(1730–1797) Qīng scholar and official whose Mòzǐ zhù (1784) marks the beginning of the modern philological study of the Mòzǐ. Drawing on evidential scholarship and textual criticism, he was among the first scholars to confront the structural problems posed by the Mòjīng, including the relationship between the canons and their explanations. His arrangement of portions of the text in parallel rows (pángháng) anticipated later attempts to reconstruct the organisation of the Mòjīng and influenced subsequent scholars such as Sūn Yíràng.

‘The study of disputation’ or ‘argumentation studies’. A modern term emphasising techniques and theories of argument rather than naming or classification. Republican-period scholars often used it when comparing Chinese traditions with Western logic and Indian yinming. Compared with míngbiàn, it places greater emphasis on debate and reasoning; compared with míngxué, it excludes many broader discussions of names, realities, and knowledge. In the early twentieth century the boundaries between these terms were fluid, and individual scholars often used them differently.

Qīng scholar active in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries and author of Mòzǐ jiān (1906). Although little is known about his life, surviving evidence suggests that he was active in scholarly and publishing circles associated with the late-Qīng revival of interest in classical learning. His commentary belongs to the first generation of Mohist scholarship following Sūn Yíràng’s reconstruction of the Mòzǐ and forms part of the transition from Qīng philology to twentieth-century studies of Mohist logic. 

Chinese logician whose studies of Mohist logic helped consolidate the modern interpretation of the Mòjīng after the pioneering work of Shěn Yǒudǐng. His Mòbiàn luójíxué (1979) and Mòbiàn luójíxué xīntàn (1996) present the logical doctrines of the Mòjīng in a clear, systematic, and pedagogically accessible form, drawing together earlier textual and logical research into a coherent exposition. These works became standard introductions to Mohist logic and influenced a generation of later Chinese scholars, including Yáng Wǔjīn.

‘the defence chapters’, a group of chapters of the Mòzǐ devoted to city defence, siege warfare, logistics, and military engineering. Although often treated as technical manuals, they are also notable for their systematic approach to practical reasoning. The chapters analyse military problems through classification of threats, conditional response, information gathering, and coordinated action. Particularly striking is their treatment of the defended city as an information system in which survival depends on detecting hidden dangers, transmitting reliable signals, and integrating people, resources, and institutions into a coherent defensive order. They therefore provide some of the clearest examples in the Mòzǐ of reasoning embodied in procedure, organisation, and technical expertise rather than explicit philosophical argument.#text

‘Daoist Canon’, a collection of Daoist scriptures whose surviving Míng edition was first printed in 1445. The canon preserves the earliest extant complete text of the Mòzǐ, including the Mòjīng. Although the Mohist dialectical chapters continued to be transmitted, they were largely no longer understood, and their organisation and meaning became increasingly obscure. The preservation of the text in the Dàozàng nevertheless made possible the later rediscovery and reconstruction of the Mòjīng by Qīng and modern scholars.#text

‘Major Selection’, one of the six dialectical chapters traditionally grouped under the label Mòbiàn. Unlike the Jīng and Jīngshuō chapters, it consists largely of extended discussions and argumentative analyses rather than brief canons and explanations. The chapter has played an important role in modern debates concerning the structure and development of Mohist dialectics. Shěn Yǒudǐng, for example, regarded it as representing a distinct strand of Mohist thought from that found in the Jīng and Jīngshuō chapters.#text

 ‘Approaching Correctness’, the earliest surviving Chinese dictionary or glossary, traditionally associated with the late Zhōu or early Hàn period. Organised by semantic categories rather than graphic form, it became a foundational work of Chinese lexicography and philology. Later lexical works, including Guǎngyǎ, were often conceived as supplements or continuations of the Ěryǎ. It is frequently cited in the interpretation of classical vocabulary and technical terminology in early Chinese texts.#text

(1898–1940) Republican-period scholar and author of Mòxué yuánliú (Origins and Development of Mohism). One of the earliest twentieth-century attempts to reconstruct Mohism as a coherent intellectual tradition, the work traces the historical development of Mohist thought from Mòzǐ to the Later Mohists. Particularly notable is its treatment of Mohist epistemology and dialectics, including an extended discussion of the Mòjīng and its place within the history of Chinese logic.

 ‘Condemning Aggressive Warfare’: a triad of chapters of the Mòzǐ devoted to the criticism of offensive war. Rather than treating warfare as a matter of glory or prestige, the chapters evaluate it according to its human, economic, and political consequences. The Mohist strategy is comparative: aggressive warfare is judged by the same standards applied to ordinary acts of theft, robbery, and violence, and is found wanting on a far greater scale. The Fēi Gōng triad is especially notable for its systematic use of analogy, cost accounting, and evaluative consistency, making it one of the clearest examples of Mohist practical reasoning.

‘Rejecting Fatalism’: a triad of chapters that develops one of the most explicitly methodological arguments in the Mòzǐ. After presenting the famous sān biǎo  ‘three tests’ for evaluating doctrines, it applies them to fatalism, arguing that beliefs have social consequences and that doctrines which undermine effort, responsibility, and effective action are politically dangerous. The Fēi Mìng chapters are especially important for their concern with standards of evaluation and the practical effects of belief.

‘Rejecting the Rú’: a pair of chapters of the Mòzǐ, or perhaps a triad, of which only the final part survives. Rather than presenting a single doctrinal argument, the chapters bring together a range of earlier Mohist criticisms of the rú tradition, including objections to fatalism, elaborate ritual, music, and appeals to antiquity. Particularly striking is the claim that neither age nor tradition is sufficient to justify a practice. However the Fēi Rú chapter is assessed as polemic, it retains value as an example of Mohist criticism of authority, custom, and inherited belief.

 ‘Condemning Music’: a triad of chapters of the Mòzǐ, of which only the first survives. The central argument is concessive: music may be pleasurable, but pleasure alone does not justify its social cost. The chapters repeatedly compare music with useful artefacts and institutions, evaluating both according to the benefits they produce. They are therefore notable as early reflections on opportunity cost, public expenditure, and the distinction between private enjoyment and public utility.

(1895–1990) One of the most influential historians of Chinese philosophy. His two-volume Zhōngguó zhéxué shǐ helped establish the modern academic study of Chinese intellectual history and played an important role in shaping twentieth-century interpretations of Mohism, the School of Names, and the Mòjīng. His work helped situate Mohist dialectics within the broader history of Chinese philosophy and contributed to the emergence of Chinese logic as a modern field of study.