Legalism became the official philosophy of the Qin Dynasty (221–206 BC) when China`s first emperor, Shi Huangdi (r. 221–210 BC), came to power and banished all other philosophies as corrupting influences. Confucianism has been particularly condemned for its insistence on the fundamental goodness of man and its teaching that people need only to be gently led to good in order to behave well. The basic structure and functioning of the traditional Chinese state was not “legalistic” as the term is commonly understood. Although persistent, pre-modern Chinese mainstream thought never really accepted the role of law and jurisprudence or the Shang Yang wing of fajia. The most important contribution of the Fajia lies in the organization and regulation of a centralized and bureaucratic government. Sinologist Herrlee G. Shen Dao and Shen Buhai devalued the charismatic leader`s importance and instead emphasized his position as a source of authority. The purpose of legalism was to establish a “natural” and automatic politics that would be consistent with Dao (the way the natural world works). A leader must therefore embody Dao by practicing “non-action”, “emptiness” and “calm” to allow the natural flow of events. The leader should not act, but let his subordinates act and be responsible for the consequences of their actions. The position of the ruler is comparable to the centre of a ladder or ladder; The center does not move, but knows which side of the ladder is heavier than the other.
The ruler must distance himself and use the “two grips” of reward and punishment or power over life and death to control his people. At the suggestion of Premier Li Si, Emperor Qin Shi Huang respected legalism as the only dominant philosophy of the Qin Empire, and his most reliable ministers were excellent masters of legalism. These states fought against each other again and again, but none of them could gain the advantage over the others until King Ying Zheng adopted Qin Han Feizi`s philosophy of legalism and Shang Yang`s concept of total war and conducted national and military campaigns in this direction to achieve victory. The ancient rules of chivalry that Chinese armies had always considered were ignored by the Qin as they destroyed one state after another. When the last of the free states was conquered, Ying Zheng declared himself the first emperor of China: Shi Huangdi. Han Feizi drew on this aspect of Xunzi`s work, as well as earlier writings from the Warring States period in China (c. 481 – 221 BC) by a Qin statesman named Shang Yang (died 338 BC) to develop his philosophy that, since humans are evil by nature, laws of control and punishment are a necessity for social order. Although legalism led to great loss of life and culture during the Qin Dynasty, it is worth remembering that the philosophy that developed in a period of constant war in China, when each state was fighting for control against all the others, and the enforcement of order in this chaos was obviously considered extremely important. Legalism was the idea of the central government of the Qin Dynasty, culminating in the unification of China under the “first emperor” (Qin Shi Huang). He is the master in the 2002 film Hero and several other films.
Most Chinese philosophers and political thinkers had very negative views about legalism and blamed it for what would now be considered a totalitarian society. Many Chinese scholars believe it was a backlash against legalism that gave Chinese imperial policy its personalist and moralistic flavor instead of emphasizing the rule of law. However, this view of the Qin may be biased, as most Chinese historical documents were written by Confucian scholars who were persecuted among the Qin. Legalists believed that political institutions should be shaped in response to the realities of human behavior and that humans are inherently selfish and short-sighted. Thus, social harmony cannot be ensured by the recognition of the virtue of its ruler by the people, but only by strong state control and absolute obedience to authority. Legalists approved the government through a system of laws that imposed strict sanctions and rewards for certain behaviors. They emphasized the orientation of all human activities towards the goal of increasing the power of the ruler and the state. The brutal implementation of this policy by the authoritarian Qin dynasty led to the overthrow of that dynasty and the discrediting of legalistic philosophy in China. The term “legalistic school” (fa jia 法家) is ubiquitous in studies of ancient Chinese political philosophy. Despite the many criticisms of its inaccuracy (e.g. Goldin 2011), the term can still be used wisely as long as two important points are taken into account.
First, the legalists were not a self-confident and organized intellectual current; On the contrary, the name was invented as a post-factum categorization of certain thinkers and texts, and its main function before the twentieth century was that of a bibliographic category in imperial libraries. Therefore, the identification of a thinker or a text as “legalistic” will forever remain arbitrary; The term can be used as a heuristic convention, but should not (Pace Creel 1974) be used as an analyzer. Second, “legalism” is a problematic name. The Chinese term fa jia is already misleading because it inadvertently reduces the rich intellectual content of this current to a single keyword, fa. “Legalism” is a doubly misleading English translation because the semantic scope of the term fa 法 is much broader than “law”; It also refers to methods, norms, impersonal regulations, etc. (Creel 1974:147-149; Goldin, 2011). It is therefore incongruous to discuss fa jia in the context of the Western notion of “rule of law” as it was popular in modern Chinese research (e.g., Hsiao 1979: 442-446) and as is sometimes still done today (Fu Zhengyuan 1996: 158-161). Given these intrinsic inaccuracies of the term “legalism”, it can only be used for heuristic reasons, as follows.
The term is simply so prevalent in the scientific literature that replacing it with a new name will only confuse readers further. The history of Korean legalism dates back to Gyeonggukdaejeon, a code of laws compiled during the Joseon Dynasty. There is a mixed perception of legalism in South Korean society, as the military regime after World War II used the idea of legalism as a tool of its governance. The ideas are related to Chinese legalism, but often differ due to Korean aversion to what they see as the Chinese use of legalism in an attempt to legitimize Han imperialism.1 The second pillar of legalistic political philosophy is their view of human nature. Legalists avoid arguing whether human wickedness or goodness is innate, or whether or not all humans possess fundamentally similar qualities. What matters to them is first that the overwhelming majority of people are selfish and greedy; secondly, that this situation cannot be changed by education or self-cultivation; and third, that people`s selfishness can become an asset to the leader rather than a threat. Let “men follow the benefit as water flows downwards” (Shang jun shu 23:131; Book of Lord Shang 23:2) is obvious: the task is to enable people to satisfy their desire for fame and fortune in a way that meets the needs of the state and does not contradict them. Shang Yang explains how to achieve this: In later dynasties, legalism was discredited and ceased to be an independent school of thought. However, ancient and modern observers of Chinese politics have argued that some legalistic ideas have merged with mainstream Confucianism and still play a role in government. More recently, Mao Zedong, who had some knowledge of ancient Chinese philosophy, compared himself to Qin Shi Huang and publicly endorsed certain legalistic methods. Since the 1990s, however, the associated concept of the rule of law has prevailed.
Shen`s most famous successor, Han Fei (c. 280 – 233 BC AD), synthesized the idea of the other Fa-Jia in his text of the same name, the Han Feizi. The Han Feizi was written around 240 BC. AD and is generally regarded as the greatest of all “legalistic” texts,[2][39][40] and is believed to contain the earliest commentaries on the Tao Te Ching in history. [41] [42] The group of thinkers finally called “Fa-Jia” or “legalists” goes back to Han Fei. [43] [44] Sun Tzu`s Art of War includes both a Taoist philosophy of inaction and impartiality and a legalistic system of punishment and reward reminiscent of Han Fei`s concepts of power (Chinese: 勢; pinyin: shì) and tactics (Chinese: 術; pinyin: shù). [45] Attracting the attention of the first emperor,[14]:344 It is often said that successive emperors followed the pattern established by Han Fei. [46] Xún Zǐ or Hsün Tzu (荀子; b.