Mohism

**Mohism** is a philosophy that came
into existence alongside confucianism, and has some similar concepts.
Unfortunately, it fell out of popularity, and more or less ceased to
exist around when BC switched to AD, and so not known of by many.
Before then it was close to equally as popular, though less for the
philosophy itself, and more because the advocates were so useful due
to other services they performed. And some aspects of it moved to
other philosophies, and the rest were just seen as too abstract for
people to practice, and so died out.

Mohism is interesting in that it
corresponds very closely with smt's law alignment. However, its not clear if this was intentional. It was also seen as super
advanced for its time, something that with a few adjustments could
actually make a totally reasonable philosophy today. Understanding
what mohism is, and what it is that chinese and eastern society in
general isn't, leading to mohism dying out can explain why the games
associate the east more veering towards chaos even though in practice
people now often consider the west more individualistic. (And in the
end its just because that's how it ended up.)

## Gods

**Tian**. Like the Confucians, they saw heaven as the highest god. But unlike
the confucians who saw it as an abstract spiritual essence, they saw
it as more of an actual being. It had thoughts, although they were
abstract self reflective ones, and it did not communicate directly
with earth. Mohists used heaven as a form of ideal observer theory.
They wanted to try to use logic and impartial stances to reach a
universal ethic that transcended culture. And for this they argued
that such a thing would exist in the mind of heaven. Since heaven
covers the entire world, and looks upon all people equally, they were
led to an ethic that was agent neutral, where your relation and good
things you do to everyone was equal, without preference to people
closer to you. This enraged confucians who thought your moral
concerns were focused on your social relations.

This description of
heaven actually calls to mind IV. Since god is treated like an
abstract thing that different angels disagree on what it wants. And
even in the ending is more treated like an abstract mind that just
reflects on the state of the world. And one which was happy to see
that there was finally unending peace, with everyone attached to one
standard and working for the community at large. The term tian also shows up directly in dsj, in the title of the new final area, with tian being the term they translated to empyrean in english for empyrean ascent. What exactly it is meant to be is ambiguous, due to not looking like a heavenly area however. Despite being the place that some law aligned figures are residing. So regardless the concept of tian is still being associated loosely with law. Note that mohist ethics are actually consequentialist like law, though this parallel may not be intentional.

For this reason they saw the
confucian's idea that morality depends on culture in some sense as
relativistic and bizarre, and would lead to privileging one's own
culture over others. And they wanted to create one universal standard
that all cultures would have to appeal to for legitimacy, and then
have the entire world adapt it and get on the same page. This lack of
focus on individuality in favor of focus on uniformity and getting
people to unify is definitely law in tone.

They even have a creation story, though
it was often meant metaphorically. In a prior archaic state, at the
beginning of time people were born and lived on earth and all had
different ideas and standards and cultures, and so went to
war But a son
of heaven came to earth to unite them and teach them one standard so
they would all get along, and there was peace. But he only did this
in a limited way, and it was up to people in the present to recreate
this standard, and this time spread it across the whole world in a
way that would not be undone.
Calling to mind law's goal of a peaceful state that is unending.

## Ethics

Ethics. They have ten precepts,
divided into five pairs.

**1: Elevating the worthy** and
**inspiration from upwards**. Again this was a simple explanation of
meritocracy, and idea that the worthy and virtuous should be put in
higher positions for those lower down to learn from. This idea exists
in confucianism too, so doesn't need to be gone over again. In this
case however, the difference is that they were implying that the has
to be done in a way that would help ultimately create one standard,
that should then be spread across the world. And so the virtuous have
to be the icons for this standard, for other people to take
inspiration from. The importance of a single standard to prevent
strife from competition was stressed.

**2: Inclusive care,** and **rejecting aggression**. The first of these means that morals have to bedone
impartially. Everyone on earth deserves equal consideration in your
moral estimations. This was actually seen as obscene by the people at
the time, including confucians who in their role ethics insisted that
you literally owed things only to specific people you were in
relations with. They called mohists cold and
inhuman, implying that having
equal consideration for all people means that you don't even have
closer relations with your own parents, or special duties to family.
In practice mohists did say that since you lived with your family and
not strangers that they were the ones who you should help more. But
that this was not because you had special duties to them, only out of
a sense of pragmatism.

Rejecting aggression means intense
pacifism. The ultimate goal is world
peace, not only the prevention of
all wars, but even interpersonal strife. At a time when war was just
viewed as an everyday reality that people would do, they said it was
wasteful and ridiculous, and should never be done in aggression,
although one could defend themselves if necessary. With the final
goal being ultimate world piece. Likewise, this logic was extended to
smaller scale conflict as well, something they hoped to erase all of
once people were on the same page and had peaceful mentalities.

