Yang Zhus Teaching and Mozis Philosophy - Essay Example

As a point of departure, Yang’s principle -“Each for himself” which does not recognize the assertion of sovereignty. On equal measure, Mo’s principle -“To love all equally”, which does not appreciate the uncharacteristic affection of the father contrasts sharply on the societal perspective (Ivanhoe & Van, 2005).  As the Mohist, philosophy enhances the aspects of equality, respect for every member of the society, exclusive independent thoughts from social conventions and history the Yogism philosophy advances individualism and attainment of the spiritual self and contentment through self-expression.

The principle of preserving life, sustaining the real and avoidance of entanglement with things attributed to Yangism makes this philosophy superior, however, the aspect of not sacrificing on behalf of others, challenges its realism and dedication towards the value of humanity (Ivanhoe & Van, 2005). Conversely, this concept is canceled by Mozi’s dedication to restoring the world order and bringing welfare to ordinary people.

From the perspective of caring and thinking about others particularly the less fortunate in the society, Yangism philosophy rates lowly and indeed can be said to be stronger than Mozi’s philosophy. In essence, Yangism cannot be deemed strong, when by its undervaluing of humanity, specifically those in the low class. Both conventional and unconventional worlds embraced humanity and indeed the benchmark of the strength of social philosophies, Yangism included.  Based on this benchmark, Mohism is stronger than Yangism. Mozi asserts that the business of the compassionate man is to try to support what is valuable to all. Mozi attributes to humanity by morally obligating people of goodwill and compassion to promote paybacks for the world and remove damage from the world (Ivanhoe & Van, 2005). Mozi believes that if humanity embraces universal love, the harm in the globe will be inexistent. Thus, any man of humanity must support the doctrine of collective love and mutual gains.

Moreover, Mozi argues that, even in developing individual characters, it should in one way or another affect the development of other societal members’ characters. Mozi desired good for all. However, Confucius differs from Mozi’s belief in love for others. According to Confucius, humanity’s nature has to give greater consideration of welfare to parents than other members of the society (Ivanhoe & Van, 2005). This is a differing point. As it may appear obsessing, Mozi’s philosophy of equal love prevails in an ideal society. The Yangism philosophy does not supersede Mozi’s philosophy of love for all in any way. Instead, it is an urge for individual craving for recognition; identity, occupation of societal niche and most importantly extend selfishness.

The aspect of Yang’s belief in private life is not idealistic in an ideal world. Humanity exists in public, this means that Yangism needs people to retreat to private corners and carry out their lives. In line with Yang’s, view that, “prior to death, one subsists life to the fullest” all humanity should embrace private life and enjoy the space they occupy (Ivanhoe & Van, 2005). The question that arises from this Yngism view is how individuals can enjoy and live to the fullest in private. It is only ideal when people are sharing universal platforms such as public talks and concerts that, they enjoy life. Yangism leaves critical questions surrounding his view on life unanswered. Yang does not convince humanity on how to enjoy life and live to the fullest in private.

This belief of Yangism’s private life contrast with Mozi’s philosophy that provides that the most effective way of fulfilling personal interest is when others are all functioning toward the same objective on our behalf (Ivanhoe & Van, 2005). This is evident that to live to the fullest one must integrate with other members of the society because they complement personal needs and desires. This leaves Yangism's philosophy on balance on how life is fulfilling in private corners.

In conclusion, the Yangism philosophy is too individualistic to be stronger than Mozi’s philosophy of love for all. Moreover, the aspect of private life does not add up to the real meaning of life fulfillment in an ideal world. Yang argues from a non-ideal point of view, which exists in a few people like Yang zhu.