In the White Horse Dialogue (白馬論, Báimǎ Lùn), one interlocutor (sometimes called the "sophist") defends the truth of the statement "White horses are not horses," while the other interlocutor (sometimes called the "objector") disputes the truth of this statement. This has been interpreted in a number of ways.
Possibly the simplest interpretation is to see it as based on a confusion of class and identity. The argument, by this interpretation, plays upon an ambiguity in Chinese (which happens to also exist in English). The expression "X is not Y" (X非Y) can mean either
- "X is not a member (or subset) of set Y"
- "X is not identical to Y"
"Whales are not fish" and "You are not a philosopher" are examples of the former use of "is not." An example of the second use of "is not" is "Jimmy Olsen is not Superman." Normally, in Chinese and English, it is clear from context which sense is intended, so we do not notice the ambiguity. So the sentence "White horses are not horses" would normally be taken to assert the obviously false claim that white horses are not part of the group of horses. However, the "sophist" in the White Horse Dialogue defends the statement under the interpretation, "White horses are not identical with horses." The latter statement is actually true, since (as the "sophist" in the dialogue explains) "horses" includes horses that are white, yellow, brown, etc., while "white horses" includes only white horses, and excludes the others. A.C. Graham proposed this interpretation and illustrated it with an analogy. The "Objector" assumes that "a white horse is not a horse" is parallel to "a sword is not a weapon," but the "Sophist" is treating the statement as parallel to "a sword is not a blade." Other interpretations have been put forward by Fung Yu-lan and Chad Hansen among others (ibid. pp. 82–3).
This work has been viewed by some as a serious logical discourse, by others as a facetious work of sophistry, and finally by some as a combination of the two.
Read more about this topic: Gongsun Long
Famous quotes containing the words white, horse and/or dialogue:
“Verily, the Indian has but a feeble hold on his bow now; but the curiosity of the white man is insatiable, and from the first he has been eager to witness this forest accomplishment. That elastic piece of wood with its feathered dart, so sure to be unstrung by contact with civilization, will serve for the type, the coat-of-arms of the savage. Alas for the Hunter Race! the white man has driven off their game, and substituted a cent in its place.”
—Henry David Thoreau (1817–1862)
“We read that the traveller asked the boy if the swamp before him had a hard bottom. The boy replied that it had. But presently the traveller’s horse sank in up to the girths, and he observed to the boy, “I thought you said that this bog had a hard bottom.” “So it has,” answered the latter, “but you have not got half way to it yet.” So it is with the bogs and quicksands of society; but he is an old boy that knows it.”
—Henry David Thoreau (1817–1862)
“You hear a lot of dialogue on the death of the American family. Families aren’t dying. They’re merging into big conglomerates.”
—Erma Bombeck (b. 1927)