An Introduction to Gongsun Longzi (《公孙龙子》)

Author: Gongsun Long (c. 325–250 BCE), a prominent thinker of the School of Names (名家, Mingjia) in ancient China.

Overview:
The Gongsun Longzi is a foundational text of classical Chinese philosophy, primarily concerned with logic, semantics, and the relationship between language and reality. Composed during the Warring States period, it is renowned for its sophisticated paradoxes and analytical rigor.

Key Themes and Content:

• Logical Paradoxes: The text systematically explores conceptual distinctions, most famously in the “White Horse Dialogue” (《白马论》), which argues that “a white horse is not a horse”—a proposition challenging conventional categorization.
• Philosophy of Language: Gongsun Long examines how words correspond (or fail to correspond) to reality, emphasizing precision in naming and definition.
• Metaphysical Inquiry: The work interrogates the nature of identity, attributes, and universals, anticipating later developments in Chinese thought.

Structure and Survival:

• Only six chapters survive today, though historical records suggest a larger original corpus.
• Notable sections include “On Referring to Things” (《指物论》) and “On Hardness and Whiteness” (《坚白论》), which further develop his epistemological theories.

Legacy and Influence:

• A cornerstone of the School of Names, contributing to early Chinese logical thought.
• Though sometimes labeled a “sophist,” Gongsun Long’s work is more accurately understood as analytical philosophy focused on linguistic clarity.
• Later engaged by Daoist and Legalist traditions, particularly in debates about truth and governance.（I used to feel that the famous scholars were a group of sophists, but suddenly I felt that the theories of the famous scholars were worth studying.）

Significance:
The Gongsun Longzi remains a critical text for understanding pre-Qin epistemology and the intellectual diversity of classical China. Its paradoxes continue to provoke scholarly discussion, bridging Eastern and Western philosophical traditions in the study of logic.

Formal Addendum:
For further study, consult reconstructions of the text in A.C. Graham’s Later Mohist Logic (1978) or contemporary sinological analyses.