Small wrongs, big wrongs

Introduction

非攻上, Against Aggression I, is the sharpest chapter in the book. Under five hundred characters; one reading and you remember it.

It begins with a man entering someone's orchard and stealing peaches and plums. Everyone who hears of it condemns him; the authorities punish him if they catch him. Why? Because he harmed another to benefit himself. Now step up: stealing a neighbor's dogs, chickens and pigs is worse than stealing fruit; entering the stable and leading off oxen and horses is worse still; killing an innocent person, stripping his clothes and taking his sword is worse again. Each level is more wrong than the last because it harms others more.

Then the turn: "In all these cases the gentlemen of the world know to condemn them and call them wrong. But when it comes to the greatest of all, attacking a state, they do not know to condemn it. They praise it and call it righteous." Everyone knows stealing a peach is wrong. Attacking a state, killing thousands and seizing land, is called righteousness.

Mozi's diagnosis: this is "not knowing the distinction between right and wrong" (不知义与不义之辩). He offers two analogies. A man who sees a little black and calls it black, but sees a lot of black and calls it white, does not know black from white. A man who tastes a little bitterness and calls it bitter, but tastes a lot and calls it sweet, does not know bitter from sweet. If small wrongs are condemned and great wrongs are praised, how can that be knowing right from wrong?

The chapter's power is that it says nothing about motives, national interest or just wars. It does one thing: it runs the same ruler from small to large. If the ruler is accurate on peaches, it should be accurate on states.

This chapter is also where the 非攻 Corps takes its name. The first step against aggression is not action. It is seeing clearly.

The three tests

This chapter leans hardest on the second test, evidence. The whole argument rests on "the gentlemen of the world all know to condemn it": everyone has seen and agrees that stealing a peach is wrong. Mozi uses that shared judgment as a lever to move the judgment that is not shared.

The third test is present too: each level of wrong is measured by "the more it harms others," the size of the harm.

Watch the key assumption: that attacking a state and stealing a peach are the same kind of wrong, differing only in size. An objector will say they are different kinds of thing. That objection deserves a serious hearing.

For families

• Children understand the peach story instantly. Afterwards ask: is stealing one peach or a hundred worse? Stealing one peach or hitting someone? Let the child rank them.
• Turn the black-and-white analogy into a game: show a little black and a lot of black, ask which is black. Then ask why someone might see a lot of black and say white.
• Watch one news story together and ask: if this happened between two people, what would we call it?

For chapters

• Reading: read the whole chapter aloud; it takes under five minutes. Then reread the passage "in all these cases the gentlemen of the world know to condemn them."
• Debate: ask each person for a contemporary peach-to-state example. The hard question is whether attacking a state and stealing a peach are really the same kind of wrong. Give the dissenters full time.
• Three-tests review: this chapter runs almost entirely on the second test. Ask: what if the judgment "everyone knows" is itself wrong? How do the three tests handle a crowd that is mistaken? Note the answer and return to it in week 17 with 非命上.