In the discussion of language, Zhuang Tzu often used the word "dispute" (±ç). Etymologically, "dispute" (±ç) is related to "differentiate" (±ç) , the middle part is "sword"(ÈÐ) and "to distinguish" (ÅÐ). The script shows that like a sword it cuts a thing in two. Therefore, in Zhuang Tzu’s Taoism, "to dispute"(±ç) implies "using language to distinguish or analyze". Like most philosophers in the times of Pre-Qin Dynasty, Zhuang Tzu also regarded language as an instrument classifying and differentiating reality in a systematic manner.

In those times, "language" was often replaced by "names" (Ãû) because language consists of "names" whose function is to signify worldly things and their conditions. To name a thing is to point out the difference between this thing and the others and to reveal its independent being. In Zhuang Tzu’s views, the problems involved were the signification of language and its impact on the sensi-bilities of human beings. Of the greatest concern was the dichotomy of language or conceptual dualism.

In accord with Zhuang Tzu’s Taoism, as soon as the world was classified and analyzed by the conceptual dualisms -- yes/no, good/evil, living/dead, beauty/ugliness, gaining/losing, success/failure, more/less, long/short, large/small, etc. -- using these names has subconsciously led to an immediate judgment of value re-garding the conduct of our own action. The results of this conceptual dualism are "preference" and "desire". Men always pursue the so-called "good" and reject "evil". On satisfying one’s desire one feels complacent, whereas failure generates desperation and anguish.

This process of "to prefer" and "to desire" is a vicious circle with conflicting emotions: "Joy and anger, sorrow and happiness, caution and remorse, come upon us by turns, with everchanging mood" (The Identity of Contraries). Human beings are controlled by these conceptual dualism. As Zhuang Tzu said: "In the struggle between peace and unrest, the friction between good and evil, much fire is evolved which consumes the inner harmony of man. But the mind is unable to resist fire. It is destroyed, and with it Tao comes to an end" (Contingencies).

Of all the kind of desires, Zhuang Tzu considered "the desire of morality" to be the most dangerous. Philosophers have always based themselves on the conceptual dualisms of good/evil, yes/no, true/false. Zhuang Tzu mocked these philosophers, saying that, "Subjectively, we are conscious of certain delimitations which are right/left, relationship/obligation, division/discrimination, emulation/contention. These are called the Eight Predicables" (The Identity of Contraries).

Especially, he criticized the teachings of Confucian. The central idea of Confucianism may be reduced to the concept "benevolence" (ÈÊ) which means "human beings" (ÈÊÕßÈËÒ²): it consists of humanity and corresponds with the rules of Heaven. The idea of "benevolence" was "etiquette" (Àñ) and "intellect" (ÖÇ) of course including "benevolence" itself. From these four virtues, Confucianists derived a complicated taxonomy of names, including "sincerity" (³Ï), "confidence" (ÐÅ), "loyalty" (ÖÒ) and "piety" (Т), etc. In the Confucian view the chaos of society is due to people lacking knowledge of these names or the knowledge being hidden by the forged names. As soon as the distinctions of benevolence/non-benevolence, etiquette/non-etiquette, intellect/non-intellect are demarcated society is in good working order. Therefore, Confucianists call for "reconfirming the names" (ÕýÃû).

However, in Zhuang Tzu’s views, if the distinctions of yes/no, good/evil are explicitly delineated, it is not necessary to emphasize "reconfirming names".

With reference to positive and negative, to that what is so and what is not so, . . . if the positive is really positive, it must necessarily be different from its negative: there is no room for argument. And if that which is so really is so, it must necessarily be different from that which is not so: there is no room for argument (The Identity of Contraries).

 

Because it is consistent with the rules of desires there occur desires if and only if the desired objects do not exist. Hence, the existence of desires shows a kind of lack or absence. If "benevolence" is the natural instinct of human beings according to Confucianism, it is not necessary to emphasize and promote these virtues. Zhuang Tzu concluded: "If the virtuous are honored, emulation will ensue. If knowledge be fostered, the result will be theft" (Keng Sang Chu). If these names once were promoted, people can struggle against each other for them so that the result of "reconfirming names: will be not order and life, but chaos and death.

