ATC |
Rules of Debate: TSOU-YEN Inaugural Program |
“The least misleading appoach to Chinese disputation is through the thinkers who actually describe and operate the apparatus of disputation, the later Mohists » (Graham 1978, p.19-20).
Graham takes Tsou Yen’s “program” (see Kroll 1985-1987) as the starting point for this tradition of disputers.
Tsou Yen lived from around 340 to around 260 BCE.
In this way, the winner does not fail to make his point and the loser finds what he is seeking.
The disputation recognised throughout the world has ‘five wins and three arrivals, of which correctness in phrasing is the least. (1)
The disputant distinguishes separate kinds of things so that they do not interfere with each other, arranges in sequences different starting-points, so that they do not confuse each other, dredges his ideas and makes his meaning intelligible, and clarifies what he has to say; he shares his knowledge with others and does not busy himself with misleading them.
In this way, the winner does not fail to make his point and the loser finds what he is seeking.
When it comes to elaborating style in order to put up a pretence, adorning phases in order to make nonsense of the other’s case, using subtle comparisons to make it shift his ground, stretching what he litterally says so that he cannot get back to his own idea, to behave like this is harmful to the Great Way.
Engaging in tangled debates and competing to keep talking the longest cannot but be harmful to being a gentleman
Tsou YenGRAHAM 1978, p. 20-21.
Rules of the Method
POSITIVE RECOMMENDATIONS
1) Cognitive component
The participants must:
(a) Distinguishe separate kinds of things so that they do not interfere with each other.
First step, about things: clarification of categories. Distinguish things according to their proper category; categories are set of things of the same kind.
No interference, that is, non-overlapping categories No fuzzy zones.
(b) Arrange in sequences different starting-points, so that they do not confuse each other,
Second, about the organization of reasoning (i.e., the correct arrangement of judgments (NB in (a): correct grouping of things). Discourse arrangement.
Starting points, basis of the whole reasoning: premisses, data, hypotheses, postulates, as well as implicit assumptions. The issue is the epistemic status of what is said.
In (a) and (b) clarification / confusion
(c) Dredges his ideas
Both participants deepen and clear up their ideas, that is exert self criticism.
For example, they have to get rid of prejudices and dubious ideas, like scooping out mud, weeds and rubbish out out a river with a dredge. Bacon’s « idols » produce such waste.
They have to track down their own shortcomings and fallacies.
2) Linguistic component
The participant must:
(d) Make his meaning intelligible:
Expression – communication: they ensure that what they have developed conceptually is expressed correctly and is correctly understood by their partner.
(e) Clarify what he has to say
The task of clarifying one’s thoughts doubles as the task of searching for the right expression. Globally (d) is about conceptual meaning whereas (e) is about correct reasoning.
[2g] Share his knowledge with others and do not busy himself with misleading them.
Share [their] knowledge with others:
Task which has been detailed through the cognitive and linguistic recommendations.
Do not busy himself with misleading them:
Task which will be detailed through the cognitive and linguistic recommendations 1)
NEGATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS
Global structure of the negative component
The positive section has a linear structure; Tree kind of action converge to a global result, « the winner does not fail to make his point and the loser finds what he is seeking.“
The negative section has an alternating structure combines two parallel groupings
1st series: four negative actions (behaviors) converge to a global result:
harmfull to the Great Way.
2nd series: two negative actions (behaviors) converge to a global result parallel to the first: harmful to being a gentleman.
First series, four actions
The actions
Elaborate style in order to put up a pretence
Using style in order to mask the weaknesses of reasoning
Adorn phases in order to make nonsense of the other’s case
A classic condemnation of ornaments, The prestige orf ornaments superseds the reasoning – dissimulates the weakness of the positions.
Use subtle comparisons to make it shift his ground,
Subtle comparison is the first step towards metaphor. A especially de-stabilizing move.
Stretch what he litterally says, so that he cannot get back to his own idea,
Result: Harmfull to the Great Way.
Second series,
Engaging in tangled debate.
Better not to engage or join a tangled debate, that is a debate defying clarification.
Competing to keep talking the longest
Could join the fallacy of eloquence.
Result: Harmfull to being a Gentleman.
Harmful to the Great way = Harmful to reality
Harmful to being a Gentleman = Harmful to the status of the person
Graham, Arthur C., 1978. Later Mohist Logic, Ethics and Science. The Chinese University Press, Chinese University of London. School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London.
Kroll J. L.,1985-1987. Disputation in Ancient Chinese Culture. Early China, Vol. 11/12 (1985–1987). Cambridge University Press. Pp. 118-145.