Recognizing the existence of Chinese Logic

Abstract

Chad Hansen provocatively claimed that there was no such thing as Chinese Logic. To assess the significance or otherwise of this claim one must know what he means by Logic (i.e. what he is denying to classical Chinese culture), what the rhetorical force of such a claim might be, regardless of his intended meaning, and whether this might be misleading in the sense that one would be missing something important about classical Chinese culture by denying there is anything that could be called Chinese ‘logic’ (as would be the case if one denied that there is anything that can be called Chinese ‘mathematics’ just because one cannot find axioms, proofs and theorems). Our paper will treat each of these in turn, first looking at the basis of Chad Hansen’s claim, and in particular at what he means by Logic. Second, looking more broadly at the rhetorical force of such a claim, regardless of its intended meaning. And thirdly looking at what important features of Chinese ways of thinking and acting this might lead one to overlook. It is to counter the rhetorical force of Hansen’s claim that the title of this paper implies the counter claim that Chinese Logic exists.