Before the Spring and Autumn Period (771 –476 BC), laws were only applied to the people with lower social status. There were no written laws as to how to convict and deliver sentences. All depended on the will of the noble rulers. Therefore, the role of the law at that time was not apparent.

 In the Spring and Autumn Period and the Warring States Period (475–221 BC), some scholars began to emphasize the importance of laws in governing a country. This school of thought was called Legalism. At that time, various vassal states adopted the Legalist doctrine and reformed. The State of Qin was the latest to do so, but was the most thorough in its reform. This led to the development of a strong State of Qin which eventually unified all other major states in China.

Why was it that the Legalists thought made Qin strong, and not the other schools? Because the Legalists’ doctrine addressed the most realistic issue at that time. The biggest problem for the vassal states was the internal decentralization and the decline of power. The vassal kings could not effectively control the power within their state. The Legalists, however, emphasized that the power must be centralized by the central government. They proposed to use laws, influence and scheme to ensure that power was centralized in the hands of the king, and to prevent his subordinates from seizing power.

Among the key figures in Legalism, Shang Yang relied mainly on the laws, Shen Dao focused on the influence, and Shen Buhai advocated the scheme. Han Feizi in the 3rd century BC combined the views of the three, and became the most prominent Legalist, and the main power to counter Confucianism in the debate of whether to rule a country with rites or law.

The Confucians proposed to run a country with rites, and acknowledged that each member of the society has his own identity and social status. Due to such differences, they were assigned different rights and obligations. As a result, the noble class and the inferior class had their rites to follow; the old, the young, the king, the ministers, the father, and the son, all have their respective rites to follow. A social order is thus maintained.

However, the Legalists criticized such practice because they believed it would bring chaos to the society, as each person has many identities. Han Feizi provided a cruel example. In the Stale of Chu, a man accused his father of stealing sheep, and brought his father to the magistrate. How should the magistrate deal with the matter? On the one hand, the young man was loyal to the king and his country. On the other hand, he was not being a filial son. The magistrate ordered that the son be executed. Did he deserve to die? Han Feizi gave another example. A native in the State of Lu, when sending his time in the arm; in the battles led by the king, had always been a deserter on the battlefield. Confucius learnt about this and asked him why he did so. The deserter said his lather was in old age. If he died in a battle, his father would have no one to rely on. Confucius regarded him as a good example of a filial son, and even suggested the king of Lu to reward him. Should this deserter be rewarded? In the two examples given above, both men had dual identities. They were both a subject of the king, as well as a son to their father. When performing their duties, they could only choose one and abandon the other. Therefore, the Legalists considered it improper to rule a country on the basis of Confucian rites, which would bring chaos to the society. They’d rather rely on law for clear decisions.

The Confucians wanted to govern a country with rites, and believed in the power of moral education. They believed, if the rulers could set themselves as moral examples, just like the sage kings Yao and Shun, they could govern the country well with ease. Shun, for example, in order to solve the problem of farmers fighting for land in Lishan, went to Lishan to work as a farmer himself for one year. What he had done during that year had demonstrated his virtue and the farmers were all touched by him. They stopped fighting for land. Han Feizi criticized Shun for the low efficiency in governing the country. He said Shun could only solve a handful of problems, if he were to solve one problem in a year. Besides, wise leaders such as Yao and Shun were rare in the history. “If we had blind faith in following Yao and Shun, we’d experience chaos in our country. We must believe in laws and abandon the superstitions in the sages, and we’ll be able to bring a country in good governance.”

The Legalists held the view that rites represented a system in the past. Times had changed and new problems had arisen. If we still want to solve new problems by relying on rites, it would be as ridiculous as the man who carved a mark on the boat to indicate where his sword had dropped in the river, and when the boat was moored at the bank, he tried to find his sword based on the mark.