History of Logic from Aristotle to Gödel (www.historyoflogic.com)

by Raul Corazzon | e-mail: rc@ontology.co

Bibliography on Language and Logic in Ancient China. Second part G - Z

Contents

Bibliography (Studies in English G - Z)

  1. Galante, Davide. 2001. "Classical Logic and Chinese Language Structure." Metalogicon no. 14:141-170.

  2. Garrett, Mary M. 1993. "Classical Chinese Conceptions of Argumentation and Persuasion." Argumentation and Advocacy no. 29:105-115.

  3. ———. 2001. "Language and Logic in China: A Guide for Argumentation Scholars." OSSA Conference Archive no. 34:1-6.

  4. Gatta, Timon. 2020. "The Translation of Western Philosophical Terms in Chinese: the case studies of "Logic", "Metaphysics" and "Aesthetics"." In Dal Medio all’Estremo Oriente / 2: Studi del Dottorato di ricerca in Civiltà dell’Asia e dell’Africa, edited by Miranda, Marina, 193-219. Roma: Carocci.

  5. Geaney, Jane. 1999. "A Critique of A. C. Graham's Reconstruction of the "Neo-Mohist Canons"." Journal of the American Oriental Society no. 119:1-11.

    "A. C. Graham's Later Mohist Logic, Ethics, and Sciences (1978) is the only Western-language translation of the obscure and textually corrupt chapters of the Mozi that purportedly constitute the foundations of ancient Chinese logic. Graham's presentation and interpretation of this difficult material has been largely accepted by scholars. This article questions the soundness of Graham's reconstruction of these chapters (the so-called "Neo-Mohist Canons"). Upon close examination, problems are revealed in both the structure and the content of the framework Graham uses to interpret the Canons. Without a more reliable framework for interpreting the text, it seems best to remain skeptical about claims that the Canons represent evidence for the study of logic in early China."

  6. ———. 2010. "Grounding «Language» in the Senses: What the Eyes and Ears Reveal about Ming (Names) in Early Chinese Texts." Philosophy East and West no. 60:251-293.

  7. ———. 2018. Language as a Bodily Practice in Early China: a Chinese Grammatology. Albany: State University of New York Press.

  8. ———. 2020. "What Is Ming 名? “Name” Not “Word”." In Dao Companion to Chinese Philosophy of Logic, edited by Fung, Yiu-ming, 15-32. Cham (Switzerland): Springer.

    "In this chapter, I survey a broad range of early Chinese texts to undermine the apparent self-evidence of translating ming as a unit of “language” (or “word”) and its correlates as “reality.” While leaving ming untranslated, I show that ming often functions somewhat like the term “name.” Names point to, pick out, or indicate referents, but names do not have “meanings.” That is, whereas words have a conceptual aspect,

    names do not. Through emphasizing these distinctions between “word” and “name,” my overview of the usage of ming foregrounds features of early Chinese philosophical discussions that are unusual in relation to the larger history of philosophy of language and logic. Their special significance lies in the nature of both the unit of analysis (ming) and that of its correlates (shi 實, shi 事, xing 形, xing 行, and shen 身)." (p. 17)

  9. ———. 2020. "Movement and Ming (Names): A Response to “Incongruent Names: A Theme in the History of Chinese Philosophy”." Dao: A Journal of Comparative Philosophy no. 19:635-644.

  10. ———. 2022. The Emergence of Word-Meaning in Early China: Normative Models for Words. Albany: State University of New York Press.

  11. Goldin, Paul R. 2020. The Art of Chinese Philosophy: Eight Classical Texts and How to Read Them. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Chapter One: Nondeductive Argumentation and the Art of Chinese Philosophy 13-27.

  12. Graham, Angus Charles. 1955. "Kung-sun Lung’s Essay on Meanings and Things." Journal of Oriental Studies no. 2:282-301.

    "A discussion of Kung-sun Lung's theory of chih and wu as contained in his essay on chih and wu. Graham attempts to show that Kung-sun Lung's theory is intelligible, consistent, and philosophical. But his interpretation of "chih" as "meaning" and his related elaboration of Kung-sun Lung's ideas are hardly textually intelligible and perhaps cannot stand philosophical criticism." Chung-Ying Cheng, Inquiries into Classical Chinese Logic, Philosophy East andf West, 15, 1965, p. 211.

  13. ———. 1957. "The Composition of the Gongsuen Long Tzy." Asia Major no. 5:147-183.

    Revised reprint with the title The Composition of the Kung-Sun Lung Tzŭ in A. C. Graham, Studies in Chinese Philosophy and Philosophical Literature, Singapore: Institute of East Asian Phllosophies, 1986, pp. 126-166.

    "Here Graham attempts to show that only two essays ("Po ma"'' and "Chih wu"ch) from the Kung-sun Lung Tzu are genuine writings of Kung-sun Lung and his contemporary followers, the rest being forgeries written some six centuries later." Chung-Ying Cheng, "Inquiries into Classical Chinese Logic", Philosophy East andf West, 15, 1965, p. 211.

  14. ———. 1959. "Being in Western Philosophy Compared with Shih/Fei and Yu/Wu in Chinese Philosophy." Asia Major no. 2:79-102.

    Reprinted in A. C. Graham, Studies In Chinese Philosophy & Philosophical Literature, Singapore: Institute of East Asian Phllosophies 1986, pp. 322-359.

  15. ———. 1964. "The Logic of the Mohist "Hsiao-ch'ŭ"." T'oung Pao no. 51:1-54.

  16. ———. 1964. "Two Dialogues in the Kung-sun Lung Tsu: “White Horse” and “Left and Right"." Asia Major no. 11:128-152.

    Revised reprint with the title A First Reading of the "White Horse" in A. C. Graham, Studies in Chinese Philosophy and Philosophical Literature, Singapore: Institute of East Asian Phllosophies, 1986, pp. 167-192.

  17. ———. 1967. "The 'Hard and White' Disputations of the Chinese Sophists." Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London no. 30:358-368.

  18. ———. 1970. "Chuang-tzu's Essay on Seeing Things as Equal." History of Religions no. 9:137-159.

  19. ———. 1972. "Later Mohist Treatises on Ethics and Logic Reconstructed from the Ta - ch'ü chapter of Mo - tzu." Asia Major no. 17:137-189.

  20. ———. 1975. "The Concepts of Necessity and the ‘A Priori’ in Later Mohist Disputation." Asia Major no. 19:163-190.

  21. ———. 1978. Later Mohist Logic, Ethics and Science. Hong Kong: Chinese University Press.

    Reprint Edition 2003 with a new introduction and supplementary bibliography by Christopher Fraser.

  22. ———. 1979. "The Organization of the Mohist Canons." In Ancient China: Studies in Early Civilization, edited by Roy, David T. and Tsien, Tsuen-hsuin, 167-179. Seattle: University of Washington Press.

  23. ———. 1981. Chuang tzu: The Inner Chapters. London: George Allen & Unwin.

    Reprint with a new Foreword by Henry Rosemont Jr. Indianapolis: Hackett 2001.

  24. ———. 1983. "Taoist Spontaneity and the Dichotomy of "Is" and "Ought"." In Experimental Essays on Chuang-tzu, edited by Mair, Victor H., 3-23. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.

  25. ———. 1985. Divisions in Early Mohism Reflected in the Core Chapters of the Mo-tzu. Singapore: Institute of East Asian Philosophies Occasional Paper and Monograph Series.

  26. ———. 1986. Yin-Yang and the Nature of Correlative Thinking. Singapore: Institute of East Asian Philosophies.

  27. ———. 1986. "The Disputation of Kung-sun Lung as Argument about Whole and Part." Philosophy East and West no. 36:89-106.

    Reprinted in A. C. Graham, Studies in Chinese Philosophy and Philosophical Literature, Singapore: Institute of East Asian Phllosophies, 1986, pp. 193-215.

  28. ———. 1989. Disputers of the Tao: Philosophical Argument in Ancient China. La Salle, IL: Open Court.

  29. ———. 1989. "The Place of Reason in the Chinese Philosophical Tradition." In The Legacy of China, edited by Dawson, Raymon, 28-56. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

  30. ———. 1989. "Rationalism and Anti-Rationalism in Pre-Buddhist China." In Rationality in Q!uestion: On Eastern and Western Views of Rationality, edited by Biderman, Shlomo and Scharfstein, Ben-Ami, 141-164. Leiden: Brill.

    Reprinted as Chapter 6 in A. C. Graham, Unreason Within Reason: Essays on the Outskirts of Rationality, Illinois: La Salle: Open Court 1992, pp. 97-120.

  31. ———. 1989. "Conceptual Schemes and Linguistic Relativism in Relation to Chinese." Synthesis Philosophica no. 4:713-732.

    Revised version in A. C. Graham, Unreason Within Reason: Essays on the Outskirts of Rationality, LaSalle:

    Open Court 1992, pp. 59-83.

    Reprinted in Bo Mou (ed.), Philosophy of Language, Chinese Language, Chinese Philosophy: Constructive Engagement, Leiden: Brill 2018, pp. 247-268.

  32. ———. 1990. "Three Studies of Kung-sun Lung." In Studies in Chinese Philosophy and Philosophical Literature, 125-215. Albany: State University of New York Press.

  33. ———. 1992. "Chinese Philosophy of Language." In Sprachphilosophie / Philosophy of Language / La philosophie du langage, edited by Dascal, Marcelo, Gerhardus, Dietfried, Lorenz, Kuno and Meggle, Georg, 94-104. Berlin: de Gruyter.

  34. Greniewski, Henrik, and Wojtasiewicz, Olgierd. 1956. "From the History of Chinese Logic." Studia Logica no. 4:241-243.

  35. Hagen, Kurtis. 2002. "Xunzi's Use of Zhengming: Naming as a constructive project." Asian Philosophy: An International Journal of the Philosophical Traditions of the East no. 12:35-51.

  36. Hall, David L., and Ames, Roger T. 1987. Thinking Through Confucius. Albany: State University of New York Press.

    Part V, Section 2: The Sage and the Ordering of Names (cheng ming) pp. 261-283.

  37. ———. 1991. "Against the Greying of Confucius: Responses to Gregor Paul and Michael Martin." Journal of Chinese Philosophy no. 18:333-347.

  38. ———. 1998. Thinking from the Han: Self, Truth, and Transcendence in Chinese and Western Culture. Albany: State University of New York Press.

    Part II: "Truth" as a Test Case of Cultural Comparison, pp. 103-186.

  39. Han, Xiaoqiang. 2009. "Maybe There Are No Subject-Predicate Sentences in Chinese." Dao: A Journal of Comparative Philosophy no. 8:277-287.

  40. Hans-Georg, Möller. 2000. "Zhuangzi's Fishnet Allegory: A Text-Critical Analysis." Journal of Chinese Philosophy no. 27:489-502.

  41. Hansen, Chad. 1975. "Ancient Chinese Theories of Language." Journal of Chinese Philosophy no. 2:245-283.

    "Four presupposed philosophical attitudes toward language are taken to characterize the major Schools of the pre-Han period. These are: 1) emotivism, 2) distinction marking -- the view that language and names, in their descriptive function, divide reality (or the Tao) into parts roughly analogous to distributive individuals, 3) conventionalism, and 4) behavioral nominalism -- that most or all "ordinary" thinking consists of entertaining names or strings of names (sentences). No clear reference to abstract ideas, classes, senses, platonic universals, etc., is found in this period nor is any necessary in understanding and interpreting the major thinkers of the period."

  42. ———. 1976. "Mass Nouns and "A white horse is not a horse"." Philosophy East and West no. 26 (2):189-209.

