What's the best way to fight corruption: harsh laws and fear of punishment or rituals and moral transformation? In this episode we discuss a deep disagreement that takes its inspiration from the political philosophies of the Confucian philosopher Xunzi and the Legalist philosopher Han Feizi. We are also happily joined by Professor Daniel Bell of the University of Hong Kong, one of the world's leading experts in Chinese political thought. Bell reimagines the views of Xunzi and Han Feizi in his book Why Ancient Chinese Political Thought Matters: Four Dialogues on Chinese Past, Present, and Future. There he stages he stages the debate as a dialogue between a modern-day Professor Xun and his student Han Fei, set against the backdrop of the recent anti-corruption campaign in the People's Republic of China. The conversation ranges from the psychology of rewards and punishments to meritocracy, institutional design, the question of whether good governance can ever be decoupled from good character, and whether Confucians might be the true realists after all.

Want to skip to the episode's primary philosophical issue? Go to

• 11:54 Preface to today's topic
• 15:00 Confucian vs. Legalist methods of governance

Daniel Bell's professional page

Bell's book, Why Ancient Chinese Political Thought Matters: Four Dialogues...

Many thanks to The Hong Kong Ethics Lab for sponsoring this podcast series.

Want to continue the discussion? Need links to some of the sources mentioned? Go to the support page for this episode on Warp, Weft, and Way.

We thank Lena Li (LI La 李拉) for her expert editing and sound engineering.

Co-hosts:
Richard Kim's website
Justin Tiwald's website

When you hear sad music and feel some sadness in response, is that because the music has successfully carried the sadness of the musician to you as the listener? Or is it better to say that the sadness is in you, released by the music but not "carried" by it? In this show (our second with a live audience), we discuss the music theory of the third-century philosopher Ji Kang 嵆康 (223–262 CE), who argued against the "carrier" view of music and for a more complicated and pluralistic account of the emotional contents of music. We also discuss Ji Kang's interpretation of a famously evocative and mysterious passage in the Zhuangzi, regarding the "piping of Heaven." To guide us in discussing these issues, we lean heavily on our guest, Meilin Chinn of Santa Clara University, a leading expert on the philosophy of music in China.

Want to skip to the episode's primary philosophical issue? Go to

• 2:14 Preface to today's topic
• 6:50 Ji Kang on music

Many thanks to The Hong Kong Ethics Lab for sponsoring this podcast series.

Want to continue the discussion? Need links to some of the sources mentioned? Go to the support page for this episode on Warp, Weft, and Way.

We thank Lena Li (LI La 李拉) for her expert editing and sound engineering. We also thank the blog Warp, Weft & Way for hosting the discussion for this episode.

Co-hosts:
Richard Kim's website
Justin Tiwald's website

Is music an extravagance in a world of scarcity or a necessary expression of our humanity? We explore Mozi’s consequentialist condemnation of elaborate musical performances and Xunzi’s argument that music, proper guided, plays a critical role in taming unruly emotions and building social bonds. Beneath the disagreement lies a profound clash over basic human goods, how emotion should be shaped, and whether the arts are dispensable or essential to human flourishing.

Many thanks to The Hong Kong Ethics Lab for sponsoring this podcast series.

Want to continue the discussion? Need links to some of the sources mentioned? Go to the support page for this episode on Warp, Weft, and Way.

We thank Lena Li (LI La 李拉 ) for her expert editing and sound engineering. We also thank the blog Warp, Weft & Way for hosting the discussion for this episode.

Co-hosts:
Richard Kim's website
Justin Tiwald's website

In this episode, we explore Zhu Xi’s striking account of how to read philosophical and other important texts with what he calls “reverential attention.” Blending close reading with reflections on learning, character, and distraction in modern life, we discuss how Zhu Xi tries to make reading simultaneously transformative and objective. The discussion raises a fascinating puzzle at the heart of Zhu’s approach: how can we personalize our reading so that it shapes us, while also preventing our own biases from distorting the text?

Many thanks to The Hong Kong Ethics Lab for sponsoring this podcast series.

Want to continue the discussion? Need links to some of the sources mentioned? Go to the support page for this episode on Warp, Weft, and Way.

