Fǎ-Jiā (法家) or Legalism is one of the six classical schools of thought in Chinese philosophy that developed during the Warring States period. Grouping thinkers with an overriding concern for political reform, the Fa-Jia were crucial in laying the "intellectual and ideological foundations of the traditional Chinese bureaucratic empire",[4] remaining highly influential in administration, policy and legal practice in China today.[5] Largely ignoring morality or questions on how a society ideally should function, they examined contemporary government, emphasizing a realistic consolidation of the wealth and power of autocrat and state, with the goal of achieving increased order, security and stability.[6]
In Imperial China, almost all activities considered by law were linked with a punishment, reinforcing the view of its concerns as being largely criminal.[59] This, however, is incorrect.[60] Contrary to the legal positivism (to which "Chinese Legalism" has sometimes been compared) of figures like John Austin in the west, Han Fei considers punishment and reward resources of, and not the essence of law, or Fa, which might more properly be understood as yardstick,[50] largely focusing on performance.[61] An interpretation of Shang Yang, so-called "Legalists" were concerned not even mainly with law, but with administration;[14][62] although the Han Feizi has implications for the work of judges, it "contains no explicit judicial theory",[63] and is motivated "almost totally from the ruler's point of view."[64]
The Fa-Jia emphasized the importance of Fa,[65] which the appendix to the Book of Changes defines as "to institute something so that we can use it." Part of any institutional structure or process,[66] Fa's basic meanings are "method" and "standard",[67] and are much broader than "law",[14] including rules, measures, codified books,[68] models, technique, or regulation, often implying two or more at the same time.[60]
Historiographer Sima Tan's commonly cited criteria held that the Fa-Jia ignored differences and disregarded kinship, evaluating everyone equally according to Fa, saying that they "are strict and have little kindness, but their alignment of the divisions between lord and subject, superior and inferior, cannot be improved upon... Fajia does not distinguish between kin and stranger or differentiate between noble and base; all are judged as one."[69] This equal treatment may be considered a "Fa-Jia" value, akin to Aristotle's value of freedom,[70] but was intended to support the position, prerogatives and policies of the prince,[71] though by definition Fa is never merely his will.[72]
