Grok

An Evaluation of the Chen Jingyuan Case Based on Core Ideas in Mohist Philosophy from the Hundred Schools of Thought

Mohism (Mojia), founded by Mozi (c. 470-391 BCE) during the Warring States period, is a utilitarian and egalitarian philosophy among the “Hundred Schools of Thought” (Zhuzi Baijia), advocating jian ai (impartial concern or universal love) to promote collective welfare, meritocracy (shang xian, elevating the worthy) over hereditary privilege, and anti-war frugality to maximize benefit (li) for all. In the Mozi, Mohists critiqued Confucian ritual excess and Legalist coercion, proposing standardized governance, economic efficiency, and defensive strength as paths to harmony, judging actions by their consequential impact on the people’s prosperity. The Chen Jingyuan case—a doctoral scholar sentenced to 20 months for “picking quarrels and provoking trouble” (PRC Criminal Law Article 293) over Twitter forwards—through the Mohist lens, exemplifies a failure of impartiality and merit: selective punishment undermines universal benefit, devaluing scholarly worthiness and squandering collective li, fostering disharmony rather than prosperity.

1. Impartial Concern (Jian Ai): Selective Enforcement Violates Universal Benefit

Mohism’s jian ai demands equal concern for all, without favoritism, to foster social harmony and prevent conflict, as “partiality leads to disorder” (Mozi, Ch. 16).

The verdict flouts this: Chen’s forwards (e.g., Hayek critiques or the “Trump-kneeling Xi” cartoon) are punished as “disruptive,” yet millions of similar shares go unheeded, exemplifying partiality that harms collective li. The prosecutor’s unverified admission (no fact-checks) prioritizes state “order” over impartial inquiry, breeding resentment among the worthy—Mohists would decry this as wasteful: punishing one scholar’s universal concern (academic sharing) disrupts broader welfare, inverting jian ai’s ethic. Without equality, harmony fractures, as Mozi warned: “Love others as self, and the world will be at peace.”

2. Elevating the Worthy (Shang Xian): Judicial Bias Devalues Scholarly Merit

Mohists championed meritocracy: rulers must promote the competent regardless of birth, as “the worthy are the state’s treasure” (Mozi, Ch. 8), ensuring efficient governance.

Chen, a doctoral scholar of merit, embodies this: his prison letter’s taxonomy (art/emotion/reason/fact) and avalanche theory demonstrate competence in inquiry, yet the “high education implies discernment” presumption twists worthiness into liability, devaluing his contributions. The closed-door trial and barred defense ignore Mohist standardization—uniform elevation of talent—favoring opaque “upper-level instructions” over merit. This bias squanders li: suppressing a worthy intellect hampers innovation, as Mozi critiqued aristocrats: “Using the unworthy wastes the people’s strength.” The case thus perverts shang xian, elevating coercion over competence.

3. Utilitarian Maximization of Benefit (Li): Coercive Sentence as Wasteful Anti-Harmony

Mohism’s consequentialism judges actions by net benefit: frugality and efficiency promote prosperity, condemning wasteful aggression (fei gong, non-attack).

The 20-month sentence fails this test: no evidence of “disorder” (zero ripple from <100 retweets) means wasted resources—imprisoning a productive scholar yields negative li, fostering fear over harmony. The non-oral appeal and evidentiary voids exemplify extravagance: Mohists would condemn this as inefficient, like offensive wars draining the state (Mozi, Ch. 11). Selective enforcement compounds waste: partial application erodes trust, diminishing collective welfare. Mozi’s ethic demands utility—here, the case’s “order” is illusory gain, true loss in alienated talent.

Conclusion: The Mohist Lens on the Case—Partiality and Waste Undermining Universal Harmony

From Mohist philosophy in the Hundred Schools, the Chen Jingyuan case is a cautionary inversion: impartiality yields to favoritism, merit to bias, and benefit to waste, fracturing the people’s prosperity. As of October 22, 2025, no retrial or exoneration has occurred; Chen’s account remains dormant, its silence a Mohist plea for efficiency. This case cautions: true strength lies in elevating all for collective li—neglect it, and harmony dissolves. As Mozi urged, “Benefit the world through impartial love”—may the state heed the worthy.