Philosophy Atlas

How Thinkers Disagree
Sign In
Text size
100%
Theme
Work

Han Feizi

HAHN fay-DZUH
Political Philosophy

The collected writings of Han Fei, fifty-five chapters synthesizing earlier Legalist thinkers, Shang Yang on law, Shen Buhai on statecraft technique, and Shen Dao on positional power, into a single systematic argument that a ruler secures order through impersonal, publicly codified law and the strategic concealment of personal preference, not through personal virtue. It became the fullest philosophical statement of Legalism and is traditionally credited with shaping the administrative doctrine Qin used to unify China in 221 BCE.

Facts
Publication Year
250 BCE 1
Most of the text's fifty five chapters date to the Warring States period, mid third century BCE; -250 marks a representative point within that range, following the convention already used for Zhuangzi.
Original Language
Classical Chinese 2
Classification
Genre / Form
Essay 1
Tradition
Eastern 1
Connections

Authored By

Han Fei, Philosophers
Source Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy

In Branch

Source Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
In the Other Atlases
Sources
1. Han Feizi (Wikipedia)
Wikipedia
  • Lead section
    Its 55 chapters, most of which date to the Warring States period mid-3rd century BCE, are the only such text to survive fully intact.
  • Lead section, essays sentence
    It comprises a selection of essays in the Legalist tradition, elucidating theories of state power, and synthesizing the methodologies of his predecessors.
  • Lead section, ancient Chinese text sentence
    is an ancient Chinese text attributed to the Legalist political philosopher Han Fei.
View the Source
2. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
Stanford University, Center for the Study of Language and Information
  • SEP, "Han Feizi"
    Han Feizi is considered as philosophically and literally more engaging than the Book of Lord Shang, and it has been more widely studied in China, Japan, and in the West.
  • Authored By: Han Fei
  • In Branch: Political Philosophy
View the Source
Comments (0)
No comments yet. Be the first to share a thought.
Reader Challenges (0)
No disputes yet. Spotted an error or a better source? Open the first one.