Furthermore, Confucians regarded the system of names made by them as absolute criterions. It turns out, however, that in order to appeal to and model themselves on these names the believers even cruelly injure their own lives. Zhuang Tzu said: "He who disregards his reputation is not what a man should be. He who is not absolutely oblivious of his own existence can never be a ruler of men. Thus Hu Pu Hsieh, Wu Kuang, Poh I, Shu Ch’i, Chi Tzu, Hs` Yu, Chi T’o, and Shen Tu Ti, were the servants of rulers, and did the behests of others, not their own" (The Great Supreme).

In order to destroy the conceptual dichotomy, Zhuang Tzu first overturned the hierarchy of conflicting ideas. For example:

(1) The use of uselessness: from the craftsman’s point of view, the useless trees are useful (because it may avoid being cut down and lives on its own lifetime.) On contrary, the useful trees are useless (because it could not keep its own life).

(2) Rukh and Cicada.

(3) The lady Li Ji’s "crying first and laughing finally".

(4) A well-frog: the greatness of well-frog is the insignificance of the spirit of the river.

These examples are not only to show that these values are relative and limited by their contraries, but that all values are relative, unnecessary and forced on the nature of things by human beings. Therefore, to really know the nature of things or their internal structure we must understand the meaning of "the law of difference" (²îÊý): "If we say that a thing is great or small because it is relatively great or small, then there is nothing in all creation which is not great, nothing which is not small. To know that the universe is but as a tare-seed, and that the tip of a hair is a mountain, this is the expression of the law of difference" (Autumn Floods).

According to the law of difference conflicting ideas or contraries could be replaced by each other. The hierarchy of good/evil and high/low are among these contraries to be dismantled. On the face of it, in the hierarchy of conceptual dichotomy, the contraries could not be in harmony with each other. However, on a deeper level they are inter-dependent and supplement each other. Zhuang Tzu said: "But for these external beings I should not be. But for me, they would have no scope. So far we can go" (The Identity of Contraries). Furthermore,

If there was a beginning, then there was a time before that beginning. And a time before the time which was before the time of that beginning. If there is existence, there must have been non-existence. And if there was a time when nothing existed, then there must have been a time before that when even nothing did not exist. Suddenly, when nothing came into existence, could one really say whether it belonged to the category of existence or of non-existence?" (The Identity of Contraries).

 

In Zhuang Tzu’s part, the law of difference (²îÊý) is the internal structure of ideas, names and symbols.

The strategy that Zhuang Tzu used to destroy the dichotomy of language is also called "deconstructionism". Like Jacques Derrida, Zhuang Tzu started with the conceptual hierarchy, and showed that the so-called superior (Being, Life, Here, I, etc.) has always already implicated the inferior (Nothingness, Death, There, Thing, etc.) which is the presupposition for the former. Thus, Zhuang Tzu exposed the limits of dichotomy.

Note the correspondence between Zhuang Tzu’s law of difference and Derrida’s "difference". Both show the contraries are inter-dependent and mutually supplementary in reality. In the essay, "La Différance", Derrida compared the word "différance" with Freud’s "faciliation" (French, "frayage"), which was derived from the German word "bahnung". It implied "to open up a path" and reminds one of the "Tao" (path) whose literal meaning is "way" or "path". Etymologically it could be reduced to the Chinese hieroglyph " " (" " means "the head of human being"; " " means "the foot of human being"; " " means "way").

Similar to Zhuang Tzu, Derrida attempts to wrench the concept of "différence" from the classical scheme which would derive it from an originary presence. Derrida declares it an "undecidable", irreducible to the "either/or" logic of Western metaphysics. This logic was based on the logocentric practice of binary opposition and functioned according to three main principles: (1) the principle of identity (A is A); (2) the principle of non-contradiction (A cannot be non-A); and (3) the principle of the excluded middle (truth is either A or non-A). Derrida subverts this binary logic of either/or into a deconstructive logic of both/and -- or to be more exact, of neither/nor. In this manner, he deconstructs decidable concepts into undecidable traces which are never identical with themselves, but harbour meanings other than themselves. Thus they contradict themselves, differ from them-selves and operate under erasure. Derrida speaks of setting to work within the text of the history of philosophy "undecidable" terms which can

no longer be included within philosophical (binary) opposition, resisting and disorganizing it, without ever constituting a third term, without ever leaving room for a solution in the form of a speculative dialectics. Thus, the Pharmakon is neither remedy nor poison, neither good nor evil, neither speech nor writing . . . neither/nor, that is simultaneously either/or (Positions).