    "The most famous paradox in Chinese philosophy, Kung-sun Lung's "White horse not horse" has been taken as evidence of Platonism, Aristotelian essentialism, class logic, etc., in ancient Chinese thought. I argue that a nominalistic interpretation utilizing the notion of "stuffs" (mass objects) is a more plausible explanation of the dialogue. It is more coherent internally, more consistent with Kung-sun Lung's other dialogues, and the tradition of Chinese thought which is usually regarded as nominalistic. The interpretation is also strongly suggested by striking parallels between all Chinese classificatory nouns and English mass nouns."

  43. ———. 1981. "Linguistic Skepticism in the Lao Tzu." Philosophy East and West no. 31:321-336.

  44. ———. 1983. Language and Logic in Ancient China. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

  45. ———. 1985. "Chinese Language, Chinese Philosophy and "Truth"." Journal of Asian Studies no. 44:491-519.

  46. ———. 1987. "Classical Chinese Philosophy as Linguistic Analysis." Journal of Chinese Philosophy no. 14:309-330.

  47. ———. 1989. "Mo-Tzu: Language and Utlitarianism." Journal of Chinese Philosophy no. 16:355-380.

  48. ———. 1992. A Daoist Theory of Chinese Thought: A Philosophical Interpretation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  49. ———. 1993. "Chinese Ideographs and Western Ideas." The Journal of Asian Studies no. 52:373-399.

  50. ———. 2001. "How Chinese Thought “Shapes” Western Thought." In The Proceedings of the Twentieth World Congress of Philosophy: Vol. 12 Intecultural Philosophy, edited by Dawson, Stephen and Iwasawa, Tomoko, 25-40. Charlottesville, Virginia: Philosophy Documentation Center.

    Abstract: "I begin this paper with some autobiographical reflections of my own journey in Chinese languages and philosophy not only in order to demonstrate how Chinese philosophy can change one’s attitudes toward Western philosophy, but also to suggest that the shift in philosophical perspective that occurs—when viewed through a Chinese lens—is reasonable.

    The second half of this paper consists of interpretative hypotheses about the content of Chinese philosophy vis-à-vis the West. I reflect more specifically how the different structure of the Chinese language seems to have worked in Chinese philosophical reflection and contrast that with the way intentional idioms did in Western philosophy. Looking mainly at theory of language, the key similarity between the two traditions is expressed in the current “pragmatic” view that “meaning” is irreducibly normative. The differences that attend to this formulation between Chinese and Western thought will also be discussed."

  51. ———. 2003. "Mohism: Later (Mo Jia, Mo Chia)." In Encyclopedia of Chinese Philosophy, edited by Cua, Antonio S., 461-469. New York: Routledge.

  52. ———. 2003. "The Relatively Happy Fish." Asian Philosophy: An International Journal of the Philosophical Traditions of the East no. 12:145-164.

    Abstract: "Zhuangzi and Hui Shi’s discussion about whether Zhuangzi knows ‘fish’s happiness’ is a Daoist staple. The interpretations, however, portray it as humorous miscommunication between a mystic and a logician. I argue for a fine inferential analysis that explains the argument in a way that informs Zhuangzi philosophical lament at Hui Shi’s passing. It also reverses the dominant image of the two thinkers. Zhuangzi emerges as the superior dialectician, the clearer, more analytic epistemologist. Hui Shi’s arguments betray his tendency (manifest elsewhere) to misstate the conclusions of their shared relativism leading him but not Zhuangzi to intuitive mysticism."

  53. ———. 2007. "Prolegomena to Future Solutions to 'White-Horse not Horse'." Journal of Chinese Philosophy no. 34:473-491.

  54. Harbsmeier, Christoph. 1989. "Marginalia Sino-Logica." In Understanding the Chinese Mind. The Philosophical Roots, edited by Allinson, Robert E., 59-83. New York: Oxford University Press.

  55. ———. 1991. "The Mass Noun Hypothesis and the Part-Whole Analysis of the White Horse Dialogue." In Chinese Texts and Philosophical Contexts: Essays dedicated to Angus C. Graham, edited by Rosemont Jr., Henry, 49-66. La Salle: Open Court.

  56. ———. 1998. Science and Civilisation in China. Volume 7 Part I: Language and Logic. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    General Editor: Joseph Needham.

  57. ———. 2009. "On the Very Notions of Language and of the Chinese Language." Histoire Épistémologie Langage no. 31:143-161.

  58. ———. 2011. "A Reading of the Guōdiàn 郭店 Manuscript Yǔcóng 語叢1 as a Masterpiece of Early Chinese Analytic Philosophy and Conceptual Analysis." Studies in Logic no. 4:3-56.

  59. Hearne, James William. 1976. "A Critical Note on the Cheng-Swain Interpretation of the Chih Wu Lun." Philosophy East and West no. 26:225-228.

  60. ———. 1980. Classical Chinese as an Instrument of Deduction, University of California, Riverside.

    Unpublished Ph.D thesis available at Pro Quest Dissertation Express ref. number 8024984.

  61. ———. 1985. "Formal Treatments of the Chih Wu Lun." Journal of Chinese Philosophy no. 12:419-427.

  62. Ho, Chien-hsing. 2013. "One Name, Infinite Meanings: Jizang’s Thought on Meaning and Reference." Journal of Chinese Philosophy no. 39:436-452.

  63. ———. 2020. "Paradoxical Language in Chan Buddhism." In Dao Companion to Chinese Philosophy of Logic, edited by Fung, Yiu-ming, 389-404. Cham, Switzerland: Springer.

  64. Hu, Shih. 1922. The Development of the Logical Method in Ancient China. Shangai: Oriental Book Company.

    Second edition: New York, Paragon Book Reprint Corp., 1963.

  65. Im, Manyul. 2007. "Horse-Parts, White-Parts, and Naming: Semantics, Ontology and Compound Terms in the White Horse Dialogue." Dao: A Journal of Comparative Philosophy no. 6:167-185.

  66. Indraccolo, Lisa. 2009. Gongsun Long and the Gongsun Longzi: authorship and textual variation in a multilayered text, Università Ca’ Foscari Venezia.

    Unpublished dissertation.

    Abstract: "The present work aims at shading new light on the structure and content of the Gongsun Longzi, focusing in particular on the so-called “original chapters”, those who are considered more truthful to an hypothetical original formulation – written and/or oral – of the topics discussed, the Baima Lun and the Zhiwu Lun. After taking into consideration the pseudo-historical figure of the putative author, the persuader Gongsun Long, an analysis of the overall structure of the text is provided, comprehending an accurate study of textual variants existing between the two most ancients versions available of the received text (the Shuofu and the Daozang edition). Finally, an exhaustive treatment of the philosophical contents of the Baima Lun and Zhiwu Lun, accompanied with a commented translation, concludes the work."

  67. ———. 2016. "The "White Horse", the "Three-Legged Chicken", and Other Paradoxes in Classical Chinese Literature." Antiquorum Philosophia: A International Journal no. 10:67-88.

    "According to pre-imperial and early imperial Classical Chinese received literature (ca. 4th cent. b.c.e. - 2nd cent. c.e.), paradoxes and language jokes seem to have been widespread in early Chinese rhetorical practice. Such stratagems are part of a rich shared repertoire mastered by the persuaders of the time that also includes narrative anecdotes, didactic stories, maxims, and authoritative quotes drawn from the most revered texts of antiquity. These diferent kinds of materials mostly had a rhetorical function. They were conveniently quoted to illustrate or strengthen a particular point in a discussion, or to allude obliquely to an implicit message or moral teaching by establishing meaningful connections between the tradition and the contemporary situation in an analogical way.

    Despite the apparent success paradoxical statements enjoyed at the time, only a handful have been preserved and handed down. Some of the most famous arguments that have been transmitted are discussed at length in individual texts that later came to be included in the Gongsun Longzi 公孫龍子(Master Gongsun Long), a composite collection of heterogeneous materials including dialogues and short treatises. However, in most cases Classical Chinese paradoxes survive only in the form of dry and rather enigmatic lists of obscure sentences or ‘theses’ deprived of any further extra-textual information, nor any proper explanation. These materials are mostly – though not exclusively – associated with a group of thinkers, (in)famous for being skilled in the art of rhetoric, the so-called Logicians." (p. 67)

  68. ———. 2017. "The ‘White Horse is Not Horse’ Debate." Philosophy Compass no. 12:1-11.

    Abstract: "The so‐called “white horse is not horse” (bái mǎ fēi mǎ 白馬非馬) debate, or “white horse” (bái mǎ白馬) dialogical argument, is beyond doubt the most famous case of argumentation (biàn辯) in the history of Classical Chinese philosophy. The somewhat disorienting statement at the center of this debate is discussed at length by two anonymous fictive characters, a persuader and their opponent, in the ‘Báimǎ lùn’ 白馬論(Disquisition on White and Horse). The ‘Báimǎ lùn’ usually appears as the first chapter in the received text Gōngsūn Lóngzǐ 公孫龍子(Master Gongsun Long). The Gōngsūn Lóngzǐ is a composite collection of heterogeneous materials in six chapters.

    The collection includes an anecdotal preface, three partially incomplete and/or corrupted dialogues, and two short and extremely intricate treatises. In particular, the dialogues included in the collection are structured in a fairly similar way and focus on what have been defined as paradoxes or sophisms belonging to the repertoire of a rather loose group of thinkers, the so‐called Logicians or Chinese “Sophists” (míngjiā名家, literally “experts on names”), allegedly active during the Warring States period (475–221 B.C.E.)."

  69. ———. 2020. "Argumentation (Bian 辯)." In Dao Companion to Chinese Philosophy of Logic, edited by Fung, Yiu-ming, 171-180. Cham, Switzerland: Springer.

  70. Jiang, Xinyan. 1992. "The Law of Non-Contradiction and Chinese Philosophy." History and Philosophy of Logic no. 13:1-14.

  71. Jiang, Xiangdong. 2020. "A New Interpretation of ‘Baimalun’ (Discourse on White and Horse)." In The Gongsun Longzi and Other Neglected Texts: Aligning Philosophical and Philological Perspectives, edited by Suter, Rafael, Indraccolo, Lisa and Behr, Wolfgang, 289-308. Berlin: De Gruyter.

  72. Jiang, Xinyan. 2020. "Contradiction." In Dao Companion to Chinese Philosophy of Logic, edited by Fung, Yiu-ming, 129-142. Cham, Switzerland: Springer.

  73. Jin, Chunlan. 2020. Textual Patterns of the Eight-Part Essays and Logic in Ancient Chinese Texts. Singapore: Springer.

  74. Johnston, Ian. 2000. "Choosing the Greater and Choosing The Lesser. A Translation and Analysis of the Daqu and Xiaoqu Chapters of the Mozi." Journal of Chinese Philosophy no. 27:375-407.

  75. ———. 2004. "The Gongsun Longzi: A Translation and an Analysis of Its Relationship to Later Mohist Writings." Journal of Chinese Philosophy no. 31:271-295.

  76. Johnston, Ian, and Wang, Ping, eds. 2019. The Mingjia & Related Texts; Bilingual Edition. Hong Kong: The Chinese University of Hong Kong Press.

    Translated and Annotated by Ian Johnston and Wang Ping.

  77. ———. 2020. "Notes on the Relationship between the Gōngsūn Lóngzǐ and the Dialectical Chapters of the Mòzǐ." In The Gongsun Longzi and Other Neglected Texts: Aligning Philosophical and Philological Perspectives, edited by Suter, Rafael, Indraccolo, Lisa and Behr, Wolfgang, 45-85. Berlin: De Gruyter.

  78. Kao, Kung-yi, and Obenchain, Diane. 1975. "Kung-sun Lung's Chih Wu Lun and Semantics of Reference and Predication." Journal of Chinese Philosophy no. 2:285-324.

  79. Kurtz, Joachim. 2001. "Coming to Terms with 'Logic': The Naturalization of an Occidental Notion in China." In New Term for New Ideas. Western Knowledge and Lexical Change in Late Imperial China, edited by Lackner, Michael, Amelung, Iwo and Kurtz, Joachim, 147-176. Leiden: Brill.

