It is said that one day, an eloquent Zhao Guoren was riding a white horse and was about to enter the customs, but he was stopped by the customs officials at the gate of the city. It turned out that during this period, the horses in Zhao State were infected with a very severe plague, and many war horses died due to being infected with the plague. In order to prevent this plague from being introduced to Qin and affecting Qin's war horses, Qin posted a notice at Hangu Pass: No horses from Zhao were allowed to enter the pass. This was a very inhumane rule for the Zhao people who were sitting on horses at that time. The horses at that time were equivalent to our current cars, and it was not very convenient to move without them. Therefore, if a person enters the customs and leaves the horse behind, this eloquent Zhao Guoren will certainly not accept it. So there was a debate between him and the officials about whether the white horse was a horse or not. The eloquent Zhao Guoren pointed to the mount under his crotch and said to the official: "The white horse is not a horse. You should let me enter." The official said: "The white horse is a horse, and it doesn't matter whether it is white or black, as long as it is Zhao's horse." No one is allowed to enter the customs." Zhao Guoren "argued with reason": "'White' refers to the color; 'horse' refers to the name, and color and name are inherently different concepts. If a person wants If a person wants a white horse, then it is okay to give him a yellow horse or a black horse. But if a person wants a white horse, then it is obviously not possible to give him a yellow horse and a black horse. This proves that 'horse' and 'white horse' are two different concepts . Therefore, a white horse is not a horse." Hearing this, the official was confused. He was confused by the sophistry of this Zhao man and was at a loss as to how to answer. In the end, he had to let him enter the gate together with his horse. .
This eloquent Zhao man was Gongsun Long, a famous philosopher during the Warring States Period.
Gongsun Long, also named Zibing, was said to be a native of Zhao during the Warring States Period and a representative figure of the famous school. Mingjia is one of the hundreds of schools of thought during the Warring States Period. It focuses on the study of the relationship between "name" and "reality" and is a school of thought that focuses on correcting names and distinguishing meanings. Famous scholars emphasize the correspondence between names and facts, "taking wrong as right and right as wrong". We have all heard the term "three religions and nine streams". Famous scholars were listed as one of the "Nine Streams" in the "Book of Han". Gongsun Long, a representative figure of famous scholars, was very eloquent. In addition to proposing the proposition "a white horse is not a horse", he also had many sophistry that had a profound impact on later generations, such as "a chicken has three legs" and "a dog is not a dog". ", "Solid White Stone" and other propositions that are still very controversial today. Gongsun Long's debates only emphasized the logical analysis of concepts and often deliberately confused some concepts. His arguments had obvious idealistic characteristics and were often called "sophists." And because his arguments often challenge people's common sense and are inconsistent with reality, they are often unacceptable. But in terms of logic and conceptual analysis, his contributions deserve attention.
In fact, in the argument about "white horse is not a horse", he first analyzed the conceptual difference between the two words horse and white horse: in the word "white horse", there is both "white" that describes the color and the shape. "Horse"; any animal with the form of a horse can become a horse, but only a white horse can become a white horse. The word "horse" includes all horses, so yellow horses and black horses are also horses. White horses refer specifically to white horses, and yellow horses and black horses are not included. Based on this, he put forward the argument that "horse" and "white horse" are two different concepts. Then it is to demonstrate the difference between the individual and the general: the "white" in "white horse" describes the commonality of all white objects and has nothing to do with horses. The "horse" in "white horse" describes the common characteristics of all horses and has nothing to do with white. Therefore, "white horse" is the superposition of the common characteristics of white and the common characteristics of horse. Therefore, white horse is not a horse.
This argument is actually very untenable. Although there is a difference between the two concepts of horse and white horse, this is only the difference between the individual and the overall concept, and the individual is included in the overall concept. Therefore, his sophistry actually exaggerates the difference between the individual and the totality, and deliberately separates the two completely and treats them as two separate parts.
In addition to the "white horse is not a horse" argument, he also had many arguments that were made after cutting off some connections between the characteristics of the objects themselves. His entire theory is based on an idealist philosophy about the independent existence of universals. For example, his other famous argument-"hard white stone" believes that the whiteness and hardness of a white stone can exist independently. .
In this argument, he first starts with the feeling of a solid white stone: He believes that when we look at a solid white stone with our eyes, we can only perceive its whiteness but not its hardness; when we touch it with our hands When a solid white stone is seen, one can only perceive its hardness but not its whiteness. From this he concluded that the whiteness and hardness of solid white stone can be separated and exist independently. He also said that white can only be perceived by eyes and light, but light does not have the ability to see objects, so light and eyes together cannot see objects. Therefore, it can only be seen by consciousness, but consciousness itself cannot Seeing objects, so vision and whiteness also exist separately.
This argument is full of holes. First of all, when we look at a solid white stone, although we cannot perceive its hardness, its hardness still exists and does not disappear just because we cannot perceive it. In the same way, when we touch a solid white stone, although we cannot perceive its whiteness, the quality of its whiteness still exists. So whiteness and hardness clearly cannot exist alone. Later, some aspects of the argument for the separate existence of vision and whiteness are clearly untenable. For example, white can be seen by eyes and light, but light has no ability to see objects. From this, he concluded that light and eyes cannot see objects together. This argument is very loose, so the conclusion he draws is unconvincing.
Gongsun Long's argument absoluteized the individual and the general as well as some universals of objects in terms of separation, while ignoring some of the inherent connections between them. This is very inconsistent with the laws of reality. His judgment itself does have big problems, but his judgment method is anti-traditional. He opened up a new logical field and proposed an unprecedented way of thinking. From this point of view, some of his arguments are still Very worthy of recognition. But later, the absurdity and outrageousness of his propositions such as "a chicken has three legs", "fire is not hot", and "a dog is not a dog" using the same principles as "a white horse is not a horse" made the world think that he had completely fallen into "sophism" cannot extricate himself from the abyss.
