{"id":11643,"date":"2024-08-21T21:25:57","date_gmt":"2024-08-21T19:25:57","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/icar.cnrs.fr\/dicoplantin\/?p=11643"},"modified":"2025-10-25T13:59:08","modified_gmt":"2025-10-25T11:59:08","slug":"atc-rules-debate-tsou-yen","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/icar.cnrs.fr\/dicoplantin\/atc-rules-debate-tsou-yen\/","title":{"rendered":"ATC D\u00e9bat Tsou Yen program"},"content":{"rendered":"\n\n\n
\n

ATC<\/span><\/h2>\n<\/td>\n

\n

\u00a0Rules of Debate:<\/span>\u00a0TSOU-YEN Inaugural Program<\/span><\/h2>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

\u201cThe least misleading appoach to Chinese disputation is through the thinkers who actually describe and operate the apparatus of disputation, the later Mohists\u00a0\u00bb <\/strong><\/em>(Graham 1978, p.19-20).
\nGraham takes Tsou Yen’s \u201cprogram\u201d (see Kroll 1985-1987) as the starting point for this tradition of disputers.
\nTsou Yen lived from around 340 to around 260 BCE.<\/p>\n

In this way, the winner does not fail to make his point and the loser finds what he is seeking.<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

The disputation recognised throughout the world has \u2018five wins and three arrivals, of which correctness in phrasing is the least. (1)<\/strong><\/span>
\nThe 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.<\/strong><\/span>
\nIn this way, the winner does not fail to make his point and the loser finds what he is seeking.<\/strong><\/span>
\nWhen 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.<\/strong><\/span>
\nEngaging in tangled debates and competing to keep talking the longest cannot but be harmful to being a gentleman<\/strong><\/span>
\nTsou YenGRAHAM<\/sub> 1978, p. 20-21.<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

Rules of the Method<\/strong><\/span><\/h3>\n

POSITIVE RECOMMENDATIONS<\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/em><\/p>\n

1) Cognitive component<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

The participants must:<\/strong><\/em>
\n(a) Distinguishe separate kinds of things so that they do not interfere with each other.<\/strong>
\nFirst step, about things: clarification of categories. Distinguish things according to their proper category; categories are set of things of the same kind.
\nNo interference, that is, non-overlapping categories No fuzzy zones.<\/p>\n

(b) Arrange in sequences different starting-points, so that they do not confuse each other,<\/strong>
\nSecond, about the organization of reasoning (i.e., the correct arrangement of judgments (NB in (a): correct grouping of things). Discourse arrangement.
\nStarting points, basis of the whole reasoning:\u00a0 premisses, data, hypotheses, postulates, as well as implicit assumptions. The issue is the epistemic status of what is said.<\/p>\n

In (a) and (b) clarification \/ confusion<\/p>\n

(c) Dredges his ideas<\/strong>
\nBoth participants deepen and clear up their ideas, that is exert self criticism.
\nFor 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 \u00ab\u00a0idols\u00a0\u00bb produce such waste.
\nThey have to track down their own shortcomings and fallacies.<\/p>\n

2) Linguistic component<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

The participant must:<\/em>
\n(d) Make his meaning intelligible:<\/strong>
\nExpression – communication: they ensure that what they have developed conceptually is expressed correctly and is correctly understood by their partner.<\/p>\n

(e) Clarify what he has to say<\/strong>
\nThe 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.<\/p>\n

[2g] Share his knowledge with others and do not busy himself with misleading them.
\nShare [their] knowledge with others:
\n<\/strong>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 Task which has been detailed through the cognitive and linguistic recommendations.\u00a0
\n<\/strong><\/p>\n

Do not busy himself with misleading them:
\n<\/strong>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0Task which will be detailed through the cognitive and linguistic recommendations 1)<\/p>\n

NEGATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS<\/em><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Global structure of the negative component
\nThe positive section has a linear structure; Tree kind of action converge to a global result, \u00ab\u00a0the winner does not fail to make his point and the loser finds what he is seeking.<\/span>\u201c
\n<\/strong><\/p>\n

The negative section has an alternating structure combines two parallel groupings
\n<\/strong><\/p>\n

1st series: four negative actions (behaviors) converge to a global result:
\n<\/span>harmfull to the Great Way.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

2nd series: two negative actions (behaviors) converge to a global result parallel to the first: harmful to being a gentleman.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

First series, four actions
\nThe actions
\nElaborate style in order to put up a pretence
\nUsing style in order to mask the weaknesses of reasoning<\/strong><\/p>\n

Adorn phases in order to make nonsense of the other\u2019s case
\nA classic condemnation of ornaments, The prestige orf ornaments superseds the reasoning – dissimulates the weakness of the positions.<\/strong><\/p>\n

Use subtle comparisons to make it shift his ground,
\nSubtle comparison is the first step towards metaphor. A especially de-stabilizing move.<\/strong><\/p>\n

Stretch what he litterally says, so that he cannot get back to his own idea,<\/strong><\/p>\n

Result: Harmfull to the Great Way.<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Second series,<\/p>\n

Engaging in tangled debate.
\nBetter not to engage or join a tangled debate, that is a debate defying\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0clarification.<\/strong><\/p>\n

Competing to keep talking the longest
\nCould join the fallacy of eloquence.\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n

Result: Harmfull to being a Gentleman.<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Harmful to the Great way = Harmful to reality
\nHarmful to being a Gentleman = Harmful to the status of the person<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n

Graham, Arthur C., 1978. Later Mohist Logic, Ethics and Science<\/em>. The Chinese University Press, Chinese University of London. School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London.<\/p>\n

Kroll J. L.,1985-1987. Disputation in Ancient Chinese Culture. Early China,<\/em> Vol. 11\/12 (1985\u20131987). Cambridge University Press. Pp. 118-145.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

ATC \u00a0Rules of Debate:\u00a0TSOU-YEN Inaugural Program \u201cThe least misleading appoach to Chinese disputation is through the thinkers who actually describe and operate the apparatus of disputation, the later Mohists\u00a0\u00bb (Graham 1978, p.19-20). Graham takes Tsou Yen’s \u201cprogram\u201d (see Kroll 1985-1987) as the starting point for this tradition of disputers. Tsou Yen lived from around 340 […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[26],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-11643","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-atc"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/icar.cnrs.fr\/dicoplantin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/11643","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/icar.cnrs.fr\/dicoplantin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/icar.cnrs.fr\/dicoplantin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/icar.cnrs.fr\/dicoplantin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/icar.cnrs.fr\/dicoplantin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=11643"}],"version-history":[{"count":21,"href":"https:\/\/icar.cnrs.fr\/dicoplantin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/11643\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":15251,"href":"https:\/\/icar.cnrs.fr\/dicoplantin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/11643\/revisions\/15251"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/icar.cnrs.fr\/dicoplantin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=11643"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/icar.cnrs.fr\/dicoplantin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=11643"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/icar.cnrs.fr\/dicoplantin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=11643"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}