    Also published in: Susan Deacy, Alexandra Villing (eds.), Athena in the Classical World, Leiden: Brill 2001, pp. 147-176.

  80. ———. 2010. "Matching Names and Actualities: Translation and the Discovery of "Chinese Logic"." In Mapping Meanings. The Field of New Learning in Late Qing China, edited by Lackner, Michael and Vittinghoff, Natascha, 471-505. Leiden: Brill.

  81. ———. 2011. The Discovery of Chinese Logic. Leiden: Brill.

  82. Kwan, Tze-wan. 2011. "Abstract Concept Formation in Archaic Chinese Script Forms Some Humboldtian Perspectives." Philosophy East and West no. 61:409-452.

  83. Lai, Karyn L. 2008. An Introduction to Chinese Philosophy. Casmbridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter 4: Early Mohist Philosophy 55-70; Chapter 7: The Mingjia and the Later Mohists 111-141.

  84. Lai, Whalen. 1980. "Further Developments of the Two Truths Theory in China: the Ch'eng-shih-lun Tradition and Chou Yung's 'San-tsung-lun'." Philosophy East and West no. 30:139-161.

    "Instead of the classical two truths theory of Nāgārjuna, Chinese Buddhists came up with three truths: reality as real, as empty and as both (i.e., middle). The essay, one in a series, traces the origin to Chou Yung's essay on three Schools (of two truths). There, Chou set up a School that failed to negate provisional reality (the real-ist), the School that succeeded (the empty-ist), the School that realized the real as the empty (the middle-ist). All later theorists, Chih-tsang, Chi-tsang and Chih-i were indebted to this essay painstakingly reconstructed here."

  85. ———. 1995. "White Horse not Horse: Making Sense of a Negative Logic." Asian Philosophy: An International Journal of the Philosophical Traditions of the East no. 5:59-74.

  86. ———. 1997. "Kung-sun Lung on the Point of Pointing: The Moral Rhetoric of Names." Asian Philosophy: An International Journal of the Philosophical Traditions of the East no. 7:47 – 58.

  87. ———. 2003. "Gongsun Long (Kung-sun Lung)." In Encyclopedia of Chinese Philosophy, edited by Cua, Antonio S., 270-271. New York: Routledge.

  88. ———. 2003. "Hui Shi (Hui Shih)." In Encyclopedia of Chinese Philosophy, edited by Cua, Antonio S., 309-311. New York: Routledge.

  89. Lange, Marc. 1989. "Hui Shih’s Logical Theory of Descriptions: A Philosophical Reconstruction of Hui Shih’s Ten Enigmatic Arguments." Monumenta Serica. Journal of Oriental Studies no. 38:95-114.

  90. Lau, Dim Cheuk. 1953. "Some Logical Problems in Ancient China." Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society no. 53:189-204.

  91. ———. 1963. "On Mencius' Use of the Method of Analogy in Argument." Asia Major no. 10.

    Reprinted as Appendix 5 in Mencius, Translated with an Introduction and Notes by D. C. Lau, Revised edition London: Penguin 2003, pp. 253-263. (Original edition 1970).

  92. Leong, Wai Ch'un. 2015. "The Semantic Concept of Truth in Pre-Han Chinese Philosophy." Dao: A Journal of Comparative Philosophy no. 14:55-74.

  93. Leslie, Donald. 1964. Argument by Contradiction in Pre-Buddhist Chinese Reasoning. Canberra: Australian National University.

    "The author shows that the Taoists, the Confucians, and the Mohists in the pre-Chin period used the principle of contradiction and the principle of the excluded middle in their philosophical writings." Chung-Ying Cheng, Inquiries into Classical Chinese Logic, Philosophy East andf West, 15, 1965, p. 213.

  94. Li, Chenyang. 1999. The Tao Encounters the West: Explorations in Comparative Philosophy. Albany: State University of New York Press.

    Chapter 3: Chapters Language: Pragmatic versus Semantic, pp. 63-87.

  95. ———. 2021. "Truth in Chinese Philosophy. A Commentary on Bo Mou's Semantic-Truth Approaches in Chinese Philosophy." Comparative Philosophy no. 12:134-146.

    "Studies of Chinese philosophy have been overwhelmingly on ethics and social philosophy. Bo Mou’s book is significant because it is squarely on semantic truth, a topic which has seldomly been brought up in studying Chinese philosophy (Mou 2019).

    That alone makes his book worthy of our attention. Mou’s book contains many insights and breaks new grounds for further study. His pluralist account of semantic truth in Chinese philosophy is highly original and pioneering in the field. Here I will not

    attempt to make a comprehensive review or assessment of this important book. Instead, I focus on two points, for the sake of further explorations on the topic. The first is on the general topic of truth in Chinese philosophy. While I do not deny that there is

    semantic truth in Chinese philosophy, I believe the main orientation of Chinese philosophy on truth is pragmatic, in that the concept of truth is understood and functions in the context of the human condition; the nature and the value of truth lies with its

    service for the good life. Second, I will offer an alternative to Bo Mou’s characterization of Xun Zi’s concept of truth and show why Mou cannot dismiss a broadly characterized pragmatic interpretation of Xun Zi’s epistemology. In this commentary, I will try to quote Mou’s relevant passages in their entirety to ensure as much accuracy as possible in presenting his argument" (p. 134)

    References

    Mou, Bo (2019), Semantic-Truth Approaches in Chinese Philosophy: A Unifying Pluralist Account (New York/London: Lexington Books).

  96. Li, Xiankun. 1998. "Why Gonsung Long (Kungsun Long) Said "White horse in not horse"." In In the World of Signs. Essays in Honour of Professor Jerzy Pelc, edited by Jadacki, Jacek Juliusz and Strawinski, Witold, 215-220. Amsterdam: Rodopi.

    "From ther above discussion, we can make the following conclusions:

    (a) Gongsun Long’s theory is a theory of semiosis. He observed the differences among symbols that are used in the process of human speech. So the problems he discussed are matters of metalanguage, not object language.

    (b) Gongsun Long’s use of the word FEI „is not” can only be interpreted as set equality, which corresponds to the English phrase „is not equal to”. It does not indicate subset-superset relationship between sets.

    (c) Gongsun Long was the first scholar in ancient China to use analytic methods fully to treat linguistic and philosophical phenomena. His proposition „White horse is not horse” is not a petty intellectual game that goes against common sense. On the contrary, it is a very insightful theoretical discovery.

    We may achieve a better understanding of Gongsun Long’s arguments by looking at his works as a whole (only six texts have been preserved). In his other texts, he explicitly stated the purpose of his work: through this kind of discussion, he intended to clarify the issues on the relationship between words and the things that are represented by those words. He believed that everything would be in place if they were named appropriately. He asked people to pay attention to this name-substance relationship and be cautious in naming things. In „A Discourse on White Horse”, he exemplified his idea by analyzing the relationship between „horse” and „white horse” in great depth. In so doing, he made a great contribution to his own time." (pp. 219-220)

  97. Li, Yu. 2015. What is N P? - Interpretation of a Chinese paradox white horse is not horse. Arxiv.org: 1-9.

    Abstract: "The notion of nondeterminism has disappeared from the current definition of N P, which has led to ambiguities in understanding N P, and caused fundamental diculties in studying the relation P versus N P. In this paper, we question the equivalence of the two definitions of N P the one defining N P as the class of problems solvable by a nondeterministic Turing machine in polynomial time, and the other defining N P as the class of problems verifiable by a deterministic Turing machine in polynomial time, and reveal cognitive biases in this equivalence. Inspired from a famous Chinese paradox white horse is not horse, we further analyze these cognitive biases. The work shows that these cognitive biases arise from the confusion between different levels of nondeterminism and determinism, due to the lack of understanding about the essence of nondeterminism. Therefore, we argue that fundamental diffculties in understanding P versus N P lie firstly at cognition level, then logic level."

    Sigla: N P = Nondeterministic Polynomial time.

  98. Lin, Chung-I. 2011. "Xunzi as a Semantic Inferentialist: Zhengmin, Bian-Shuo and Dao-Li." Dao. A Journal of Comparative Philosophy no. 10:311-340.

    Abstract: "This essay argues that the idea of name-rectification (zheng ming 正名) in the Xunzi can be properly reconstructed as revealing a normative pragmatic semantic theme that linguistic contents embody, and are embedded in, the normative, justificatory

    network, or pattern, of dao li 道理 (proper routes/patterns of norm) which, in turn, is constituted and manifested by social inferential justificatory practices of bian shuo 辯說 (dialectical justification/explanation)."

  99. Linderborg, Otto. 2021. "Patterns of Reasoning Shared Across Cultural Divides: Normative Arguments in the Classical Age of Greece and the Warring States Period of China." Orientalia Suecana no. 70:89-104.

    Abstract: "In this paper, a selection of arguments encountered in a pair of canonical classical Greek and Chinese literary and philosophical works are analyzed and compared. The works in which the passages selected for analysis occur are the Histories of Herodotus and the Fei Gong section in the Mozi. The present research focuses on three respective passages in these canonical classical Greek and Chinese works containing early examples of normative argumentation of an internally critical kind (‘internal critique’). So-called deontic logic is then applied in order to formally analyze the argumentative content of the selected sections. It is shown that each of the Herodotean and Mohist examples of internal critique may be assigned a formally equivalent Chinese vis-à-vis Greek partner. Based on these similarities, the question of the origins of internal critique in the ancient Greek and Chinese cultural spheres is reconsidered."

  100. Liou, Kia-hway. 1965. "The Configuration of Chinese Reasoning." Diogenes no. 13:66-96.

    Translated by Nora McKeon.

  101. Liu, Chuang. 2003. "Ming-Jia (the Logicians) and Zeno: A Comparative Study." In Comparative Approaches to Chinese Philosophy, edited by Mou, Bo, 297-306. Aldershot: Ashgate.

  102. Liu, Fenrong, and Seligman, Jeremy, eds. 2015. History of Logic in China. 5 Questions. Copenhagen: Automatic Press / VIP.

  103. Liu, Fenrong, Seligman, Jeremy, and van Bentham, Johan. 2012. Models of Reasoning in Ancient China. eprints repository software: 1-25.

  104. Liu, Fenrong, Seligman, Jeremy, and van Benthem, Johan. 2011. "The History of Logic in China: An introduction." Studies in Logic no. 4:1-2.

  105. Liu, Fenrong, Seligman, Jeremy, and Zhai, Jincheng, eds. 2023. Handbook of Logical Thought in China. Berlin: Springer.

    To be published in 2023.

    "The Handbook aims to provide a comprehensive review of research on logical thought in China by both Chinese and non-Chinese scholars. It highlights and summarizes important areas of controversy and general agreement, while giving prime importance to clarity of exposition. The title covers Chinese thought on reasoning and argumentation, the influence of non-Chinese logic on Chinese thought, and the systematic aspects of reasoning other than the classical canon of ‘logic’ texts. By bringing together different perspectives, it seeks to provide a multifaceted and comprehensive presentation on this rich and sometimes perplexing phenomenon."

  106. Liu, Fenrong, and Yang, Wujing. 2010. "A Brief History of Chinese Logic." Journal of the Indian Council of Philosophical Research no. 27:101-123.

  107. Liu, Fenrong, and Zhang, Jialong. 2008. A Note on Mohist Logic. 1-25.

    Available on line on Academia.edu.

    Abstract: "The paper is an exploration of the old Chinese texts called the Mohist Canons from a modern logical perspective. We mainly explain what the Mohists have contributed to logic in the following aspects: Theory on names, structures of propositions, patterns of reasoning, and theories on disputation and paradoxes. A comparative perspective is taken throughout the investigation. We compare Mohist logic and Western traditional and modern logic. We provide our new interpretations of the issues discussed in the Canons by applying the modern logical theories."

