Conclusion
At the end it remains to point out the similarities and the differences in these three schools in relation to the above-elaborated subject.
According to the three schools the state except of underlying on ethical norms, it, also, directs itself according to the ontological principle. Confucianism firmly sticks to Book of Change where the different phenomena in the world have their role and function. Due to it, they are placed in constant relation to each other. Out of them, Heaven separates as supreme ruler and beginning of all. Because there are many phenomena in the world the relations between them become complex. The complexity by itself is not bad if it follows Heaven and its ordinance. Thus, in the state, these relations should be brought to harmony, which means complete ruling of Heaven with the state.
Taoism, again, speaks up exactly for the opposite of Confucianism. Tao acts spontaneously and because of that there are no complex relations developed between the things. Man should accept this simplicity and should not make his way into complex relations with other people. Therefore, in the state people should direct themselves according to simplicity, which would mean that Tao is perfectly practiced.
Moism holds the view that Heaven loves all things equally and by that makes unity with them. Man, as product of Heaven, should accept all-embracing love from it. That means that he should love all people equally and feel as one with all mankind. If this is done in the state that means that Heaven succeeds to practice the all-embracing love.
The three philosophical schools agree that perfect way of governing is monarchy. The ruler must be one, as the source of the world is one. For all of these schools the ruler is an image of the creator of the world. Through the ruler the ontological principle performs its function in the area of mankind. But, in this segment the three schools have the following differences:
Firstly, we can speak about difference between Confucianism and Moism together as opposed to Taoism. The first two maintain that the ruler receives his mandate from Heaven and they call him Son of Heaven. By that, the ruler is immediately responsible for his deeds before Heaven. The ruler, according to Taoism, does not receive mandate from Tao. He is just a man who has reached the highest wisdom to know the function of Tao. Knowing it, he just acts according to it, so there is no responsibility that he should take before Tao. Tao does not call upon any responsibility, while Heaven in Confucianism and Moism does.
Secondly, there is difference between Confucianism and Taoism on one hand, and Moism. Moism sees Heaven on a more religious way apart from Confucianism, in which Heaven rather represents cosmic principle (idea that emerges from Book of Chabge), and Taoism which, also, sees Tao as cosmic principle. Hence, according to Moism, the ruler should without reserve obey Heaven and receive orders from it. The ruler is just a mediator between Heaven and people. Although sometimes Confucianism shows signs of religiousness of Moist kind, yet it differs from it because it considers that receiving orders from Heaven is not the important moment in the ruling. The ruler has realized the laws and the relations that emerge from Heaven and with his ruling he tries to practice them, same as in Taoism the ruler has realized the laws and the relations that emerge from Tao and tries to practice them in his state.
Thirdly, what remains is to talk about the difference between Taoism and Moism on one hand and Confucianism on the other. In its ethical teachings Confucianism and Moism are big opponents. The former holds that from the closeness of the relations we have with people, our love towards them depends. For instance, I love my family the most, than my closer relatives, closer friends, more distant relatives etc. but, Moism maintains that all people should be loved equally no matter how close to us they are. These rules as such are prescribed by Heaven. Taoism, can be said that stands on the side of Moism because Tao in creating the world does not make differences between things and people. Thus, the Confucian ruler should develop relations of various types, while the Taoist and the Moist one are interested in one kind of relation, equal treatment of all people.
At the beginning we marked Chinese philosophy as more directed to practical than theoretical philosophy. But, as we can see, practical philosophy in China can not develop without the support of theoretical one. The philosophy in China starts with ontology (as the philosophy in ancient Greece starts with ontology, too), and it is a basis of further thinking in the field of practical philosophy.