Logic is an instrumental argumentative science that has been tightly interwoven with the development of Western philosophy as its foundational discipline since antiquity. But now Chinese logic (commonly referred to as the study of names and disputation [mingbianxue]) has been largely modeled after the pedagogical framework of traditional Western logic, which limits its capacity to serve as a philosophical cornerstone for Chinese philosophy. The original essence of Chinese logic is rooted in the specific intellectual ecosystem of traditional Chinese scholarship and culture. It fundamentally explores the relationships between names and objects, between things and classes, and between images and things. Rooted in this intellectual framework, Chinese logic explores names and associated issues by treating the rectification of names (zhengming) as its primary objectives, grounding in the doctrines of class, and employing the “generalization of classes” (tuilei) as its methodology. To rectify names, Chinese logic proceeds through investigating objects, differentiating things, and classifying them according to similarities and differences. The basic method entails transitioning from names to classes and classes to names through the generalization of classes. Moreover, Chinese logic has remained deeply integrated with the development and evolution of traditional Chinese philosophy.

Mohist logic exhibits a close connection with critical thinking. The Mohist three-factor logic, comprising premise, principle, and analogy, demonstrates a structural correspondence with the basic framework of critical thinking. Specifically, the Mohist “three-factor logic” stipulates that these three conditions should be satisfied to reach a valid conclusion, mirroring the three fundamental criteria for evaluating argumentation in critical thinking: truthfulness, sufficiency, and relevance. Furthermore, Mohist logic embodies several theoretical characteristics inherent in critical thinking. Fundamental features of critical thinking—including reflexivity, constructiveness, and normativity—are fully manifested within Mohist logic. The spirit of critical thinking is also evident in the practical application of Mohist logic within their social and political thought. In arguing for their core tenets, the Mohists frequently anticipated, analyzed, and addressed diverse viewpoints and potential objections, whether existing in their present reality or potentially arising in the future.

Gongsun Longzi: The Establishment of a Philosophical Paradigm

The Foundation, Limits, and Rigor of Generalization of Classes in Ancient China

Pre-Qin masters extensively explored issues related to the names and disputation (mingbian), but these issues received limited attention from scholars following the Qin and Han dynasties. Research on this topic was not revived until the late Qing to the early Republican periods, and it has continued to the present day. Over the past century, research on pre-Qin study of names and disputation has primarily focused on the theoretical reconstruction of texts based on frameworks, such as logic (particularly traditional logic), philosophy, and semiotics. Some researchers have also concentrated on exploring the ancient approaches to issues of mingbian. Contemporary research emphasizes the importance of employing appropriate interpretative methods that align with the characteristics of texts, alongside the necessity for a solid and reliable literature foundation. The interpretation of “Baima Lun” of Gongsun Longzi indicates that concept clarification and argumentative analysis are valuable for grasping the intrinsic meaning of texts. This approach has proven effective for interpreting similar texts and addressing issues related to the study of names and disputation.

Logic in the modern Chinese context was primarily transplanted from the West. Driven by the eastward dissemination of Western learning during the late Qing period, the translated works of Western logic in the late Qing and early Republican periods largely fell into two categories: first, direct translations from English that rendered logic as bianxue (the study of disputation), mingxue (the study of names), or lizexue (the study of principles and orders); second, translations from Japanese works compiled by Japanese scholars that largely translated logic as the study of principles of reasoning. The publication of these Western logical works under such translated titles as the study of names, the study of disputation, the study of principles and orders, and lunlixue (the study of rational principles marked the inception and formation of modern Chinese logic. Building upon the existing translations of traditional Western logic texts, Chinese scholars synthesized various strengths to compile textbooks on logic suitable for Chinese readers and modern educational institutions in the late Qing period. With the widespread establishment of new-style schools in this period, logic secured its position in the new educational system under the designations of study of rational principles or study of names, becoming part of the curricula of normal schools and higher education institutions. As modern school curricula became increasingly systematized, this Western-transplanted discipline of logic gradually evolved into an independent modern academic field in China.