Content area
Full text
(ProQuest: ... denotes non-US-ASCII text omitted.)
Introduction
In the "Qiwulun" ... chapter of the Zhuangzi, the author recommends a better way of arguing for a conclusion in the debates that are recorded in the books Discourse on Pointing at Things (Zhiwulun ...) and White Horse Discourse (Baimalun ... -hereafter abbreviated as WHD)1:
To use an attribute to show that attributes are not attributes is not as good as using a non-attribute to show that attributes are not attributes. To use a horse to show that a horse is not a horse is not as good as using a non-horse to show that a horse is not a horse. Heaven and earth are one attribute; the ten thousand things are one horse.2
Later in the same chapter, Zhuangzi gives a lengthy, disparaging speech on discerning the real winner in a debate:
Suppose you and I have had an argument. If you have beaten me instead of my beating you, then are you necessarily right and am I necessarily wrong? If I have beaten you instead of your beating me, then am I necessarily right and are you necessarily wrong? Is one of us right and the other wrong? Are both of us right or are both of us wrong? If you and I don't know the answer, then other people are bound to be even more in the dark. Whom shall we get to decide what is right? Shall we get someone who agrees with you to decide? But if he already agrees with you, how can he decide fairly? Shall we get someone who agrees with me? But if he already agrees with me, how can he decide? Shall we get someone who disagrees with both of us? But if he already disagrees with both of us, how can he decide? Shall we get someone who agrees with both of us? But if he already agrees with both of us, how can he decide? Obviously, then, neither you nor I nor anyone else can decide for each other. Shall we wait for still another person? . . . If right were really right, it would differ so clearly from not right that there would be no need for argument. If so were really so, it...