approach from Contemporary Logic |journal=Journal of Chinese Philosophy |volume=20 |issue=2 |pages=211–255 |doi=10.1111/j.1540-6253.1993.tb00174.x |issn=0301-8121}}
* {{Cite journal |last=Lucas |first=Thierry |author-mask=3 |year=2005 |title=Later Mohist logic, lei, classes, and sorts |journal=Journal of Chinese Philosophy |volume=32 |issue=3 |pages=349–365 |doi=10.1111/j.1540-6253.2005.00198.x |issn=0301-8121}}
* {{Cite book |last=Nakamura |first=Hajime |title=Ways of Thinking of Eastern Peoples: India–China–Tibet–Japan |last2=Wiener |first2=Philip P. |publisher=University of Hawaiʻi Press |year=1981 |isbn=0-8248-0078-8 |location=Honolulu |orig-date=1964}}
* {{Cite book |title=Language and Logic |publisher=Cambridge University Press |year=1998 |isbn=978-0-521-57143-2 |editor-last=Needham |editor-first=Joseph |series=[[Science and Civilisation in China]] |volume=VII:1 |editor-last2=Harbsmeier |editor-first2=Christoph |editor-link=Joseph Needham}}
* {{Cite journal |last=Rošker |first=Jana S. |year=2014 |title=Specific Features of Chinese Logic: Analogies and the Problem of Structural Relations in Confucian and Mohist Discourses |url=https://hrcak.srce.hr/138229 |journal=Synthesis philosophica |publisher=Hrvatsko filozofsko društvo |volume=29 |issue=1 |pages=23–40 |issn=0352-7875}}
* {{Cite journal |last=Rošker |first=Jana S. |author-mask=3 |year=2015 |title=Classical Chinese Logic |journal=Philosophy Compass |volume=10 |issue=5 |pages=301–309 |doi=10.1111/phc3.12226 |issn=1747-9991}}
* {{Cite book |last=Rošker |first=Jana S. |year=2021 |title=Interpreting Chinese Philosophy |publisher=Bloomsbury |isbn=978-1-350-19990-3 |author-mask=3}}
* {{Cite encyclopedia |edition=Fall 2023 |title=Logic and Language in Early Chinese Philosophy |encyclopedia=[[Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy]] |publisher=Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University |last=Willman |first=Marshall D. |date=2016 |editor-last=Zalta |editor-first=Edward N. |editor1-link=Edward N. Zalta |editor-first2=Uri |editor-last2=Nodelman |url=https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2023/entries/chinese-logic-language/}}
{{Refend}}

== External links ==
{{Refbegin}}
* {{cite SEP |url-id=mohist-canons |title=Mohist Canons |last=Fraser |first=Chris}}
* {{cite SEP |url-id=school-names |title=The School of Names |last=Fraser |first=Chris}}
* {{Cite web |last=Hansen |first=Chad |year=1996 |title=Later Mohist Dialecticians |url=http://www.hku.hk/philodep/ch/nmintro.htm |website=Chad Hansen's Philosophy Pages |publisher=University of Hong Kong}}
* [https://www.historyoflogic.com/logic-chinese.htm Raul Corazzon, Language and Logic in Ancient China] with a bibliography on Chinese logic
{{Refend}}

{{Chinese philosophy}}
{{S&T in China}}

[[Category:History of logic]]
[[Category:Ancient Chinese philosophy]]