Daoism picked up where Confucianism left off in terms of creating an ideal society. For the Confucian, morality and social order are the ultimate aims. For the Taoist, morality and social order are only side-effects of living according to the Tao, or the Way. Morality is not a set of prescribed behaviors but rather, is the natural by-product of living in harmony with the universe. Taoism has none of the specificity of Confucianism in its teachings and does not advise specific actions or institutions. The foundation of Daoism is a mystical philosophy outlined in texts like the Tao-te Ching, also unlike Confucianism which is determinately pragmatic. However, like Confucianism, Daoism is also replete with ritual. Taoist rituals are not of the social type, though, but rather, of the mystical variety. One of the sharpest philosophical differences between Taoism and Confucianism is the Daoist emphasis on non-interference, which is often misinterpreted as purposeless passivity. When Daoism is applied to government and politics, the philosophy would translate into international policies of non-interference, which should ideally eliminate cause for strife and war. Taoism does propose that the ideal leader is a sage, a wise person familiar with the Way who can instruct the less educated and ignorant and help all persons achieve personal and interpersonal harmony. Because of its insistence on passivity and gentleness and because of its avoidance of concrete rules, Daoism is inadequate for a complete political philosophy. However, for these same reasons, but also because of its respect for the paradoxes inherent in human existence and its ability to transcend the petty grievances of politics, Daoism is an ideal philosophy of life.

Of Confucianism, Daoism and Legalism, the latter is the least idealistic of the three great Chinese philosophies. Legalist thought holds a more pessimistic view of leadership...

According to the Legalist, no human being can be truly entrusted and sages are few and far between. In order to create a workable government, the legalist suggests subscription to the rule of law. The law is held above human leadership in terms of its efficacy in governing societies. However, legalism is as concerned with order as Confucianism is and the legalists propose a strong centralized government.
Legalism is a reaction against the hierarchical nature of Confucianism and the mystical nature of Daoism. Moreover, the legalists did not believe that sagacity or virtue were even possible qualities for a ruler. This realistic political philosophy can be easily transformed into a rigid tyrannical or dictatorial state in which a powerful central government imposes strict sets of arbitrary rules on its citizens. Punishments for disobedience are harsh, to make up for the innate evils in human nature. Legalism promotes a strong state that sets itself apart from its rivals and theoretically does not shy away from conflict or even war. Thus, legalism stands in sharp contrast to either Confucianism or Daoism, both of which advocate peaceful international and domestic relations. Legalism contributed the strong sense of nationalism and cultural pride inherent in Chinese society, but took a back seat to the tenets of Confucianism.

Confucianism, Daoism, and Legalism have each influenced the direction of Chinese history, and Chinese culture is a reaction to all three of these significant philosophies. None of these can be considered as superior to any other, but rather, each has specific applications and each can contribute to a comprehensive political philosophy.

Works Cited

De Bary, Wm. Theodore (Ed.) Sources of Chinese Tradition. Volume One. New York: Columbia, 1960.