Rectification of names

Although not done justice by English translation, professor Zhenbin Sun considers Gongsun Long』s work on ming-shi, or name and reality, the most "profound and systematic" of the School of Names. As Gongsun Long enjoys the favor or rulers, his work also concerns social order.

The Gongsun Long Zi reads:

Heaven, earth, and their products are all things wu. When things possess the characteristics of things without exceeding them, there is actuality shi. When actuality actually fulfills its function as actuality, without wanting, there is order wei. To be out of order is to fall into disorder. To remain in order is to be correct. What is correct is used to rectify what is incorrect. is incorrect is not used to doubt what is correct. To rectify is to rectify actuality, and to rectify the name ming corresponding to it.

White Horse dialogue

In the White Horse Dialogue, one interlocutor (sometimes called the "sophist") defends the truth of the statement "White horses are not horses," while the other interlocutor (sometimes called the "objector") disputes the truth of this statement. This has been interpreted in a number of ways.

Possibly the simplest interpretation is to see it as based on a confusion of class and identity. The argument, by this interpretation, plays upon an ambiguity of the negative copula "is not" (非). The expression "X is not Y" (X非Y) can mean either

• "X is not a member (or subset) of set Y"

• "X is not identical to Y"

The sentence "White horses are not horses" would normally be taken to assert the obviously false claim that white horses are not part of the group of horses. However, the "sophist" in the dialogue defends the statement under the interpretation, "Not all horses are white horses". The latter statement is actually true, since—as the "sophist" explains—"horses" includes horses that are white, yellow, brown, etc., while "white horses" includes only white horses, and excludes the others. A.C. Graham proposed this interpretation and illustrated it with an analogy. The "Objector" assumes that "a white horse is not a horse" is parallel to "a sword is not a weapon," but the "Sophist" is treating the statement as parallel to "a sword is not a blade." Other interpretations have been put forward by Fung Yu-lan and Chad Hansen, among others.

This work has been viewed by some as a serious logical discourse, by others as a facetious work of sophistry, and finally by some as a combination of the two.

Other works

He was also responsible for several other essays (論 lùn, literally discourses, dialogues), as short as 300 characters.

• "On Pointing at Things" (指物論 Zhǐwù Lùn): An enigmatic discussion on reference and the referent, or designation and the designated.

• "On Understanding Change" (通變論 Tōngbiàn Lùn)

• "On Hardness and Whiteness" (堅白論 Jiānbái Lùn): based on the example of a stone that is both hard and white.

• "On Name and Substance" (名實論 Míngshí Lùn)

• "Storehouse of Traces" (跡府 Jifǔ)

主要成就

其主要著作為《公孫龍子》，西漢時共有14篇，唐代時分為三卷，北宋時遺失了8篇，到目前只殘留6篇，共一卷，保存在明代《道藏》中。該書流傳情況複雜，宋代以後有人懷疑它的真實性，認為今本《公孫龍子》是晉朝人根據零碎材料編纂起來的，在一定程度上失去了先秦《公孫龍子》的本來面目。《公孫龍子》第一章《跡府》描述其生平事跡。第二章《白馬論》提出「白馬非馬」，討論概念之間相等和包含的關係，和現代集合論思想有共通之處。第三章《指物論》提出「物莫非指」，討論現實世界和主觀概念的關係。第四章《通辯論》提出「雞足三」，第五章《堅白論》，提出「離堅白」，討論的是物體和物體的屬性的關係。第六《名實論》。

人物評價

諸子各家普遍認為公孫龍為詭辯，但似乎又無法在辯論中勝出。《公孫龍子》第一章《跡府》記載了孔子的後代孔穿企圖駁倒公孫龍但失敗的故事。《莊子·天下篇》稱公孫龍「飾人之心，易人之意，能勝人之口，不能服人之心」。《荀子·不苟篇》中認為君子不看重惠施等名家的辯才，因為其不符合禮。君子並不是無法反駁堅白離的觀點，而是不與之辯論。《荀子 正名篇》認為白馬非馬論是「此惑于用名以亂實者也」。《資治通鑑》中記載鄒衍認為公孫龍是「煩文以相假，飾辭以相敦，巧譬以相移，引人使不得及其意，如此害大道」，于是不和公孫龍辯論。

周昌忠《公孫龍子新論》把公孫龍的思想和西方哲學相比較，認為公孫龍「構造了一個相當豐富的關于語言本身的哲學理論」，並不比亞里士多德遜色。

張遠山在著作《寓言的密碼》中認為，公孫龍開創了中國的理性學派的先河。但諸子百家都未能理解他的觀點。

史書記載

• 高誘注《呂氏春秋》：謂龍為魏人，不知何據。

• 《淮南鴻烈解》稱，「公孫龍粲於辭而貿名」。

• 揚子《法言》稱，「公孫龍詭辭數萬」。蓋其持論雄贍，實足以聳動天下，故當時莊、列、荀卿並著其言，為學術之一。特品目稱謂之間，紛然不可數計，龍必欲一一核其真，而理究不足以相勝，故言愈辨而名實愈不可正。然其書出自先秦，義雖恢誕，而文頗博辨。

• 陳振孫《書錄解題》概以「淺陋迂僻」譏之，則又過矣。明鍾惺刻此書，改其名為《辨言》，妄誕不經。今仍從《漢志》，題為《公孫龍子》。

• 鄭樵《通志略》載此書，有陳嗣古注、賈士隱注各一卷，今俱失傳。此本之注。乃宋謝希深所撰。前有自序一篇。其注文義淺近。殊無可取。以原本所有。姑並錄焉。

• 據《史記‧仲尼弟子列傳》記載，另有孔子的弟子之一，也有一個叫公孫龍，字子石，比孔子小五十三歲。