  108. Liu, Fenrong, and Zhang, Jalong. 2010. "New Perspectives on Moist Logic." Journal of Chinese Philosophy no. 37:605-621.

  109. Liu, Shu-hsien. 1974. "The Use of Analogy and Symblism in Traditional Chinese Philosophy." Journal of Chinese Philosophy no. 1:313-338.

    "When we review the Chinese history of philosophy, we find that the Chinese did not develop any formal systems of logic. There was a conspicuous lack of discussion of forms of inference, as the Chinese failed to develop anything either like an Aristotelian syllogism or a Nyaya syllogism. The so-called Logicians(1) in ancient China were really dialecticians like the Greek Sophists who were being looked down upon by serious scholars, as Chuang Tzu said of them, “They are able to subdue other people’s mouths, but cannot win their hearts.”(2) This situation, however, does not mean that the Chinese did not pay any attention to the problem of methodology. It is precisely because they were convinced that empty talks would lead us nowhere so they decided to concentrate their effort on finding appropriate expressions for their experience of reality.

    This explains why they made such extensive use of analogies and symbolisms, as these were regarded as the only effective means to approach the Way (Tao), or rather Ultimate Reality understood in a dynamic sense.

    In this article, I would like to contend that as a general trend the Chinese are moving away from an analogical way of thinking toward a symbolic way of thinking through metaphorical expressions. In the following I shall try to outline this development and discuss its significance on the Chinese way of doing philosophy." (p. 313)

    (1) Wing-tsit Chan (trans. and comp.), A Source Book in Chinese Philosophy, Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1963, pp. 232-243. Hereafter will be referred to as Chan, Source Book.

    (2) Ibid. p. 233.

  110. Liu, Tisheng. 2020. "A New Interpretation of the Gongsun Longzi’s ‘Zhiwu lun’ (Discourse on Pointings and Things) and ‘Mingshi lun’ (Discourse on Names and Actualities)." In The Gongsun Longzi and Other Neglected Texts: Aligning Philosophical and Philological Perspectives, edited by Suter, Rafael, Indraccolo, Lisa and Behr, Wolfgang, 241-288. Berlin: De Gruyter.

  111. Lloyd, Geoffrey E.R. 2007. "Towards a Taxonomy of Controversies and Controversiality: Ancient Greece and China." In Traditions of Controversy, edited by Dascal, Marcelo and Chang, Han-Liang, 3-15. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

    "Following up Marcelo Dascal’s emphasis on the importance of controversy as the locus of critical activity and innovation, and building on his triadic classification of polemics into “discussion”, “dispute” and “controversy” (Dascal 1998b), I shall raise a number of questions concerning the specificities of the controversies for which we have evidence in ancient Greece and China. What typically were the controversies and disputes about? Between whom were they held? Who were the participants, who constituted the audiences, and what are the relations between those two groups? How do the contenders come to agree, if and when they do, to their resolution? What, in the final analysis, is at stake, and for whom?

    There are important similarities, as well as differences, between the controversies and disputes of ancient Greece and China, and (as I argued already in Lloyd 1996) these already tell against any simple thesis of a global psychological contrast between adversarial Greeks and irenic Chinese. Rather, an exploration of the patterns of controversies in these two cultures can throw important light on the implicit and explicit values characteristic of the societies in question and so also on the different ways in which science developed in each." (p. 3)

    References

    Dascal, M. 1998b. “The study of controversies and the theory and history of science”. Science in Context 11: 147–154.

    Lloyd, G.E.R. 1996. Adversaries and Authorities: Investigations into Ancient Greek and Chinese Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  112. López-Astorga, Miguel. 2021. "School of Names and mental possibilities: Is a white horse a horse?" Studii de lingvistică no. 11:167-175.

    Abstract: "According to the ‘white horse’ paradox, a horse that is white is not a horse: it is a white horse, but not a horse. Though logical arguments can be adduced in support of the proposition, people tend to reject the paradox. Individuals often regard a white horse as a horse and therefore usually ignore the arguments from logic. This paper attempts an explanation of their behaviour. The theory of mental models offers a cognitive explanation for the habitual rejection of the paradox. Within this framework, the key is the way that people reason – a way that does not necessarily coincide with logic."

  113. Loy, Hui-chieh. 2003. "Analects 13.3 and the Doctrine of "Corrcting Names"." Monumenta Serica. Journal of Oriental Studies no. 51:19-36.

  114. ———. 2020. "Correcting Names in Early Confucianism." In Dao Companion to Chinese Philosophy of Logic, edited by Fung, Yiu-ming, 329-349. Cham, Switzerland: Springer.

  115. Lu, Xing. 1998. Rhetoric in Ancient China, Fifth to Third Century, B.C.E.: A Comparison with Classical Greek Rhetoric. Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina Press.

  116. Lucas, Thierry. 1993. "Hui Shih and Kung Sun Lung: An Approach from Contemporary Logic." Journal of Chinese Philosophy no. 20:211-255.

    "Semantical instruments of contemporary logic are applied to the analysis of Hui Shih's "Ten propositions" and Kung Sun Lung's discourses "On the white horse", "On hard and white", "On indices and things". The notion of logical interpretation is used to clarify the structure of Hui Shih's argument; coupled with the notion of sorted language, it also allows us to show the logical coherence and common structure of Kung Sun Lung's three discourses."

  117. ———. 2005. "Later Mohist Logic, Lei, Classes and Sorts." Journal of Chinese Philosophy no. 32:349-366.

  118. ———. 2010. "The Logic of Mohist Reasonings; Leis and Structured Sorts." Universitas: Monthly Review of Philosophy and Culture (Taipei) no. 37:65-93.

    Abstract: "It is well-known that some Mohist reasonings of the final portion of the Xiao qu 〈小取〉 are paradoxical: “a robber is a man, but to kill a robber is not to kill a man”. In this paper, we analyze and formalize the different groups of Mohist reasonings using concepts of contemporary western logic: classes, sorts, structured sorts as they appear in the mathematical theory of categories. We solve those paradoxes by using sorts and more generally arrive at the conclusion that those reasonings are based on structured sorts, a notion which, in our opinion, is fundamental to clarify the notion of lei (類)."

  119. ———. 2011. "Basic Concepts of Mohist Logic." Studies in Logic no. 4:82-108.

    Abstract: "The following text has been presented with minor modifications to the colloquium “The History of Logic in China” which took place in Amsterdam on November 24-26, 2010. It will briefly recall the historical and intellectual context of later Mohist Logic and will mainly discuss its basic logical concepts in relation with contemporary logic: disputation; name, object and their relation; proposition; “lèi” (class or sort or kind); inference. Other notions such as a priori, necessary and sufficient condition, quantification, necessity, time, space, infinity, ... will also be mentioned."

  120. ———. 2012. "Why White Horses are not Horses and Other Chinese Puzzles." Logique et Analyse no. 55:185-203.

    "The aim of this paper is on the one hand to remind the Western reader some aporias of Chinese antiquity, and on the other hand to show that a logic of sorts or of types similar to that which has been proposed to explain the relation between categories (in the mathematical sense of the term) and logic brings much light on these aporias. This should be contrasted with older traditional explanations using conventional syllogistics or feeling satisfied with too simple explanations such as the confusion between inclusion and identity. The article is based on preceding papers of mine (see [LUC], [LUCa], [LUCb]), but stresses the basic unity of the solutions which I proposed there, a unity which is probably not apparent to the casual reader and which is shown here by sketching a very simple formal system and its semantics. I apologize for overlappings with some of my previous publications, but it seemed to me that the present paper would be unreadable if I just presented the final part without repeating the basic motivations."

    References

    [LUC ] Lucas Thierry, "Hui Shih and Kong Sun Lung: an approach from contemporary logic", Journal of Chinese Philosophy, 20(2), 1993, pp. 21 1-255.

    [LUCa] Lucas Thierry, "Later Mohist Logic, Lei, Classes and Sorts", Journal of Chinese Philosophy, vol. 32, no 3, 2005, pp. 349-365.

    [LUCb] Lucas Thierry, "The Logic of Mohist reasonings; Leis and structured sorts", Universitas: Monthly Review of Philosophy and Culture (Taipei, Taiwan, R.O.C.), vol. 37, no 8, 2010, pp. 65-93.

  121. ———. 2012. "Definitions in the Upper Part of the Moist Canons." Journal of Chinese Philosophy no. 39:386-403.

    Abstract: "The purpose of this article is to evaluate the Moist Canons from the point of view of logic, as a system of definitions.We concentrate more specifically on the formal organization of the upper part of the Moist Canons.This method leads us to a globally positive evaluation of the system of definitions but also to the less expected conclusion that a few very basic concepts are undefined and form the background of the Moist concrete, realist, and pragmatic philosophical system: ran, to be so; de, to obtain; ming, illumination; zuo, to initiate; and wei, to act."

  122. ———. 2013. "Definitions in the Upper Part of the Moist Canons." Journal of Chinese Philosophy no. 39:386-403.

  123. ———. 2013. "Parallelism in the Early Moist Texts." Frontiers of Philosophy in China no. 8:289-308.

    Abstract: "Parallelism is present everywhere in the early Moist texts: at the syntactic level, at the semantic level, between sentences, between sets of sentences, between argumentative structures. The present article gives many examples of the phenomenon: parallelism of insistence, insistence from top to bottom, insistence from bottom to top, parallelism with symmetry, parallelism involving negation, subcontraries and negation at deeper levels, parallelism of the argumentative structures. Logic is particularly applied to the study of parallelism involving negation. From the point of view of argumentation, it is shown that many of those constructions have an important role in supporting arguments such as: arguments of generalization, a fortiori arguments, arguments

    of exemplarity, consequentialist arguments, arguments by comparison. This study draws the attention to the importance of argumentation in the study of Moism and gives a new light on the argument by parallelism (mou) in the "Xiaoqu": It is a natural extension of what we call "parallelism involving negation," already very common in the early Moist texts."

  124. ———. 2018. "Limits of Logic in Moism." Journal of Chinese Philosophy no. 45:239-251.

    Abstract: "We are trying to answer the following question, using the distinctions of contemporary logic: why did the Moists stop at some points on their otherwise remarkable way to logic? We argue that they did not explicitly discover negation because of their insistence on linguistic parallelism; they did not recognize logical conjunction nor logical disjunction because of juxtaposition or prefixation; they did not identify the notion of sufficient condition; negation of quantifiers was treated as a problem of extension; their notion of proposition was limited; they discovered some intensionality phenomena but did not explore them very deeply; they insisted more on argumentation than on logic. However our exploration of these limitations shows that the Moists had discovered many logical phenomena and that their attention to the structure of the proposition and to their parallelism reveals a real interest in formal methods."

  125. ———. 2020. "Definitions in Pre-Qin Texts." In Dao Companion to Chinese Philosophy of Logic, edited by Fung, Yiu-ming, 233-249. Cham, Switzerland: Springer.

  126. ———. 2020. "The Logical Style of Confucius’ Analects." Frontiers of Philosophy in China no. 15:167-197.

    Abstract: "Considered from a logical point of view, Confucius’ Analects contain many implicit forms of reasoning and argumentation. This is shown first by analyzing the phenomenon of parallelism: direct parallelism is often a way of hinting at a general assertion, whereas anti-parallelism hides dilemmas, generalizations and modal notions of “moral preference.” The Analects also have various types of conditionals, ranging from material implications, to modalized implications, and counterfactual conditionals, which are the germs of implicit reasoning, concluding with a moral recommendation. Analogies are particularly abundant and a presentation of three examples suggests that, beyond their explicative role, they also involve moral recommendations. The implicit logic of The Analects requires an active, albeit unconscious participation of the reader, which could be an important element in explaining the enduring influence of the text."

  127. ———. 2020. "Logical Thought in Mohism and Later Mohism." In Dao Companion to Chinese Philosophy of Logic, edited by Fung, Yiu-ming, 253-283. Cham, Switzerland: Springer.

