Doil Kim, “Did Xunzi (荀子) really Approve of the Way of the Hegemon (覇道)?” Cheolhak (哲學, Korean Philosophical Association) vol.139 (May, 2019) in Korean
● Cheolhak (Korean Journal of Philosophy) is the only philosophy journal that is selected by Korean Citation Index (KCI) as one of the excellent academic journals in Korea
https://philosophy.jams.or.kr/co/main/jmMain.kci
Abstract
Mencius (孟子) and Xunzi (荀子) are considered to be disagree with each other with respect to their views of wang dao (王道, the way of the true king) and ba dao (覇道, the way of the hegemon). In early Confucian thought, wang dao is the kind of statecraft based on Confucian ideal values or principles, such as ren yi (仁義) and li yi (禮義), whereas ba dao is the kind of statecraft that gains political supremacy by force (力). Unlike Mencius who strongly opposes ba dao, Xunzi is widely understood as taking a flexible attitude toward ba dao in consideration of hardships involved in the implementation of wang dao in the real world. Xunzi’s compromising stance is considered an approval for the moral aspect of ba dao as well as a recognition of the success of ba dao in history, namely its actual success in having achieved domestic integration and having gained international influence. This contrast between Mencius and Xunzi seems to be almost an established view in the academic field of early Chinese thought. This view will be scrutinized in this paper. This paper will question if Xunzi is really a compromiser who accepts ba dao in believing that wang dao, Confucian political ideal, would inevitably face difficulties in its implementation in the real world. This paper will argue that the widely accepted view is a sheer misunderstanding.
Key words: Xunzi, Mencius, Wang dao (王道), Ba dao (覇道), li (力), de (德), xin (信), da jie (大節), yi (義)