韓非子 Hanfeizi · Chapter 41
On Disputation
The Origin of Disputation
或問曰："辯安生乎？"
對曰："生於上之不明也。"
問者曰："上之不明因生辯也，何哉？"
Someone asked: "Where does disputation come from?"
The answer: "It comes from the ruler's lack of discernment."
The questioner said: "How does the ruler's lack of discernment give rise to disputation?"
Notes
This short chapter is a concentrated attack on the Warring States culture of philosophical debate. For Han Fei, disputation (辯) is not a sign of intellectual vitality but a symptom of political dysfunction.
In the Enlightened Ruler's State There Is No Disputation
對曰："明主之國，令者，言最貴者也；法者，事最適者也。言無二貴，法不兩適，故言行而不軌於法令者必禁。若其無法令而可以接詐、應變、生利、揣事者，上必采其言而責其實。言當，則有大利；不當，則有重罪。是以愚者畏罪而不敢言，智者無以訟。此所以無辯之故也。亂世則不然：主有令，而民以文學非之；官府有法，民以私行矯之。人主顧漸其法令而尊學者之智行，此世之所以多文學也。夫言行者，以功用為之的彀者也。夫砥礪殺矢而以妄發，其端未嘗不中秋毫也，然而不可謂善射者，無常儀的也。設五寸之的，引十步之遠，非羿、逢蒙不能必中者，有常儀的也。故有常，則羿、逢蒙以五寸的為巧；無常，則以妄發之中秋毫為拙。今聽言觀行，不以功用為之的彀，言雖至察，行雖至堅，則妄發之說也。是以亂世之聽言也，以難知為察，以博文為辯；其觀行也，以離群為賢，以犯上為抗。人主者說辯察之言，尊賢抗之行，故夫作法術之人，立取捨之行，別辭爭之論，而莫為之正。是以儒服、帶劍者眾，而耕戰之士寡；堅白、無厚之詞章，而憲令之法息。故曰：上不明，則辯生焉。
The answer: "In the state of an enlightened ruler, edicts are the most valued of all speech, and the law is the most fitting standard for all affairs. Speech has no second authority, and the law admits no competing standard. Therefore speech and conduct that do not conform to laws and edicts are invariably prohibited. If someone has something to say that is not covered by existing laws and edicts but can be used to counter deception, respond to contingencies, generate profit, or assess situations, the ruler will certainly adopt his words and hold him accountable for results. If his words prove correct, he receives great reward; if not, he receives severe punishment. Thus the foolish fear punishment and dare not speak, while the intelligent have nothing to dispute about. This is why there is no disputation.
In a chaotic age it is otherwise. The ruler issues edicts, and the people use literary learning to criticize them. The government has laws, and the people use private conduct to circumvent them. The ruler gradually abandons his laws and edicts and honors the wisdom and conduct of scholars -- this is why the age abounds in literary learning.
Speech and conduct require practical results as their target. If one sharpens arrows to a lethal edge and fires them randomly, the tips may well hit something as fine as an autumn hair -- yet this cannot be called good marksmanship, for there was no fixed target. Set up a five-inch target at a distance of ten paces, and none but Yi or Feng Meng can hit it with certainty -- because there is a fixed target. With a fixed standard, even Yi and Feng Meng find the five-inch target challenging. Without a fixed standard, hitting an autumn hair by random shooting is considered clumsy.
Now if we listen to speech and observe conduct without making practical results the target, then no matter how penetrating the speech or how resolute the conduct, it is the random-shooting school. Thus in a chaotic age, when listening to speech, they take what is difficult to understand as 'penetrating' and what is broadly learned as 'eloquent.' When observing conduct, they take separation from the crowd as 'worthy' and defiance of superiors as 'resolute.' The ruler is pleased by penetrating and eloquent speech and honors worthy and resolute conduct. Therefore those who construct systems of law and techniques, those who establish standards of acceptance and rejection, those who distinguish disputation and argument -- none of them can set the standard. As a result, those who wear Confucian robes and carry swords multiply, while farmers and soldiers dwindle. Treatises on 'hard and white' and 'having no thickness' flourish, while constitutional law withers. Therefore it is said: when the ruler lacks discernment, disputation arises."
Notes
Feng Meng (逢蒙) was a legendary archer and disciple of Yi (羿). According to tradition, he eventually murdered his master.
The references to 'hard and white' (堅白) and 'having no thickness' (無厚) are the logical paradoxes of the School of Names (名家), particularly associated with Gongsun Long and Hui Shi. Han Fei considers such abstract philosophical debate a harmful distraction from practical governance.
The archery metaphor is central to Han Fei's epistemology: knowledge is only meaningful when measured against a fixed, practical standard (的/target). Without such a standard, even brilliant reasoning is no better than random shooting.