  128. ———. 2020. "Logically Significant Words in the Gōngsūn Lóngzǐ." In The Gongsun Longzi and Other Neglected Texts: Aligning Philosophical and Philological Perspectives, edited by Suter, Rafael, Indraccolo, Lisa and Behr, Wolfgang, 313-346. Berlin: De Gruyter.

  129. Maeder, Erik W. 1992. "Some Observations on the Composition of the "Core Chapters" of the Mozi." Early China no. 17:27-82.

  130. Makeham, John. 1989. "The Chien-pai Sophism: Alive and Well." Philosophy East and West no. 39:75-81.

  131. ———. 1989. "Mohist Marginalia: A New Interpretation and Translation of Canon and Explanation B 67 in the Neo-Mohist Summa." Papers on Far Eastern History no. 39:167-176.

  132. ———. 1990. "Mohist Marginalia’—Addenda and Corrigenda." Papers on Far Eastern History no. 42:125-130.

  133. ———. 1991. "Names, Actualities, and the Emergence of Essentialist Theories of Naming in Classical Chinese Thought." Philosophy East and West no. 41:341-363.

    "In this paper the author advances the thesis that by the late Third century b.C., discussions of the name and actuality/object, iming-shid, relationship by classical Chinese thinkers evidence a shift from nominalist theories of naming to essentialist theories of naming. According to the former, it is man who arbitrarily or conventionally determines which imingd should be applied to which ishid. According to the latter, there is a proper or correct correspondence between a given imingd and a given ishid, determined, variously, by what is ordained by 'heaven' or by what is 'naturally so'/'so of itself' (izirand)."

  134. ———. 1994. Name and Actuality in Early Chinese Thought. Albany: State University of New York Press.

  135. ———. 2003. "Names, School of (Ming Jia, Ming Chia)." In Encyclopedia of Chinese Philosophy, edited by Cua, Antonio S., 491-497. New York: Routledge.

  136. Mei, Tsu-Lin. 1961. "Chinese Grammar and the Linguistic Movement in Philosophy." The Review of Metaphysics no. 14:135-175.

  137. Mei, Yi-Pao. 1953. "The Work of Kung-sun Lung Tzu, with a Translation into English." Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies no. 16:404-437.

  138. ———. 1956. "Some observations on the Problems of Knowledge among the Ancient Chinese Logicians." Tsing Hua Journal of Chinese Studies no. 1:114-121.

    "This is a relatively short and concise presentation of various pre-Chin philosophical views on the problems of knowledge and their interrelationships. " Chung-Ying Cheng, Inquiries into Classical Chinese Logic, Philosophy East andf West, 15, 1965, p. 214.

  139. Meyer, Dirk. 2015. "Truth Claim with no Claim to Truth: Text and Performance of the "Qiushui" Chapter of the Zhuangzi." In Literary Forms of Argument in Early China, edited by Gentz, Joachim and Meyer, Dirk, 297-340. Leiden: Brill.

  140. Meynard, Thierry. 2019. "What the “Failure” of Aristotelian Logic in Seventeenth Century China Teaches Us Today: A Case Study of the Mingli Tan " Frontiers of Philosophy in China no. 14.

    Abstract: "The Mingli Tan is recognized as the first Chinese-language treatise introducing Western logic in China. First published in the final years of the Ming dynasty, the work was presented to Emperor Kangxi in 1683. Despite its sophisticated thought and innovation, the work failed to gain support among intellectuals and court officials. By analyzing the objectives of the Mingli Tan in tandem with its companion work, the Coimbra commentary, this paper explores some of the important philosophical, pedagogical, and historical reasons that can help to explain this failure. Through this historical failure, we can gain some insights about the nature of logic and its current position in China."

  141. Ming, Thomas, and Aaron, Lai. 2016. "Fixing the White Horse Discourse: Zhuangzi’s Proof of “A White Horse Is not a Horse”." Philosophy East and West no. 66:271-289.

  142. Moller, Hans-Georg. 1997. "The Chinese Theory of Forms and Names ("Xingming Zhi Xue") and Its Relation to "Philosophy of Signs"." Journal of Chinese Philosophy no. 24:179-190.

  143. Møllgaard, Eske J. 2020. "Problems of Language and Logic in Daoism." In Dao Companion to Chinese Philosophy of Logic, edited by Fung, Yiu-ming, 369-387. Cham, Switzerland: Springer.

  144. Mou, Bo. 1998. "An Analysis of the Ideographic Nature and Structure of the Hexagram in "Yijing": From the Perspective of Philosophy of Language." Journal of Chinese Philosophy no. 25:305-320.

    "I present an analysis of the ideographic nature and semantic structure of the hexagrams of the "Yijing" ("the book of changes") from the perspective of the philosophy of language. My purpose is twofold: first, i take this as a good case for analysis leading to an understanding of the ideographic semantic structure of an ideographic language like Chinese; second, I take this understanding as a significant aspect in comprehending the "Yijing" philosophy. In the paper, I first examine the ideographic construction of the hexagrams, then suggest an interpretation of the triple ideographic semantic structure, and finally discuss the denotational meaning of the hexagrams in terms of a collective-noun hypothesis."

  145. ———. 1999. "The Structure of the Chinese Language and Ontological Insights: A Collective-Noun Hypothesis." Philosophy East and West no. 49:45-62.

    "Through a comparative case analysis regarding the Chinese language, it is discussed how the structure and functions of a natural language would bear upon the ways in which some philosophical problems are posed and some ontological insights shaped. Disagreeing with Chad Hansen's mass-noun hypothesis, a collective-noun hypothesis is argued for: (1) the denotational semantics and relevant grammatical features of Chinese nouns are like those of collective nouns; (2) their implicit ontology is a mereological ontology of collection-of-individuals with both part-whole and member-class structure; and (3) encouraged and shaped by the folk semantics of Chinese nouns, classical Chinese theorists of language take this kind of mereological nominalism for granted."

  146. ———. 2006. "Chinese Philosophy: Language and Logic." In Encyclopedia of Philosophy, edited by Borchert, Donald M., 202-215. Chicago: Thomson-Gale/Macmillan Reference.

  147. ———. 2007. "A Double-Reference Account: Gongsun Long's "White-horse-not-horse" Thesis." Journal of Chinese Philosophy no. 34:493-513.

  148. ———. 2009. Substantive Perspectivism: An Essay on Philosophical Concern with Truth. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Chapter 5: A Cross-Tradition Examination – Philosophical Concern with Truth in Classical Daoism, pp. 125-158.

  149. ———. 2016. "How the Validity of the Parallel Inference is Possible: From the Ancient Mohist Diagnose to a Modern Logical Treatment of Its Semantic-Syntactic Structure." History and Philosophy of Logic no. 37:301-324.

  150. ———, ed. 2018. Philosophy of Language, Chinese Language, Chinese Philosophy: Constructive Engagement. Leiden: Brill.

  151. ———. 2020. "How Gōngsūn Lóng’s Double-Reference Thought in His “White Horse Not Horse” Argumentation Can Engage with Fregean and Kripkean Approaches to the Issue of Reference." In The Gongsun Longzi and Other Neglected Texts: Aligning Philosophical and Philological Perspectives, edited by Suter, Rafael, Indraccolo, Lisa and Behr, Wolfgang, 169-204. Berlin: De Gruyter.

  152. Mou, Zongsan. 2015. Nineteen Lectures on Chinese Philosophy: A Brief Outline of Chinese Philosophy and the Issues It Entails. San José (CA): Foundation for the Study of Chinese philosophy and Culture.

    Translated by Esther C. Shu.

    Lecture Ten: The Pre-Quin School of Names: A Summary of Its Character and Content.

  153. Needham, Joseph. 1956. Science and Civilisation in China, vol. 2: History of Scientific Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  154. Paul, Gregor. 1991. "Reflections on the Usage of the Terms 'Logic' and 'Logical'." Journal of Chinese Philosophy no. 18:73-87.

  155. ———. 1992. "Against Wanton Distortion: A Rejoinder to David Hall’s and Roger Ames’ Criticism of My Reflections on Logic and Confucius." Journal of Chinese Philosophy no. 19:119-122.

  156. ———. 1993. "Equivalent Axioms of Aristotelian, or Traditional European, and Later Mohist Logic: An Argument in Favor of the Universality of Logic and Rationality." In Epistemological Issues in Classical Chinese Philosophy, edited by Lenk, Hans and Paul, Gregor, 119-135. Albany: State University of New York Press.

  157. Perleberg, Max. 1952. The Work of Kung-sun Lung-tzu = Kung-sun Lung-tzu, with a translation from the parallel Chinese original text, critical and exegetical notes, punctuation and literal translation, the Chinese commentary, prolegomena, and index. Hongkong: Local printing Press.

    Reprint: Westport, Conn., Hyperion Press, 1973.

  158. Pogonowski, Jerzy. 2010. "Remarks on Ancient Chinese Logic." In Logic in Religious Discourse, edited by Schumann, Andrew. Frankfurt: Ontos Verlag.

  159. Qingtian, Cui. 2021. "Researching the History of Chinese Logic. The Role of Wen Gongyi in the Establishment of New Methodologies." Asian Studies no. 9:105-120.

  160. Raphals, Lisa. 1998. "On Hui Shi." In Wandering at Ease in the Zhuangzi, edited by Ames, Roger T., 143-161. Albany: State University of New York Press.

  161. Reding, Jean-Paul. 1986. "Greek and Chinese Categories: A Reexamination of the Problem of Linguistic Relativism." Philosophy East and West no. 36:349-374.

    Reprinted in: J. P. Reding, Comparative Essays in Early Greek and Chinese R ational Thinking, Aldershot: Ashgate 2004, pp. 65-92.

  162. ———. 1986. "Analogical Reasoning in Early Chinese Philosophy." Asiatische Studien = Études asiatiques no. 40:40-56.

  163. ———. 2002. "Gongsun Long on What Is Not: Steps Toward the Deciphering of the Zhiwulun." Philosophy East and West no. 52:190-206.

    "The Zhiwulun, chapter 3 of the Gongsunlongzi, attributed to the Sophist Gongsun Long (third century B.C.), is generally interpreted as a theoretical treatise on the relations between words and things. A new reading proceeds from the hypothesis that the Zhiwulun, like the White Horse Treatise, is another logical puzzle. Its theme is the problem of pointing out things that do not exist in the world or, put in modern terms, the problem of negative existentials. The Zhiwulun is a dilemma whose purpose is to show that the pointing that points at things that do not exist points without pointing."

  164. ———. 2004. Comparative Essays in Early Greek and Chinese Rational Thinking. Aldershot: Ashgate.

    Contents: Acknowledgements VII; Introduction 1; 1. 'Contradiction is Impossible' 17; 2. The Origin of Logic in China 31; 3. Philosophy and Geometry in Early China 49; 4. Greek and Chinese Categories 65; 5. Words for Atoms - Atoms for Words: Comparative

    Considerations on the Origins of Atomism in Ancient Greece and on the Absence of Atomism in Ancient China 93; 6. Light and the Mirror in Greece and China: Elements of Comparative Metaphorology 127; 7. ‘To Be’ in Greece and China 167; ('hinese Characters and Texts 195; Bibliography 207; Index 223-229.

