The Chinese period of Zhou was characterized by a great philosophical awakening. During the Zhou period, the ruling dynasty sought to find philosophical ways of handling power and ruling its subjects efficiently. Consequently, the Zhou period led to an age of intellectual pursuit that was characterized by opposing schools of thought, regional philosophical divisions, and public debates. Nevertheless, by the end of the Zhou period only three schools of thought emerged on top.
These three philosophies were Daoism, Legalism, and Confucianism. All of the three philosophies have parallel teachings that have both similarities and differences. However, Confucianism remains the most influential school of thought among the three philosophies.
Therefore, both Daoism and Legalism can be viewed as having a dialogue with Confucianism. This paper discusses how both Daoism and Legalism differ from Confucianism on the issues of family, human nature, education, role of ruler, role of government, and role of individual.
The founder of Confucianism, Confucius, was a teacher and politician from Lu and he taught between 5th and 6th centuries BC. Confucius held tradition in high regard and his teachings always encouraged the study of history, poetry, music, and ritual. The core message in Confucius’ message was an ideal society where people from all walks of life devoted themselves to being responsible towards others.
Confucianism concerns itself with ultimate virtue or the ability to achieve “humanity, perfect goodness, benevolence, human-heartedness, and nobility” (Ebrey and Walthall 27). Laozi is the personality behind Daoism. The Daoism School of philosophy harbors a disapproval of anything that is artificial and unnatural.
According to Daoism, whereas plants and animals are able to align themselves with the natural way of life, human beings insist on planning, plotting, organizing, and analyzing. On the other hand, Legalism focused on harnessing state powers. Legalism was prompted by the existence of disorder in the Chinese society. Henceforth, the rulers sought to impose tough measures to curb the increasing disorder.
Both Daoism and Legalism differ with Confucianism on their outlook of family. Legalism does not concern itself with familial matters. In addition, Legalism only focused on family members in their capacity as citizens. On the other hand, Confucianism consisted of roles that were to be assumed by family members in an ideal society.
For example, according to Confucianism, the children were obligated to take care of their aging parents. Confucianism dealt with family matters with the view of bringing order and peace to the society while Legalism did not see the need to include the family unit in its system of governance.
Daoism handled family matters with the view of harnessing natural harmony. Consequently, Daoism’s views on family are closely related to Confucianism. For instance, Daoism teaches that both men and women should assume their natural roles. Similarly, Confucianism offers women a more background role in the family setting.
Legalism outlawed the study of all pre-existing philosophies and doctrines. When legalism came into effect, the rulers burnt all the study materials that were connected to other philosophies (Debary 137). Legalists also monitored the type of education that was offered to its citizens.
Unlike Legalists, Confucius encouraged his disciples and followers to study poetry and history in order to achieve enlightenment. Furthermore, Confucianism was of the opinion that the stability of any government depended on well-educated officials. On the other hand, Daoism differed with Confucianism because the philosophy taught that “political involvement and education were unnecessary” in human life (Hoff 74).
Daoism taught that human beings are one with nature and the world’s harmony depends on this realization. On the other hand, Confucianism teaches that humans are naturally born with the ability to choose good over bad. Consequently, both Daoism and Confucianism have an element of natural and moral order.
There is a similarity between Daoism and Confucianism’s outlook on human nature because both philosophies agree that morality in human beings can be achieved without outside influence. On the contrary, Legalism advocates for tough and severe punishments to ensure that human beings follow rules and regulations. Moreover, Legalists insist on tough punishments even for simple mistakes.
Daoism does not consider the government to be a vital component of the society because the philosophy teaches that political ambition and activism only bring chaos to the society. Consequently, Taoists believe that natural balance has the ability to bring harmony to the society even without the existence of a government.
Daoism differs with Confucianism on the issue of government because the latter insists on the existence of an informed and able governing system (Ebrey and Walthall 27). However, Legalism insists that the government is the supreme body in the society and it is supposed to harness its power. For instance, Legalist rulers considered “the Confucian notion that government could be based on virtue” to be naïve (Ebrey and Walthall 31).
In addition, rulers only exist in Legalism and Confucianism. However, in Legalism rulers are supreme beings who strive to bring discipline in the society by all means necessary. The role of the individual is different in all three philosophies. For instance, in Confucianism the individual plays a prime role in the cohesion of the society.
On the other hand, Daoism advocates for a reclusive individual who aims to be one with nature. In Legalism, the role of the individual is to serve the state by engaging in activities such as hard work and military service (Ebrey and Walthall 32).
Works Cited
Debary, Williams. Sources of Chinese Tradition, New York, NY: Columbia Press, 1960. Print.
Ebrey, Patricia, and Anne Walthall. East Asia: a cultural, social, and political history, New York, NY: Cengage Learning, 2013. Print.
Hoff, Benjamin. The Tao of Pooh, New York: Penguin Books, 1983. Print.