力作者何——戰國思想中的身分與農業勞動

To Carry Out Physical Work: Discourse on Status and Agricultural Labor in Warring States China

本文析論戰國諸子如何論述農業勞動，尤其是農業勞動應由誰來承擔，以及為何這種構想有其正當性。本文認為，進入戰國時代，出現三個與農業勞動緊密相關的社會經濟變遷，包括舊有的身分秩序崩解、人民生計選項增加，以及國家對農業生產益發重視。戰國諸子論述農業勞動，便是在面對這些變化的同時，根據自身思想洞見進行發揮。大體而言，墨家一方面重視生產，另方面也認可不同社會身分，承認有些人得以免除農務。以孟子為代表的戰國中期儒家則承繼春秋時期的身分勞動觀，認為士階層的要務乃出仕從政，因而無須承擔農業勞動。孟子的這類觀點遭到道家與法家的批評。法家出於富國強兵的追求，極為重視農業勞動的生產價值，嘗試建立兵農合一、全民皆農的政權，並因此特別關注如何提升人們的勞動意願。在上述脈絡下，戰國晚期的荀子則透過禮，闡發一套不廢生產、妥善安排不同生業，又能塑造一個新身分秩序的農業勞動論述。這種綜合性論述，也見於《管子》的若干篇章。要言之，農業勞動論述不僅有助理解分工與身分觀念，對分析古代政治思想中的「民」以至各種理想秩序觀，也能帶來重要貢獻。

This article analyzes discourses on agricultural labor in Warring States China, especially views on who should undertake farming and justifications of such designs, arguing that three new socio-economic developments were closely related to the issue of agricultural labor, including the demise of the existing social hierarchy, the increase in livelihood options, and the growing attention of the state to agricultural production. Warring States discourses on agricultural labor thus entail how the individual thinker/text had responded to these developments via his/its intellectual insights. In short, the Mohists not only valued production, but also accepted the existence of different social statuses, among which some people could be justifiably relieved from agricultural labor. Moreover, inheriting the attitudes toward labor and status that prevailed in the Spring and Autumn period, Mencius in the mid-Warring States argued that shi士could shirk farming since their major task was to seek political posts and serve the state, a view which was, however, criticized by the Legalists and the Taoists. The Legalists aimed to strengthen the state and thereby emphasized the importance of production, attempting to build a regime in which every individual was expected to be both a farmer and a soldier; to this end, they focused on the elevation of people’s willingness to engage in agricultural labor. Responding to the above contexts, Xunzi in the late Warring States period used the concept of li禮(rite) to articulate a synthetic discourse, which can be found in certain chapters of Guanzi管子, on agricultural labor that not only paid sufficient attention to the issue of production but re-established a social hierarchy. The analysis of discourse on agricultural labor, therefore, may well help us to understand the notion of the division of tasks, the idea of status, the role of“the people”in Chinese political thought, and the varying visions of ideal order in early China.