    Acknowledgements: 1. ‘“Contradiction is Impossible’” is a previously unpublished contribution; 2. ‘The Origin of Logic in China’ is an original contribution. Part of its research material goes back to an earlier paper that appeared in Études Asiatiques 40/1 (1986), 40-56, under the title ‘Analogical Reasoning in Early Chinese Philosophy’; 3. ‘Philosophy and Geometry in Early China’ is a completely rewritten and expanded version of a paper that appeared in Études Asiatiques 47/4 (1993), 623-44, under the title ‘Les philosophes-geometres de la Chine ancienne’ (in French); 4 ‘Greek and Chinese Categories’ appeared first in Philosophy East and West 36/4 (1986), 349-74. The present version is updated, corrected and enlarged; 5. ‘Words for Atoms - Atoms for Words: Comparative Considerations on the origins of Atomism in Ancient Greece and on the Absence of Atomism in Ancient China’ is a previously unpublished contribution. It originated as a series of lectures (‘Warum gibt es keinen Atomismus im alten China?') delivered at the University of Zurich in 1990/91. An earlier version of it was presented at the conference ‘Thinking through Comparisons’ in Eugene, Oregon (May 1998); 6. 'Light and the Mirror in Greece and China: Elements of Comparative Metaphorology’ was first presented at the Asian Studies Annual Meeting in Honolulu, Hawaii (April 1996), and also later in the same year at the annual meeting of the ‘Societeromande de philosophic’ at Rolle, Switzerland (June 1996). A shorter and less technical French version has appeared in the Revue de theologie et de philosophie 129 (1997), 1-30, under the title ‘L’utilisation philosophique de la métaphore en Grece et en Chine. Vers une metaphorologie comparee’ (in French). The present version has not been published before; 7. ' "To Be” in Greece and China’ is a previously unpublished contribution.

  165. Ren, Yuan, and Lui, Yuyu. 2019. "A Pro-Realist Account of Gongsun Long’s “White Horse Dialogue”." Philosophy East and West no. 69:464-483.

  166. Resnik, Michael David. 1968. "Logic and Scientific Methodology in the Writings of Mencius." International Philosophical Quarterly no. 8:212-230.

  167. Reu, Wim de. 2006. "Right Words Seem Wrong: Neglected Paradoxes in Early Chinese Philosophical Texts." Philosophy East and West no. 56:281-300.

  168. Rieman, Fred. 1977. "On Linguistic Skepticism in Wittgenstein and Kung-sun Lung." Philosophy East and West no. 27:183-193.

  169. ———. 1980. "Kung-Sun Lung, Designated Things and Logic." Philosophy East and West no. 30:305-319.

  170. ———. 1981. "Kung-sun, White Horses and Logic." Philosophy East and West no. 31:415-447.

  171. Robins, Dan. 2010. "The Later Mohists and Logic." History and Philosophy of Logic no. 31:247-285.

    Abstract: "This article is a study of the Later Mohists’ ‘Lesser Selection (Xiaˇoquˇ)’, which, more than any other early Chinese text, seems to engage in the study of logic. I focus on a procedure that the Mohists called mo´u . Arguments by mo´u are grounded in linguistic parallelism, implying perhaps that the Mohists were on the way to a formal analysis of argumentation. However, their main aim was to head off arguments by mo´u that targeted their own doctrines, and if their argument succeeds then it entails that linguistic parallelism can never ground a cogent argument. In a way, this committed them to the view that formal logic cannot work, but the fact that they did not pursue this line of investigation was by no means inevitable. One consequence of this study is that the Later Mohists conducted their logical work by studying the behaviour of terms and verb phrases, and did not identify the sentence as a significant linguistic unit. This tends to confirm Chad Hansen’s generalisation that early Chinese philosophers did not posit sentences or other sentence-like entities such as propositions, beliefs, or laws. Focusing on subsentential expressions did not stop the Mohists from addressing genuinely logical issues, but it may help explain the fact that they never developed a conception of logical structure. This study includes the complete Chinese text of the ‘Lesser Selection’ and a translation in English."

  172. ———. 2012. "Names, Cranes, and the Later Moists." Journal of Chinese Philosophy no. 39:369-385.

  173. Rosemont Jr., Henry. 1974. "On representing Abstractions in Archaic Chinese." Philosophy East and West no. 24:71-88.

  174. ———. 1992. "Remarks on the Quasi-Syllogism." Philosophy East and West no. 42:31-35.

  175. Rošker, Jana S. Interpreting Chinese Philosophy: A New Methodology. New York: Bloomsbury Academic.

    Chapter 3: Chinese Logic as a Basis of Classical Chinese Theory, pp. 73-99.

  176. ———. 2014. "Specific Features of Chinese Logic: Analogies and the Problem of Structural Relations in Confucian and Mohist Discourses." Synthesis Philosophica no. 57:23-40.

  177. ———. 2015. "Classical Chinese Logic." Philosophy Compass no. 19:301-309.

  178. ———. 2017. "Structural Relations and Analogies in Classical Chinese Logic." Philosophy East and West no. 677:841-863.

  179. ———. 2022. "Comparing Logical Paradoxes through the Method of Sublation: Hui Shi, Zeno and the “Flying Arrow Problem”." Asian Studies no. X (XXVI):299-312.

    Abstract: "This article addresses some basic methodological problems in the field of transcultural post-comparative studies of ancient logic by comparing the famous flying arrow paradox of Hui Shi (370–c. 310 BCE) with an apparently similar paradox attributed to Zeno of Elea (495–430 BCE). The article proceeds from a general introduction to the basic framework of semantically determined classical Chinese logic, to an illumination of Hui Shi’s specific contributions to the field, and finally to a preliminary explanation that emerges from a contrastive analysis of Zeno’s and Hui Shi’s respective views on the problem of motion and stasis as manifested in their corresponding paradoxes. The contrastive analysis, based on an exposition of some basic problems in the field of transcultural methodology and a description of the so-called sublation method, points to the importance of considering different paradigms and frames of reference in identifying differences between apparently similar theses."

  180. ———. 2022. "Asian Studies and the History of Chinese Logic: A Long and Fruitful Journey." Asian Studies no. X (XXVI):7-10.

  181. Roth, Harold D. 2003. A Companion to Angus C. Graham's Chuang Tzu. The Innner Chapters. Honolulu: University of Hawai's Press.

  182. Saunders, Frank. 2014. "Semantics without Truth in Later Mohist Philosophy of Language." Dao: A Journal of Comparative Philosophy no. 13:215-229.

  183. Schaberg, David. 2002. "The Logic of Signs in Early Chinese Rhetoric." In Early China /Ancient Greece: Thinking through Comparisons, edited by Shankman, Steven and Durrant, Stephen W., 155-186. Albany: State University of New York Press.

  184. Schilling, Dennis. 2020. "Place as a Category in the ‘Treatise on Name and Reality’ (Míngshí lùn名實論)." In The Gongsun Longzi and Other Neglected Texts: Aligning Philosophical and Philological Perspectives, edited by Suter, Rafael, Indraccolo, Lisa and Behr, Wolfgang, 207-239. Berlin: De Gruyter.

  185. Schleichert, Hubert. 1993. "Gong-sun Long on the Semantics of ‘World’." In Epistemological Issues in Classical Chinese Philosophy, edited by Lenk, Hans and Paul, Gregor, 113-117. Albany: State University of New York Press.

  186. She, Shiqin. 2022. "Critique of “Judgment” in Gongsun Long’s “Zhiwu Lun”—A Comparative Reading in the Light of Hölderlin’s “Judgment and Being”." Asian Studies no. X (XXVI):269-298.

    Abstract: "This paper has attempted to characterize “Zhiwu lun” as the presentation of the incapacity of object-oriented knowledge to represent the realm of “things”, highlighting Gongsun Long’s epistemological and ontological value beyond a logical one. This paper proposes that only based upon this assumption does “Zhiwu lun” allow a thorough interpretation of “Mingshi lun”, whereby the intuitive function of “names” provides a better solution to the cognitive limits imposed by object-oriented (self-)consciousness. Methodologically, this paper mainly considers the Heidelberg School’s interpretation of Hölderlin’s critique of

    judgment in “Judgment and Being” to be both a complementary justification and reconstruction of the implicit structures of Gongsun Long’s view. This paper has presupposed the interpretation of Gongsun Long’s key concept of 指 as “judgment” in Hölderlin’s sense, in contrast to “things” (物) and “name” (名), then verified this hypothesis, as well as the relationships amongst these translations, by a close textual analysis and new translation of “Zhiwu lun”."

  187. Shi, Ningzhong. 2010. "Proposition, Definition and Inference in Ancient Chinese Philosophy." Frontiers of Philosophy in China no. 5:414-431.

  188. Smith, Huston. 1980. "Western and Comparative Perspectives on Truth." Philosophy East and West no. 30:425-437.

    Abstract: "My article consists of four parts. Beginning with the comparative side of our symposium theme, I divide this into a temporal, historical comparison (Part I) and a geographical, spatial comparison(Part II). In Part III, I turn expressly to our Western handling of the truth issue, reserving Part IV for pulling these various strands together."

  189. Solomon, Bernard S. 1969. "The Assumptions of Hui-Tzu." Monumenta Serica. Journal of Oriental Studies no. 28:1-40.

  190. ———. 1981. "Kung-Sun Lung Tzu 公孫籠子 IV and VI." Monumenta Serica. Journal of Oriental Studies no. 35:235-273.

  191. ———. 2012. On the School of Names in Ancient China. Sankt Augustin: Institut Monumenta Serica.

  192. Stephens, Daniel. 2017. "Realism and Conventionalism in Later Mohist Semantics." Dao. A Journal of Comparative Philosophy no. 16:521-542.

    Abstract: "In this essay, I argue in favor of a novel interpretation of the semantic theory that can be found in the Later Mohist writings. Recent interpretations by Chad Hansen and Chris Fraser cast the Later Mohist theory as a realist theory; this includes attributing to the Later Mohists what we can call “kind-realism,” the idea that there is some correct scheme of kind-terms that carves the world at its joints. While I agree with Hansen and Fraser that the Later Mohist theory is realist in various ways, I offer challenges to their kind-realist interpretations, and argue instead for a kind-conventionalist interpretation on which there is no fixed, correct set of kinds, leaving schemes of kind terms to be determined by conventional decisions that occur during disputation (bian 辯)."

  193. Stevenson, Frank. 1991. "Meaning is not Meaning: World, Thing, and Difference in Kung-sun Lung’s Chih Wu Lun." Tamkang Review no. 21:297-322.

  194. ———. 1991. "South Has (No) Limits: Relative and Absolute Meaning in Hui Shi’s Ten Points." Tamkang Review no. 21:325-346.

  195. Sun, Siao-Fang. 1963. "Chuang-Tzu's Theory of Truth." Philosophy East and West no. 3 (2):137-146.

  196. Sun, Weimin. 2009. "Chinese Logic and the Absence of Theoretical Sciences in Ancient China." Dao. A Journal of Comparative Philosophy no. 8:403-423.

    Abstract: "In this essay, I examine the nature of Chinese logic and Chinese sciences in the history of China. I conclude that Chinese logic is essentially analogical, and that the Chinese did not have theoretical sciences. I then connect these together and explain why the Chinese failed to develop theoretical sciences, even though they enjoyed an advanced civilization and great scientific and technological innovations. This is because a deductive system of logic is necessary for the development of theoretical sciences, and analogical logic cannot provide the deductive connections between a theory and empirical observations required by a theoretical science. This also offers a more satisfactory answer to the long-standing Needham Problem."

  197. Sun, Zhongyuan. 2007. "Meta-research in Chinese logic." Frontiers of Philosophy in China no. 2:50-69.

    Abstract: "This paper discusses the topics, goals, values and methods of Chinese logic. It holds that the goal of the research in Chinese logic is to reveal its structure, content, rules, and essential character, as well as to reveal both similarities and differences between Chinese and foreign logic. The value of the research is to carry forward and develop the outstanding heritage of Chinese logic. Its method is to annotate original works of Chinese ancient logic with the tools of modern language and logic in order to reveal both the particular nature and the universal qualities of Chinese logic. The method also explores the differences and similarities between Chinese and foreign logic. In recent years, research in Chinese logic has developed considerably; it has also logged many important achievements.

