mengzi and gaozi on nei and wai英文学习资料.pdfVIP

5 Mengzi and Gaozi on Nei and Wai KIM-CHONG CHONG THE DEBATE between Mengzi and Gaozi in Book 6 of the Mengzi has been controversial. For instance, D. C. Lau has argued that it is wrong to think that “Mencius . . . could have indulged con- sistently in what appears to be pointless argument or that his oppo- nents were always effectively silenced by non sequiturs.”1 But it is pre- cisely this that Mengzi is guilty of, according to Chad Hansen.2 More famously, Arthur Waley states, “As a controversialist he [Mengzi] is nugatory. The whole discussion (Book VI) about whether Goodness and Duty are internal or external is a mass of irrelevant analogies, most of which could equally well be used to disprove what they are intended to prove.”3 A. C. Graham credits Lau with converting him from sharing this point of view.4 Given these contradictory views, it is timely to look at the de- bate afresh. A major feature of it is the use of analogies by both Mengzi and Gaozi. I shall draw out certain assumptions and implica- tions of these analogies that have not been sufficiently clarified. As we shall see, Mengzi fails to refute Gaozi in 6A1, 6A2, and 6A3. But the real issue emerges in 6A4 and 6A5, where the terms nei and wai , or “internal” and “external,” are prominent.5 It is crucial to note that they are introduced by Gaozi and questioned by Mengzi. Through the analogies of food and drink, Mengzi exposes the sen- sory and appetitive assumptions behind Gaozi’s use of these terms.6 This throws doubt on whether nei and wai, as understood by Gaozi, can be applied to show that ren is internal and yi is external. As far as I am aware, no commentator has seen the debate in this light. 103 104 KIM-CHONG CHONG Instead, they have simply a