Necessity of controversy
Disputation is central to the period of the Hundred Schools of Thought, which flourished during the periods known as the « Spring and Autumn » and the « Warring States, » from the 779 to 221 BC.
The Confucian philosopher Mencius (Mengzi, 372-289 BC), a disciple of Confucius, justifies his practice of disputation as a necessity if one wants to preserve the truth in times of proliferation of systems of thought, which, according to Mengzi, endanger the true,
Gongduzi said, Master, outsiders all say you are fond of disputation. What do you say to that?’
Mencius said, How could it be that I am fond of disputation? I simply have no choice. The world has existed for a long time, now in order, now in chaos. In the time of Yao, the waters ran awry and flooded the central states; eels and dragons dwelt there and the people had no security. […]
But after the deaths of Yao and Shun the Dao of the sages declined and tyrants arose one after another. They leveled homes in order to create their pleasure ponds and the people had no place to rest. They took fields out of cultivation to create their pleasure parks and the people had no way to eat. And then there arose errant teachings and patterns of violent conduct. […]
But no sage king has arisen [after Confucius]. The lords of the states act with abandon and gentlemen in retirement proclaim deviant doctrines. The words of Yang Zhu and Mo Di fill the world such that those who do not preach the doctrines of Yang Zhu preach those of Mozi. The maxim of the Yangists is ‘Each for himself,’ a world of men without rulers; the maxim of the Mohists is ‘universal love,’ a world of men without fathers. To know no father and no ruler – this is to be nothing but a beast! […] If the daos of Yang and Mo don’t cease and the Dao of Confucius is not clear to all, then deviant doctrines will deceive the people and humanity and righteousness will be blocked. To block out humanity and righteousness is to lead the beasts and devour the people, and the people will be led to eat one another.
This is why I am alarmed, and why I defend the Dao of the past sages and confront Yangists and Mohists, driving out depraved speech so that errant doctrines will no longer flourish.
(MenciusEno 3B.9)
In this passage, « disputation » is not used as a tool to find a common superior truth, but to eradicate the « bad doctrines » of the opponents. The outcome of the controversy is fruitless , entirely negative.
This position is very different from that of dialecticians philosophers, who enjoy paradoxes and controversy, the controversy being a way to impose their position.