    But there are many different views about the complexity and long-term goals of the research. Future research will build on the merits of different kinds of logic, promote Chinese logic, and increase communication between Chinese logic and foreign logic."

  198. Sun, Zhenbin. 2013. "Cracking the white horse puzzle." Journal of East-West Thought no. 3:97-106.

  199. ———. 2015. Language, Discourse, and Praxis in Ancient China. Dordrecht: Springer.

  200. Sun, Zhiqiang, and Liu, Fenrong. 2020. "The Inference Pattern Mou in Mohist logic - A Monotonicity Reasoning View." Roczniki Filozoficzne no. 68:257-270.

  201. Sung, Z. D. 1934. The Symbols of Yi King or The Symbols of the Chinese Logic of Changes. Shangai: The China Modern Education Co.

  202. Suter, Rafael. 2020. "Buddhist Murmurs? – Another Look at the Composition of the Gongsun Longzi." In The Gongsun Longzi and Other Neglected Texts: Aligning Philosophical and Philological Perspectives, edited by Suter, Rafael, Indraccolo, Lisa and Behr, Wolfgang, 429-558. Berlin: De Gruyter.

  203. Suter, Rafael, Indraccolo, Lisa, and Behr, Wolfgang, eds. 2020. The Gongsun Longzi and Other Neglected Texts: Aligning Philosophical and Philological Perspectives. Berlin: De Gruyter.

    Contents: Rafael Suter, Lisa Indraccolo and Wolfgang Behr: Preface and Acknowledgements V-VI;

    The Gōngsūn Lóngzǐ and Other Neglected Texts – Aligning Philosophical and Philological Perspectives: An Introduction 1;

    I History

    Traditions of Scholarship in China

    1 Wang Ping and Ian Johnston: The Gōngsūn Lóngzǐ: A Historical Overview 25; 2. Ian Johnston and Wang Ping: Notes on the Relationship between the Gōngsūn Lóngzǐ and the Dialectical Chapters of the Mòzǐ 45; 3. Zhōu Chāngzhōng 周昌忠 : The ‘Discourse on the White Horse’: A Concrete Analytical Philosophy of Language – with a Coda on the Authenticity of the Received Gōngsūn Lóngzǐ 87;

    II Philosophy

    Contemporary Analytic Approaches

    4 Yiu-ming Fung馮耀明 : Reference and Ontology in the Gōngsūn Lóngzǐ 119; 5 Bo Mou: How Gōngsūn Lóng’s Double-Reference Thought in His “White Horse Not Horse” Argumentation Can Engage with Fregean and Kripkean Approaches to the Issue of Reference 169;

    Philosophical Readings of the Gōngsūn Lóngzǐ

    6 Dennis Schilling: Place as a Category in the ‘Treatise on Name and Reality’ (Míngshí lùn 名實論) 207; 7 Liú Tǐshèng 劉體勝 : A New Interpretation of the Gōngsūn Lóngzǐ’s ‘Zhǐwù lùn’ (Discourse on Pointings and Things) and ‘Míngshí lùn’ (Discourse on Names and Actualities) 241; 8 Jiāng Xiàngdōng 蔣向東 : A New Interpretation of ‘Báimǎlùn’ (Discourse on White and Horse) 289;

    III Philology

    Perspectives on Language and Terminology

    9 Thierry Lucas: Logically Significant Words in the Gōngsūn Lóngzǐ 313; 10 Lukáš Zádrapa: Linguistic Affinites of the Yǐnwénzǐ Text in the Light of Basic Corpus Data 347;

    Textual Resonances and Questions of Authenticity

    11 Ernst-Joachim Vierheller: Gōngsūn Lóng and the Zhuāngzǐ: On Classifying (Declassifying) Things Zhǐ (Qí) Wù Lùn指〔齊〕物論 399; 12 Rafael Suter: Buddhist Murmurs? – Another Look at the Composition of the Gōngsūn Lóngzǐ 429;

    Indices: 1 Terms 559; 2 Source Texts 569; 3 Persons 572-575.

  204. ———. 2020. "The Gōngsūn Lóngzǐ and Other Neglected Texts – Aligning Philosophical and Philological Perspectives: An Introduction." In The Gongsun Longzi and Other Neglected Texts: Aligning Philosophical and Philological Perspectives, edited by Suter, Rafael, Indraccolo, Lisa and Behr, Wolfgang, 1-19. Berlin: De Gruyter.

  205. Sypniewski, Bernard Paul. 2001. "Notes Comparing Aristotelian Reasoning with that of the Early Confucian School." Journal of Chinese Philosophy no. 28:257–274.

  206. Tanaka, Koji. 2011. "Inference in the Mengzi 1A: 7." Journal of Chinese Philosophy no. 38:444-454.

  207. Tang, Paul C. L. 1997. "On the Special Logic Thesis in Chinese Philosophy." Metaphilosophy no. 28:371-384.

  208. Tang, Paul C. L., and Schwartz, Robert David. 1988. "The Limits of Language: Wittgenstein’s Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus and Lao Tzu’s Tao Te Ching." Journal of Chinese Philosophy no. 15:15-34.

  209. Tavor, Ori. 2014. "Naming/Power: Linguistic Engineering and the Construction of Discourse in Early China." Asian Philosophy: An International Journal of the Philosophical Traditions of the East no. 24:313-329.

  210. Teng, Norman Y. 2006. "The Relatively Happy Fish Revisited." Asian Philosophy no. 16:39-47.

    Abstract: "The anecdote of Zhuangzi and Hui Shi’s brief discussion on a bridge above the Hao river gives us a nice piece of reasoning in ancient Chinese texts that may serve as a platform for a productive philosophical exchange between the East and the West. The present study examines Hansen’s inferential analysis of Zhuangzi and Hui Shi’s discussion in this spirit. It is argued that Hansen’s analysis founders. To do justice to both Hui Shi and Zhuangzi, the present study proposes that we apply the logic developed in the later Mohist text, the Lesser Pick, to an analysis of their discussion. The re-analysis shows that the intricate dialectic of the reasoning in which Zhuangzi and Hui Shi engage, neatly accords with the pattern of discourse expounded in the Lesser Pick, and gives us global insight into Zhuangzi’s final statement in the anecdote, which is notoriously recondite, or confusing."

  211. Thompson, Kirill Ole. 1995. "When a "White Horse" Is Not a "Horse"." Philosophy East and West no. 45 (4):481-499.

    "Is the White Horse Paradox just a sleight of hand, or is it indicative of some truths about words, language, and logic? The paradox underscores some differences in the significance and implications of terms when considered in the context of mention rather than use. Moreover, the paradox shows that insights into how words and phrases operate in language can be gained by considering them in the context of mention. The paradox also causes us to think of the instrumental value of words, as opposed to thinking of their roles just in referring and in judgments and inferences."

  212. Tiles, Mary, and Yuan, Jinmei. 2004. "Could the Aristotelian Square of Opposition Be Translated into Chinese?" Dao: A Journal of Comparative Philosophy no. 4:137-149.

  213. ———. 2016. "Recognizing the Existence of Chinese Logic." International Communication of Chinese Culture no. 3:305-323.

  214. Trauzettel, Rolf. 1999. "A Sophism by the Ancient Philosopher Gongsun Long: Jest, Satire, Irony--or is there a Deeper Significance?" Journal of Chinese Philosophy no. 26:21-35.

  215. Van Norden, Bryan W. 2011. Introdcution to Classical Chinese Philosophy. Indianapolis: Hackett.

    Chapter 4: Mohist Consequentialism 51-68; Chapter 7: Language and Paradox in the "School of Names" 102-119.

  216. Vierheller, Ernst-Joachim. 1993. "Object Language and Meta-Language in the Gongsun Long Zi." Journal of Chinese Philosophy no. 20:181-209.

    "The Gongsun Long Zi is a text of the ancient Chinese School of Logicians. An attempt is made to provide a coherent interpretation of the logical content of the chapter "bBi ma lun". The analysis based on a new look on the logical function of the negated copula "Fei" yields a reading of the text as being directed toward elucidating the distinction of meta-/object-language and of extension/intension of a concept. This fact could enhance the appreciation of the level of language analysis reached at an early premodern state of Chinese philosophy. "

  217. ———. 2011. "Language and Logic in the Zhuangzi: Traces of the Gongsun Longzi." Oriens Extremus no. 50:29-46.

  218. Vierheller, Ernst Joachim. 2020. "Gongsun Long and the Zhuangzi: On Classifying (Declassifying) Things Zhi (Qi) Wu Lun." In, edited by Suter, Rafael, Indraccolo, Lisa and Behr, Wolfgang, 399-428. Berlin: De Gruyter.

  219. ———. 2020. "Gōngsūn Lóng and the Zhuāngzǐ: On Classifying (Declassifying) Things Zhǐ (Qí) Wù Lùn 指〔齊〕物論." In The Gongsun Longzi and Other Neglected Texts: Aligning Philosophical and Philological Perspectives, edited by Suter, Rafael, Indraccolo, Lisa and Behr, Wolfgang, 399-428. Berlin: De Gruyter.

  220. Volkov, Alexei K. 1992. "Analogical Reasoning in Ancient China: Some Examples." Extrême-Orient Extrême-Occident no. 14:15-48.

  221. ———. 2020. "Analogy." In Dao Companion to Chinese Philosophy of Logic, edited by Fung, Yiu-ming, 143-160. Cham, Switzerland: Springer.

  222. Vrhovski, Jan. 2020. "From Mohism to the school of names, from pragmatism to materialist dialectics: Chinese interpretations of Gongsun Longzi as a text and source of Chinese logic, 1919–1937." International Communication of Chinese Culture no. 7:511-538.

    Abstract: "This article aims at providing a general overview of the development of interpretational discourse on Gongsun Longzi (公孫龍子) as a text in Chinese logic in the timeframe between the May Fourth events in 1919 and the outbreak of the Sino-Japanese war in 1937. In my attempt to highlight the main interpretational approaches to the text and philosophy of Gongsun Long (公孫龍, 320 BC-250 BC) I will, on one hand, focus on the question whether or how the Western philosophies and notions of logic, such as for instance that of pragmatism, analytic philosophy and dialectical materialism, influenced the above-mentioned interpretations. On the other hand, aside from its contextual evolution I will also try to cast some new light on the main milestones of its textual re-emergence and development in the early Republican period."

  223. Vrubliaiskaité, Aušra. 2014. "Language in Zhuangzi. How to Say Without Saying." International Journal of Area Studies no. 9:75-90.

  224. Wang, Lu. 1997. "Logic in China." In Structures and Norms in Science: Volume Two of the Tenth International Congress of Logic, Methodology and Philosophy of Science, Florence, August 1995, edited by Dalla Chiara, Maria Luisa, Doets, Kees, Mundici, Daniele and van Bentham, Johan, 463-472. Dordrecht: Kluwer.

    On the history of logic see Section III, pp. 468-471.

    "Since China is historically one of the three sources of logic, the history of Chinese logic is a very important subject. It is generally recognized that the "Mo-Jing" (Mohist Canon) logic is the high point in the development of logic in ancient China. So research into the history of Chinese logic is mainly that of "Mo-Jing". There have been a great number of books and papers published in this field over the past twenty years. In my view it can be divided in two periods: before and after the end of the eighties. In the first period great effort was devoted to sorting out the material, digging out the logical problems, and making scientific assessments. In the second period, a reflection is made on the conclusions of the first period, including sharp criticism. In order to make

    the introduction easier, I will concentrate on the argumentation in this field.

    "Mo-Jing" logic is said to be the first scientific and complete system of logic in ancient China, to be as good as Aristotle's logic, and to have achievements comparable to that in Greek Antiquity, etc. There are also some people querying these points of view. There are two problems here. One is about the interpretation of Mo-Jing logic; the other is about the comparison between Mo-Jing logic and Aristotle's logic." (pp. 468-469)

  225. Wang, Ping, and Johnston, Ian. 2020. "The Gōngsūn Lóngzǐ: A Historical Overview." In The Gongsun Longzi and Other Neglected Texts: Aligning Philosophical and Philological Perspectives, edited by Suter, Rafael, Indraccolo, Lisa and Behr, Wolfgang, 25-44. Berlin: De Gruyter.

