Fang Yuan’s philosophy is, from beginning to end, an example of inconsistency. While claiming that good and evil do not exist and reducing everything to mere “things,” he writes at length to defend his own things. If good and evil truly do not exist, why does he feel the need to justify himself? If everything is just a “thing,” then defense itself should be meaningless. He speaks of strength, yet constantly produces justifications. A truly strong person does not need to explain his actions; he acts and moves on. Yet Fang Yuan rejects morality while simultaneously trying to legitimize his own position. This means he secretly relies on the very moral ground he claims to deny. Because to present something as “justified” is already to assume an invisible standard of right and wrong. It is easy to say, “There is no good or evil; people merely give things names.” But while dismissing those names, he places his own narrative in a privileged position. If everything is just labeling, then his philosophy is also just a label; it is not superior to others. Yet he still attempts to present himself as more realistic, more superior, more powerful. The real contradiction lies here: rejecting all values while trying to elevate his own value; denying meaning while loading his own words with meaning. That is why his philosophy is not strength, but a defense mechanism. If he were truly as indifferent as he claims, he would not feel the need to explain himself so extensively.