We thank Lena Li (LI La 李拉 ) for her expert editing and sound engineering. We also thank the blog Warp, Weft & Way for hosting the discussion for this episode.

Co-hosts:
Richard Kim's website
Justin Tiwald's website

Early in Chinese history, a number of political thinkers developed sophisticated arguments for relying on consistent application of laws rather than the personal discretion of political authorities to govern the state. In this episode, we explore the arguments of one of the early pioneers of this way of thinking, Shen Dao 慎到 (c. 350-275 BCE). We are joined by a leading expert on Shen Dao and Chinese Legalism, Eirik Lang Harris.

Want to skip to the episode's primary philosophical issue? Go to

• 7:39: Preface on Chinese Legalism, or
• 15:13: Part II: Shen Dao on Law

Many thanks to The Hong Kong Ethics Lab for sponsoring this podcast series.

Want to continue the discussion? Need links to some of the sources mentioned? Go to the support page for this episode on Warp, Weft, and Way.

We thank Lena Li (LI La 李拉) for her expert editing and sound engineering. We also thank the blog Warp, Weft & Way for hosting the discussion for this episode.

Co-hosts:
Richard Kim's website
Justin Tiwald's website

In this episode, we continue our exploration of Mohist impartial caring (jian'ai 兼愛) by examining two of Mencius’s most influential objections: (1) the “Without a Father” Argument (Mencius 3B9) and (2) the “Two Roots” Argument (Mencius 3A5).

Along the way, we take up some important questions: Should moral values be impartial even between family members and total strangers? Is radical impartiality incompatible with being human? And should ethics be grounded in rational doctrine or in human nature?

Many thanks to The Hong Kong Ethics Lab for sponsoring this podcast series.

Want to continue the discussion? Need links to some of the sources mentioned? Go to the support page for this episode on Warp, Weft, and Way.

We thank Lena Li (LI La 李拉 ) for her expert editing and sound engineering. We also thank the blog Warp, Weft & Way for hosting the discussion for this episode.

Co-hosts:
Richard Kim's website
Justin Tiwald's website

This episode examines the Mohist doctrine of impartial caring (jian'ai) via two arguments in the Mozi -- the Caretaker Argument and the Filial Piety Argument. We examine the arguments' logical structure, psychological plausibility, and practical applicability. We also discuss the importance of reciprocity, and competing interpretations of "impartial caring," from the less demanding don't-harm-anyone interpretation to stronger equal-concern readings, setting them against the Confucian model of care with distinctions (graded love). We also consider what genuine filiality requires and how different moral frameworks shape familial and social practices.

Many thanks to The Hong Kong Ethics Lab for sponsoring this podcast series.

Want to continue the discussion? Need links to some of the sources mentioned? Go to the support page for this episode on Warp, Weft, and Way.

We thank Lena Li (LI La 李拉 ) for her expert editing and sound engineering. We also thank the blog Warp, Weft & Way for hosting the discussion for this episode.

Want to skip to the philosophical content?

4:01 Preface to today's topic: arguments for impartial caring (jian'ai 兼愛)

Co-hosts:
Richard Kim's website
Justin Tiwald's website

According to a speaker in a famous historical dialogue, "A white horse is not a horse." In this episode, we’re joined by Dr. Lisa Indraccolo (Associate Professor, Tallinn University) to unpack one of the most intriguing discourses in early Chinese philosophy—the White Horse Dialogue from the Gongsun Longzi. Together, we explore what this paradoxical statement reveals about language, logic, and categorization in early China, from the connection between words and reality to the ways that set theory, semantics, and metaphysics might be used to help us understand this fascinating text.

Lisa Indraccolo's professional website.

Many thanks to The Hong Kong Ethics Lab for sponsoring this podcast series.

Want to continue the discussion? Need links to some of the sources mentioned? Go to the support page for this episode on Warp, Weft, and Way.

We thank Lena Li (LI La 李拉 ) for her expert editing and sound engineering. We also thank the blog Warp, Weft & Way for hosting the discussion for this episode.

Co-hosts:
Richard Kim's website
Justin Tiwald's website