Divinity Atlas

Sacred Correspondences
Sources

Legalism in Chinese Philosophy (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy entry)

Citation Formats

General Reference

APA Style

BibTeX

This is Yuri Pines's Legalism in Chinese Philosophy entry in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, first published 10 December 2014 and substantively revised 7 April 2023, maintained by the Metaphysics Research Lab at Stanford University. As a peer-reviewed, continuously revised scholarly reference by a specialist in early Chinese statecraft thought it covers the Legalist tradition associated with figures such as Han Feizi and Shang Yang and its emphasis on law, statecraft and political control. Its strength is that Stanford Encyclopedia entries are written and periodically revised by recognized specialists under editorial oversight. Its limit is that it surveys the tradition broadly across multiple thinkers, so a claim needing close analysis of one Legalist figure's own text needs a source addressing that text directly.

Facts
Assessment
Reliability Tier
2
Written by Yuri Pines, a specialist in early Chinese statecraft thought, for the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, a signed, peer reviewed and continually revised specialist reference maintained by the Metaphysics Research Lab at Stanford University; a synthesizing survey entry rather than a full monograph, hence the middle tier.
Notes
First published 2014-12-10; substantive revision 2023-04-07. Verified live 2026-08-06.
Citation
Author
Yuri Pines
Publisher
Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University
Publication Year
2014
URL
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/chinese-legalism/
Source Type
reference
Claims Backed By This Source (32 claims)

This source backs 32 claims across the atlas. As facts: 25 well-attested. As cited relationships: 1 holds, 1 connected, 2 critiqued Here. Plus 3 entities citing it as a general reference with no single fact or relationship attached.

Disposition By Topic

  • Articles, 11 claims: 9 well-attested, 1 connected, 1 general references.
  • Philosophical Schools, 10 claims: 7 well-attested, 2 critiqued Here, 1 general references.
  • Sources, 8 claims: 8 well-attested.
  • Historical Periods, 3 claims: 1 well-attested, 1 holds, 1 general references.
Comments (0)
No comments yet. Be the first to share a thought.
Reader Challenges (0 open reader challenges)
No disputes yet. Spotted an error or a better source? Open the first one.

View At A Past Year

The atlas records no dated fact of its own for this entry, so there is no other year to choose.