The theory of correct names

This ideology, popular in China during the Warring States period, is also called the theory of name and reality, and is a philosophy that aims for the consistency of name and substance. There are two trends, one based on political thought and the other on logic, but the former is the mainstream. The origin of the theory of correct name is Confucius' (Kongqiu) claim that the most urgent task in politics is to correct the name (Zilu chapter of the Analects), and the specific content is, for example, that the ruler and his subjects and father and son should behave like a ruler and a subject (Yan Yuan chapter of the Analects), and the idea is that good governance will be carried out if the substance is appropriate to the name. This idea can also be seen in various chapters such as the Correct Name and Review chapters of the Spring and Autumn Annals of Lüshi and the general chapter of the Shenzi. It was the Legalists who actively adopted this political theory of correct name and created the political ideology of form and name being the same, in which the ruler supervises his subjects in order to achieve form and reality appropriate to their name (duties). The political theory of correct naming can be seen in such works as "Guanzi" (Psychology), "Xunzi" (Right Name), and "Han Feizi" (Determination of Laws). Later, especially after the Song dynasty, it developed into the theory of correct naming.

On the other hand, the application of Confucius's idea of ​​correct names to general things by such notable figures as Gongsun Long and others is considered to have become what can be called the logical theory of correct names. Gongsun Longzi also includes the theory of name and reality, but the characteristics of the theory of correct names are clearly seen in the assertions in the White Horse Theory that a white horse is not a horse, and in the Hard White Theory that there are two hard, white stones. He asserts that white belongs to color and horse to shape, and that since horse refers to shape, a white horse with color plus shape is a horse, i.e., not a shape, and that when a stone is known as a hard stone, the white stone is not conscious, and when a stone is conscious as a white stone, the hard stone is not perceived, rejecting the theory that there are one or three hard white stones. In response to this, the Mohist refutes the idea that a white horse is not a horse in a purely logical manner in the Little Taking chapter of Mozi, stating that whether one rides a white horse or a black horse, a white horse is a horse because one has ridden a horse. This kind of logical discussion of name and reality can also be found in the chapter on correct name in Xunzi, but Xunzi does not delve into this discussion, and while he acknowledges the precision of the analysis, he rejects it from a political and practical standpoint, calling it an unnecessary and non-urgent discussion. After him, logical theories of correct name can be seen in Lu Sheng of the Jin Dynasty and others, but the discussion has generally converged and political theories of correct name have become mainstream.

[Takio Sawada]

"Eight Treatises on Classical History" by Tetsuji Morohashi (1932, Seki Shoin) " "Logical Thought" by Jun Takada (included in Lectures on Eastern Thought, Vol. 4, 1967, University of Tokyo Press)" " History of Problems in Chinese Philosophy, Volume 2" by Yu Tong, translated by Takio Sawada (1977, Yachiyo Publishing)

Source: Shogakukan Encyclopedia Nipponica About Encyclopedia Nipponica Information | Legend

中国、戦国時代に盛行し、名実論ともいわれ、名称と実質との一致を志向する思想。政治思想的なものと論理学的なものとの二傾向があるが、前者が主流となっている。正名論の発端は、政治の急務は名を正すことにありとの孔子（孔丘(こうきゅう)）の主張であるが（『論語』子路篇(しろへん)）、その具体的内容は、たとえば君臣父子がそれぞれ君臣父子らしくあれというもので（同上顔淵(がんえん)篇）、名称にふさわしい実質であればよい統治が行われるという考えである。こうした考えは『呂氏春秋(りょししゅんじゅう)』正名・審分(しんぶん)や『申子(しんし)』大体などの諸篇にもみえる。こうした政治論的正名論を積極的に取り入れて、名（職務）にふさわしい形・実（実績）を求めて君主が臣下を督責するという形名参同の政治思想を創案したのが法家である。政治論的正名論は『管子(かんし)』心術、『荀子(じゅんし)』正名、『韓非子(かんぴし)』定法などの諸篇にもみえる。のち、とくに宋(そう)代以後、名分論として展開する。

　他方、名家の公孫竜(こうそんりゅう)などが孔子の正名思想を一般の事物に適用したのが、論理学的正名論ともいうべきものとなったと考えられる。『公孫竜子』には名実論もあるが、白馬論の白馬は馬ではないとか、堅白論の堅くて白い石は二つだといった主張に、その正名論の特徴が明白に現れている。白とは色、馬とは形に属するもので、馬とは形についていうものであるから、色プラス形の白馬は馬つまり形ではないと主張したり、堅い石と知るときは白い石は意識されず、白い石と意識されるときは堅い石は知覚されないとして、堅白石は一または三だとする説を退ける。これに対して白馬非馬については、墨家(ぼくか)は、『墨子』小取(しょうしゅ)篇で、白馬に乗っても驪馬(りば)（黒馬）に乗っても、馬に乗ったというから白馬は馬だと純粋に論理的に反駁(はんばく)している。こうした名と実との論理的な議論は『荀子』正名篇にもみられるが、荀子はこうした議論には深入りせず、分析の精密さは認めるが、不要不急の議論だとして政治的、実用的立場から否定する。彼以後、論理学的正名論は晋(しん)の魯勝(ろしょう)などにみられるものの、おおむね収束して政治論的正名論が主流となる。

［澤田多喜男］

『諸橋轍次著『経史八論』（1932・関書院）』▽『高田淳著『論理思想』（『講座東洋思想　第4巻』所収・1967・東京大学出版会）』▽『宇同著、澤田多喜男訳『中国哲学問題史　下冊』（1977・八千代出版）』

出典　小学館　日本大百科全書(ニッポニカ)日本大百科全書(ニッポニカ)について　情報 | 凡例