  226. Wang, Yueqing, Bao, Qinggang, and Guan, Guoxing. 2020. History of Chinese Philosophy Through Its Key Terms. Nanjing: Nanjing University Press.

    Name and Corresponding Object (mingshi, 名实), pp. 307-315.

    "Name and corresponding object are a key conceptual pair in traditional Chinese philosophy.

    Name means designation and concept. Corresponding object means reality, things and affairs or the object situation of the thing or affair. The relationship between name and corresponding object is roughly equivalent to the concept and the objective reality that the concept reflects. In Chinese philosophy, the issue of name and corresponding object contains the following four main contents. One, that which the name is based on, two, the rule for producing names, three, the categorization of names and four, the relationship between names and corresponding object. With regard to the relationship between names and reality, it can be further divided into question of whether the name or the object came first. This means whether the name determines the object or vice versa, as well as whether names accurately reflect reality, that is, whether names and objects can correspond with each other."

    Language and Meaning ( yanyi, 言意). pp. 413-424.

    "“Yanyi” is a key concept is Chinese epistemology. “Yan” refers to one’s words (言辞), nouns (名词), concept (概念), exposition and argument (论说) and writings (著述). In traditional Chinese philosophy, “yi” contains two dimensions of meaning, one means intention and the other means ideal (理想), the argument of a speech or essay (义理) and purpose (宗旨). When the two terms are united, “yi” refers to idea, argument and purpose. Key to the concept of “yanyi” is the relationship between “yan” and “yi,” and this relationship differed throughout different historical epochs and at the hands of different philosophers. Due to their different understandings of “yanyi,” therewere also differences in their understanding of the relationship between “yan” and “yi.”"

  227. Wang, Zuoli. 2010. "New Investigations in the School of Names." Asian and African Studies no. 14:85-101.

  228. Wenzel, Christian Helmut. 2007. "Chinese Language, Chinese Mind?" In Cultures. Conflict - Analysis - Dialogue, edited by Kanzian, Christian and Runggaldier, Edmund, 295-314. Frankfurt: Ontos Verlag.

    Proceedings of the 29th International Wittgenstein Symposium 2006, Kirchberg am Wechsel, Austria.

    "This article focuses on two questions. One is about the so-called Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, which says that language plays a role in how we perceive and understand the world. To put it strongly: Language determines thought. The other question is more specific. It is about the Chinese language. Is Chinese, with its grammar and its writing system, fundamentally different from Western languages such as Greek, Latin, German, Spanish or English? And does this difference account for cultural differences in perception and understanding? We all live in one world. But individually and culturally, we also live in different worlds. One easily notices this when one lives abroad. What is the role of language in this? What is its influence on perception, thought and culture? I am interested in influences that are due not just to vocabulary (which should be obvious), but, more fundamentally and systematically, to grammar and writing system. Words can easily be added to a language, one by one and step by step, and they do indeed reflect thought and culture. But grammar goes deeper. In what ways it reflects thought and culture is a more difficult but more interesting question, so it seems to me."

  229. Willman, Marshall D. 2008. "Searle, de re Belief and the Chinese Language." In Searle’s Philosophy and Chinese Philosophy: Constructive Engagement, edited by Mou, Bo, 247-263. Leiden: Brill.

  230. ———. 2010. "Logical Analysis and Later Mohist Logic: Some Comparative Reflections." Comparative Philosophy no. 1:53-77.

    Abstract: "Any philosophical method that treats the analysis of the meaning of a sentence or expression in terms of a decomposition into a set of conceptually basic constituent parts must do some theoretical work to explain the puzzles of intensionality. This is because intensional phenomena appear to violate the principle of compositionality, and the assumption of compositionality is the principal justification for thinking that an analysis will reveal the real semantical import of a sentence or expression through a method of decomposition.

    Accordingly, a natural strategy for dealing with intensionality is to argue that it is really just an isolable, aberrant class of linguistic phenomena that poses no general threat to the thesis that meaning is basically compositional. On the other hand, the later Mohists give us good reason to reject this view. What we learn from them is that there may be basic limitations in any analytical technique that presupposes that meaning is perspicuously represented only when it has been fully decomposed into its constituent parts. The purpose of this paper is to (a) explain why the Mohists found the issue of intensionality to be so important in their investigations of language, and (b) defend the view that Mohist insights reveal basic limitations in any technique of analysis that is uncritically applied with a decompositional approach in mind, as are those that are often pursued in the West in the context of more general epistemological and metaphysical programs."

  231. Wong, David B. 2002. "Reasons and Analogical Reasoning in Mengzi." In Essays on the Moral Philosophy of Mengzi, edited by Liu, Xiusheng and Ivanhoe, Philip J., 187-220. Indianapolis: Hackett.

  232. ———. 2003. "Mohism: The Founder, Mozi (Mo Tzu)." In Encyclopedia of Chinese Philosophy, edited by Cua, Antonio S., 452-461. New York: Routledge.

  233. Wu, Joseph S. 1969. "Chinese Language and Chinese Thought." Philosophy East and West no. 19 (4):423-434.

    "The main task of this paper is an exposition of some subtle common traits of Chinese thought through an examination of some major characteristics of the Chinese language. First, the author presents the main structures of the Chinese written characters and some notable syntactical features of the classical Chinese. Second, he exposes some essential characteristics of Chinese thinking as revealed by the nature of the language. In the conclusion, he justifies the thesis that the Chinese language is a language for poetry."

  234. Xu, Xeqian. 1997. "The Unique Features of Hui Shi's Thought: A Comparative Study Between Hui Shi and Other Pre-Quin Philosophers." Journal of Chinese Philosophy no. 24:231-253.

  235. Yan, Xiaofeng. 2001. "Disputes Over Words and Meanings in the History of Chinese Philosophy." Contemporary Chinese Thought no. 32:18-31.

  236. Yang, Wujin. 2011. "Valid Reasoning in Ancient China from the Perspective of Modern Logic." Studies in Logic no. 4:115-125.

  237. ———. 2020. "Reasoning (Pi 譬, Mou 侔, Yuan 援, Tui 推)." In Dao Companion to Chinese Philosophy of Logic, edited by Fung, Yiu-ming, 161-169. Cham, Switzerland: Springer.

  238. Yang, Wujin, and Zhang, Wanqiang. 2020. "Classes (Lei 類) and Individuals." In Dao Companion to Chinese Philosophy of Logic, edited by Fung, Yiu-ming, 203-212. Cham, Switzerland: Springer.

  239. Yang, Xiaomei. 2019. "How Do We Make Sense of the Thesis “Bai (White) Ma (Horse) Fei (Is Not) Ma (Horse)"?" Dao. A Journal of Comparative Philosophy no. 18:163-181.

    Abstract: "In this article, I introduce a new interpretation of the puzzling thesis “bai 白 (white) ma 馬 (horse) fei 非 (is not) ma 馬 (horse)” argued by Gongsun Long 公孫龍 in his essay “On White Horse (Bai Ma Lun 白馬論).” I argue that previous interpretations, which can be grouped under the name of “attribute-object interpretations,” are not satisfactory, and that the thesis on the new interpretation is not about attributes or objects, but about names. My argument focuses on the disagreement over inseparability of white (shou bai zhi zheng 守白之爭) between Gongsun Long and his interlocutor in the text of “On White Horse.” On my interpretation or the name interpretation, the disagreement is about whether constituents of a syntactically complex or multi-term name are separable or have their contextually independent meanings. Gongsun Long’s thesis makes perfect sense on my interpretation, and is supported by the text and other preserved texts collected in GongsunLong Zi 公孫龍子. The name interpretation can also make sense of some puzzling expressions of sophists in the classic period."

  240. Yi, Byeong-uk. 2014. "Numeral Classifiers and the White Horse Paradox." Frontiers of Philosophy in China no. 9:498-522.

  241. ———. 2019. "Two Syllogisms in the Mozi: Chinese Logic and Language." The Review of Symbolic Logic no. 12:589-606.

  242. Yu, Anthony C. 2002. "Cratylus and Xunzi on Names." In Early China /Ancient Greece: Thinking through Comparisons, edited by Shankman, Steven and Durrant, Stephen W., 235-250. Albany: State University of New York Press.

  243. Yuan, Jinmei. 2002. "Exploring the Logical Space in the Patterns of Classical Chinese Mathematical Art." Journal of Chinese Philosophy no. 29:519-531.

  244. ———. 2005. ""Kinds, Lei" in Ancient Chinese Logic: A Comparison to "Categories" in Aristotelian Logic." History of Philosophy Quarterly no. 22:181-199.

  245. ———. 2006. "The Role of Time in the Structure of Chinese Logic." Philosophy East and West no. 56:136-152.

  246. ———. 2010. "ZHAI, jincheng 翟錦程, the study of the theories of Ming 名 (name) in the pre-Qin period 先秦名家研究." Dao: A Journal of Comparative Philosophy no. 9:253-255.

  247. ———. 2012. "Analogical Propositions in Moist Texts." Journal of Chinese Philosophy no. 39:404-423.

  248. ———. 2012. "Aristotelian Logic in China-A Case Study of the Chinese Transtion of Euclid's Elements." Journal of East-West Thought no. 2:81-94.

  249. ———. 2021. "Exploring an Alternative Pre-Qin Logic." In One Corner of the Square: Essays on the Philosophy of Roger T. Ames, edited by Sullivan, Ian M. and Mason, Joshua, 190-200. Honolulu: University of Hawai‘i Press.

  250. Zhai, Jincheng, and Liu, Yongqiang. 2022. "The History, Present and Future of the Study of Chinese Logic." Asian Studies no. 10:105-117.

  251. Zhang, Chunpo, and Zhang, Jialong. 1997. "Logic and Language in Chinese Philosophy." In Companion Encyclopedia of Asian Philosophy, edited by Carr, Brian and Mahalingam, Indira, 562-575. New York: Routledge.

  252. Zhang, Jialong, and Liu, Fenrong. 2007. "Some Thoughts on Mohist Logic." In A Meeting of the Minds: Proceedings of the Workshop on Logic, Rationality and Interaction, Beijing 2007, edited by van Bentham, Johan, Shier, Ju and Veltman, Frank, 85-102. London: College Publicaitons.

  253. Zhou, Changzhong. 2020. "The ‘Discourse on the White Horse’: A Concrete Analytical Philosophy of Language – with a Coda on the Authenticity of the Received Gongsun Longzi." In The Gongsun Longzi and Other Neglected Texts: Aligning Philosophical and Philological Perspectives, edited by Suter, Rafael, Indraccolo, Lisa and Behr, Wolfgang, 87-114. Berlin: De Gruyter.

  254. Zhou, Qi. 2009. "Study on the Logical Ideas in Chinese Ancient Mathematics from “Liu Hui’s Commentary of the Chiu Chang Suan Shu”." Asian Social Science no. 5:9-13.

  255. Zong, Desheng. 2000. "Studies of Intensional Contexts in Mohist Writings." Philosophy East and West no. 50:208-228.

    "The Mohist School's logical study focuses mainly on the following inference rule: suppose that N and M are coextensive terms, or N a subset of M; it follows that if a verb can appear in front of N, it can also appear in front of M. That is, if 'VM' then 'VN', where V is some extensional verb. Such an approach to logical inference necessitates the study of logical relations among nouns, verbs, and the relations between these two types of words. Evidence is offered here that the Mohists clearly distinguished extensional verbs from intensional verbs, and that this insight enabled them to say, among other things, that VN does not follow from VM, even in cases where N is M or contained in M, as long as the V in question is an intensional verb."