Like I said before, history ended the moment the Jewish Bible took over all facets of life as the sole moral, ideological, philosophical and spiritual ideology.
Whatever happens next is Jews trampling over mankind for 2,000 years.
Any resurgence of morality and rational thought perished when the Jews and those of Jewish faith start infiltrating Atheist groups to spread Communism and when Judeo Christianity took over the US.
Mozi's moral teachings emphasized introspection, self-reflection, and authenticity, rather than obedience to rituals. He observed that people often learned about the world through adversity.[7] By reflecting on one's own successes and failures, one attains true self-knowledge rather than mere conformity to ritual.[8] Mozi exhorted people to lead a life of asceticism and self-restraint, renouncing both material and spiritual extravagance.
Like Confucius, Mozi idealized the Xia dynasty and the ancients of Chinese mythology, but he also criticized the Confucian belief that modern life should be patterned on the ways of the ancients. Mozi argued that what is thought of as "ancient" was actually innovative in its time, and thus should not be used to hinder present-day innovation.[9] Though Mozi did not believe that history necessarily progresses, as did Han Fei Zi, he shared the latter's critique of fate (命, mìng). Mozi believed that people were capable of changing their circumstances and directing their own lives, which could be achieved by applying one's senses to observing the world, as well as judging objects and events by their causes, functions, and historical bases.[10] This was the "three-prong method" Mozi recommended for testing the truth or falsehood of statements. His students later expanded upon this theory to form the School of Names.
Mozi tried to replace what he considered to be the long-entrenched Chinese ideal of strong attachments to family and clan structures with the concept of "impartial caring" or "universal love" (兼愛, jiān ài). He argued directly against Confucians, who had philosophized that it was natural and correct for people to care about different people in different degrees. Mozi, in contrast, argued that people in principle should care for all people equally, a notion that philosophers in other schools found absurd, as they interpreted this notion as implying no special amount of care or duty towards one's parents and family.
Overlooked by those critics, however, was a passage in the chapter on "Self-Cultivation" which stated, "When people near-by are not befriended, there is no use endeavoring to attract those at a distance."[11] This point was also precisely articulated by a Mohist in a debate with Mencius (in the Mengzi), where the Mohist argued, in relation to carrying out universal love, that "we begin with what is near." Also, in the first chapter in the Mozi on the topic of universal love, Mozi argued that the best way of being filial to one's parents is to be filial to the parents of others. The foundational principle was therefore that benevolence, as well as malevolence, is requited, and that one would be treated by others as one treats others. Mozi quoted a popular passage from the Book of Odes to bring home this point: "When one throws to me a peach, I return to him a plum." One's parents will be treated by others as one treats the parents of others. Mozi also differentiated between "intention" and "actuality", thereby placing a central importance on the will to love, even though in practice it might very well be impossible to bring benefit to everyone.
In addition, Mozi argued that benevolence comes to human beings "as naturally as fire turns upward or water turns downward", provided that persons in positions of authority illustrate benevolence in their own lives. In differentiating between the ideas of "universal" (jian) and "differential" (bie), Mozi said that "universal" originated from righteousness while "differential" entailed human effort.
Mozi also held a belief in the power of ghosts and spirits, although he is often thought to have only worshipped them pragmatically. In fact, in his discussion on ghosts and spirits, he remarked that, even if they did not exist, communal gatherings for the sake of making sacrificial offering would play a role in strengthening social bonds. Furthermore, for Mozi the will of Heaven (天, tiān) was that people should love one another, and that mutual love by all would bring benefit to all. Therefore, it was in everyone's interest that they would love others "as they love themselves". According to Mozi, Heaven should be respected because failing to do so would subject one to punishment. For Mozi, Heaven was not the "amoral", mystical nature of the Daoists; rather, it was a benevolent, moral force that rewarded good and punished evil. Similar in some ways to the beliefs systems found in the Abrahamic religions, Mozi believed that all living things lived in a realm ruled by Heaven, and Heaven possessed a will which was independent from, and higher than, the will of people. Thus Mozi wrote that "Universal love is the Way of Heaven", since "Heaven nourishes and sustains all life without regard to status."[12] Mozi's ideal of government, which advocated a meritocracy based on talent rather than background, also followed his idea of Heaven.
Mozi opposed the Confucian idea of "Destiny",[13] promoting instead an idea of "anti-fatalism" (非命). Where the Confucian philosophy held that a person's life, death, wealth, poverty, and social status were entirely dependent upon destiny and therefore could not be changed, Mozi argued that hard work and virtuous acts could change one's position in life.
The crazy part? Mo Zi is credited as the founder of the Mo Pai school of Nei Gong (which I’ve posted about a fair bit, mostly over in c/HumanPotential - for anyone interested check the video stickied to the top of that page)
Mozi tried to replace what he considered to be the long-entrenched Chinese ideal of strong attachments to family and clan structures with the concept of "impartial caring" or "universal love" (兼愛, jiān ài). He argued directly against Confucians, who had philosophized that it was natural and correct for people to care about different people in different degrees.
Overlooked by those critics, however, was a passage in the chapter on "Self-Cultivation" which stated, "When people near-by are not befriended, there is no use endeavoring to attract those at a distance."[11] This point was also precisely articulated by a Mohist in a debate with Mencius (in the Mengzi), where the Mohist argued, in relation to carrying out universal love, that "we begin with what is near." …. Mozi also differentiated between "intention" and "actuality", thereby placing a central importance on the will to love, even though in practice it might very well be impossible to bring benefit to everyone.
Like I said before, history ended the moment the Jewish Bible took over all facets of life as the sole moral, ideological, philosophical and spiritual ideology.
Whatever happens next is Jews trampling over mankind for 2,000 years.
Any resurgence of morality and rational thought perished when the Jews and those of Jewish faith start infiltrating Atheist groups to spread Communism and when Judeo Christianity took over the US.
what literature do we have for a solid moral/spiritual doctrine prechristianity?
Mo Zi (aka Mo Tzu, ala Lao Tzu or Sun Tzu) was a pre-Christian chinaman with quite a revolutionary philosophy:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozi
Here’s the wiki overview:
The crazy part? Mo Zi is credited as the founder of the Mo Pai school of Nei Gong (which I’ve posted about a fair bit, mostly over in c/HumanPotential - for anyone interested check the video stickied to the top of that page)
Hard pass
u/redkrab also (responding to both comments here)