In the world's debates there are three excellencies and five
points of superiority, but language as such is relegated to an
inferior place.[2]
Disputants distinguish different categories to
prevent their interfering with one another. They (arrange in
succession =) keep separate incompatible doctrines to prevent
their mutual contradiction. They put forth their intentions and
display their meanings,[3]
making plain[4]
what they mean so as to
let others partake in understanding. They do not devote themselves
to confusing one another. Under these conditions the
winner[5]
does not lose what he should preserve, while the one who
does not win gets what he seeks. [Conducted] in this way, debating
is worthwhile.[6]
But, while involved diction to falsify [the argument], decorated
words to pervert it, numerous metaphors to shift it, raising the
voice so that it is impossible to attain to [understanding][7]
may
be convenient to the argument, still harm results from these.[8]
Now not explaining one's point so that it is not known is called
obscurantism, and excluding meaning and excluding yourself
[9]
(?)
is called evasion. In approaching an honest man, to take advantage
of his slips is called shiftiness. In pointing out connections,
to use misleading words is called wrong. These four are not
practiced [by the superior man],
[10]
and as a result the truth is made
apparent to everybody. Now if arguments and disputes can be
brought to an end only
[11]
by obscurantism, evasion, perversion,
and wrong, they cannot but injure a person as a superior man,
and so the superior man does not practice [the like]. The
Lun yü
says,
[12]
"What the superior requires, is just that in his words there
may be nothing incorrect."
The Ode says,[13]
Do not speak lightly—your words are your own;
Do not say, `This is of little importance.'