A logical analysis of the debate on Hao River

The debate between Zhuangzi and Huizi has profound epistemological significance, however, the main body of their debate comprises logical inferences and refutations. Therefore, this paper mainly focuses on the logical aspects of the debate. Some scholars have suggested that Huizi’s argument is self-...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Hao, Xudong (Author)
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Interlibrary Loan:Interlibrary Loan for the Fachinformationsdienste (Specialized Information Services in Germany)
Published: 2022
In: Asian philosophy
Year: 2022, Volume: 32, Issue: 4, Pages: 439-447
Standardized Subjects / Keyword chains:B Zhuangzi 365 BC-290 BC / Hui, Shi / Logic
RelBib Classification:AB Philosophy of religion; criticism of religion; atheism
BM Chinese universism; Confucianism; Taoism
KBM Asia
Further subjects:B law of identity
B self-contradictory
B clandestine change of argumentative issue
B quibble
B Debate of Haoliang
Online Access: Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)

MARC

LEADER 00000caa a22000002c 4500
001 1819977323
003 DE-627
005 20230227151650.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 221026s2022 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
024 7 |a 10.1080/09552367.2022.2108108  |2 doi 
035 |a (DE-627)1819977323 
035 |a (DE-599)KXP1819977323 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rda 
041 |a eng 
084 |a 0  |2 ssgn 
100 1 |a Hao, Xudong  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
245 1 2 |a A logical analysis of the debate on Hao River 
264 1 |c 2022 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a The debate between Zhuangzi and Huizi has profound epistemological significance, however, the main body of their debate comprises logical inferences and refutations. Therefore, this paper mainly focuses on the logical aspects of the debate. Some scholars have suggested that Huizi’s argument is self-contradictory; however, in fact, based on such evaluations of Huizi’s argument, we can conclude that Zhuangzi’s logic is also self-contradictory. By utilizing modern logical analysis tools, this study reveals what and how the propositions and inferences contained in the language of the debate are articulated accurately and strictly. Moreover, by elaborating on the implicit premises omitted by Zhuangzi and Huizi, the actual logical process of the debate can be restored, and the logical fallacy of clandestine change of argumentative issue are revealed. This study presents clear modern logic analysis of the debate; it can also provide a more reliable logical basis for the discussions of Zhuangzi and Huizi’s related philosophical thoughts. 
650 4 |a quibble 
650 4 |a law of identity 
650 4 |a self-contradictory 
650 4 |a clandestine change of argumentative issue 
650 4 |a Debate of Haoliang 
652 |a AB:BM:KBM 
689 0 0 |d p  |0 (DE-588)118520768  |0 (DE-627)079322646  |0 (DE-576)208886338  |2 gnd  |a Zhuangzi  |d v365-v290 
689 0 1 |d p  |0 (DE-588)118708015  |0 (DE-627)079489761  |0 (DE-576)209319763  |2 gnd  |a Hui, Shi 
689 0 2 |d s  |0 (DE-588)4036202-4  |0 (DE-627)106243772  |0 (DE-576)209017082  |2 gnd  |a Logik 
689 0 |5 (DE-627) 
773 0 8 |i Enthalten in  |t Asian philosophy  |d London [u.a.] : Carfax, 1991  |g 32(2022), 4, Seite 439-447  |h Online-Ressource  |w (DE-627)320310922  |w (DE-600)2025427-1  |w (DE-576)094080704  |x 1469-2961  |7 nnas 
773 1 8 |g volume:32  |g year:2022  |g number:4  |g pages:439-447 
856 4 0 |u https://doi.org/10.1080/09552367.2022.2108108  |x Resolving-System  |z lizenzpflichtig  |3 Volltext 
935 |a mteo 
951 |a AR 
ELC |a 1 
ITA |a 1  |t 1 
LOK |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 
LOK |0 001 420201233X 
LOK |0 003 DE-627 
LOK |0 004 1819977323 
LOK |0 005 20230227151650 
LOK |0 008 221026||||||||||||||||ger||||||| 
LOK |0 035   |a (DE-Tue135)IxTheo#2022-10-25#07B247915D0A1D84DA937B13CAA46F10133CB670 
LOK |0 040   |a DE-Tue135  |c DE-627  |d DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 092   |o n 
LOK |0 852   |a DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 852 1  |9 00 
LOK |0 935   |a ixzs  |a zota 
LOK |0 936ln  |0 144204893X  |a KBM 
LOK |0 936ln  |0 1442043660  |a BM 
LOK |0 936ln  |0 1442042990  |a AB 
ORI |a SA-MARC-ixtheoa001.raw 
REL |a 1 
STA 0 0 |a Logic,Philosophical logic 
STB 0 0 |a Logique 
STC 0 0 |a Lógica 
STD 0 0 |a Logica 
STE 0 0 |a 逻辑,推理,推论 
STF 0 0 |a 邏輯,推理,推論 
STG 0 0 |a Lógica 
STH 0 0 |a Логика 
STI 0 0 |a Λογική 
SUB |a REL 
SYG 0 0 |a Zhuāngzǐ,v365-v290,Zhuang, Zhou,v365-v290,Zhuangzi,v365-v290,Krong-tsi,v365-v290,Chuang, Chou,v365-v290,Tschuang-Tse,v365-v290,Chuang-tzu,v365-v290,Dschuang-dsi,v365-v290,Chuang,Master,v365-v290,Dschuang, Dsï,v365-v290,Dschuang, Dsi,v365-v290,Dschuang Dsi,v365-v290,Dschuang-Dsï,v365-v290,Zhuang Zi,v365-v290,Tschuang Tse,v365-v290,Dsi, Dschuang,v365-v290,Chuang-Chou,v365-v290,Chuang Zi,v365-v290,Chuang-tsu,v365-v290,Chuang Tsu,v365-v290,Chuang, Tzu,v365-v290,Chuang Dsi,v365-v290,Tchang,v365-v290,Tchouang, Tseu,v365-v290,Tseu, Tchouang,v365-v290,Chuang Tzŭ,v365-v290,Chuang-Tzu,v365-v290,Chuang-tzŭ,v365-v290,Czuang-Tsy,v365-v290,Kwang-Tsze,v365-v290,Kwang-Zze,v365-v290,Tchouang-Tseu,v365-v290,Tsjwang-tze,v365-v290,Chuang, Choǔ,v365-v290,Chuang, Tse,v365-v290,Chuang, Tsu,v365-v290,Chuang Chou,v365-v290,Chuangtzu,v365-v290,Tchoang-Tzeu,v365-v290,Tchouang-tseu,v365-v290,Tschuang-tse,v365-v290,Chuang-tse,v365-v290,Dschuang Dsï,v365-v290,Chuang Tzu,v365-v290,Dschuang-dse,v365-v290,Kwang-tsze,v365-v290,Kwang-tse,v365-v290,Sōshi,v365-v290,Sōsi,v365-v290,Tzu, Chuang,v365-v290,Zi, Zhuang,v365-v290,Zhou, Zhuang,v365-v290 , Shi, Hui,Shi, Hu,Hui, Schi,Hui, Shih,Hui-tse,Hui-tzu , Philosophische Logik