**3: Thrift in utilization** and
**thrift in funerals**. Basically this meant that everything done
needed to be done for maximum efficiency. They saw wasted resources
as a grave evil, and likewise the extravagant lives of the rich as
something unacceptable while poor people suffered. The rich should
learn not to waste their resources on themselves, and relocate them
to a more efficient place for them, such as anywhere where people
were impoverished or starving. And that intense calculation should be
done in a cold impartial way to determine where was in most need of
the resources. Note that even though the meritocracy would exist,
this meant that they were saying that those higher in rank would not
be getting much better lives as a result. Mostly just more
responsibilities. Thrift in funerals was basically them saying that
dead people aren't alive to care about their funeral. And so
expensive funerals are a waste that has no purpose. It was a focusing
in one one form of inefficient expenditure, saying that rich people
would waste resources on themselves even in ways they don't benefit.
Pointing out just how unnecessary it was. Obviously this calls to
mind law's intense focus on humility as well as the fact that when
the angels came back to mikado they literally told the rich that this
was going to happen.

**4: Heaven's intention** and
**elucidating ghosts.** Heaven's intention was the standard used to
justify the universal system that society must be built on in
general. A derivation from the impartial will of heaven. Heaven being impartial due to existing over all beings equally. Ghosts were
seen as existing and would punish the wicked. So belief in them was
seen as necessary to keep people from thinking wickedness would go
unseen. Note that although they thought ghosts literally existed,
they were also making a pragmatic argument that either way, the idea
of them had utility. So its not only morals like laws, but tied to
the religious elements of it. Note that this justification for its ethics sounds similar to ancient of days in iva talking about how the dispensation of the universe is collective. Implying a universal vision.

**5: rejecting music** and **rejecting fatalism**. Rejecting music
seems like an odd phrase, but in this context it meant rich people
putting all their money in to things like expensive musicians and
things for themselves at times when the poor were starving. Mohists
saw these things as wasteful expenditures that were not worth the
cost, and which could be focused on once the main problems were
solved, but only then. And outside of that, any music or art could be
done, but should be done more cheaply, so as not to waste money or
resources. Rejecting fatalism simply means that people should not
think that nothing they do matters, since this attitude would cause
them to not try harder, thus lowering utility.

So all in all, they were heavily
focused on the goal of protecting everyone through the movement
towards the creation of a system which would be self regulating,
erase strife through unity, and ultimately be set up so well that it
would never collapse. A negative here being that this meant that they
saw conformity to the universal system as a new virtue that would
have to be instilled. Which is of course a complaint of the law paths
in most games. Do they go overboard with the pressure to get people
into a unified self regulating society? Mohists often worked on ways
to ensure that there were balances to account for when incorrect
systems
existed,
and how to make sure you weren't accidentally propagating a non ideal
one.

**Mohist consequentialism** is the term
for their system as a whole. This is not only the oldest form of
consequentialism in history, a new explicitly defined one would not
exist again for 2000 years. And consequentialism now stands as one of
the two main moral theories. (Or three if you count virtue ethics in
third place.) Unlike modern utiltiarianism, the focus is not on
addition of individual utilities, but rather direct proportion to a
few standards. These being.

**1: Order.** The "order" of
Mohist consequentialism refers to Mozi's stance against warfare and
harm or violence, which he viewed as pointless and a threat to social
stability. It also refers to unity, and society interacting without
strife or difference. He saw people being on the same page as
necessary to prevent strife. And that this focus should be for each
of them on the community as a whole. An overt horizontal collectivist
system.

**2: Material wealth.** The "material
wealth" of Mohist consequentialism refers first to basic needs
like shelter and clothing. But to actual enhanced wealth once
everyone in society is taken care of.

**3: Increase in population.** During
Mozi's era, war and famines were common, and population growth was
seen as a moral necessity for a harmonious society, due to villages
literally often dying out without it. But this ironically also has
the added note that total utilitarians note today that utility is
raised overall if more people exist to experience happiness. And so
an optimum population size in balance with the environment and
society are seen as part of maximum benefit.

Note that he did not consider morality
to be directly based on sums of individual happiness. But one step
removed. As a collective, morality was focused on contribution to the
community as a whole, raising living conditions. Something he saw as
a thing that if it was done would raise overall happiness and thus
was good. And he morality of all actions was based on the results in
terms of this utility rather than duties to any particular person.

## Afterlife

**Afterlife**. One final point to note
is their beliefs on afterlife. They didn't really believe in any
other realm one goes to after death. When talking about ghosts they
described them as living on or above earth, though hidden from
humans. And same for gods. They saw this belief as helping people
focus on this life, and the threat of punishment from ghosts for lack
of virtue as helping them focus on morality rather than being lax.