墨家倫理比任何其他諸子學派的倫理都接近清教徒倫 理。墨家同清教徒一樣，都持某種入世的禁欲經濟倫理，肯定 現實逐利與財富積累的正當性，強調勤懇工作和節儉的禁欲主 義。甚至墨家還有類似基督教上帝信仰與博愛教義的「天志」 信仰與「兼愛」倫■理主張。但這些只能算作表面的相似性，墨 家倫理與清教徒倫理其實存在本質差異。清教徒倫理以永生 救贖為其信仰背景，通過「天職」觀念確立起塵世職業工作的 救贖論意義，再把預定論造成的心理焦慮轉化為工作與禁欲的 精神動力，對現實的社會實踐生活進行理性化的組織與規 劃。其中尤其是對經濟活動的理性組織與安排，最終使自然 財富轉變為不斷赚取利潤的商業資本。這種經濟理性主義是資 本主義精神的核心。墨家沒有清教徒這種特殊的信仰文化，其 主張力行、節用的禁欲經濟倫理，追求財富的積累，其實最大 理想也不過是「滿足需求」，均富共用，實現其所謂民富國安 的現實政治訴求而已。這完全屬於韋伯所講的那種經濟傳統主 義，並不存在無限追逐利潤的商業精神，因此與資本主義精神 也不可能產生任何重要關聯。

Mohist ethic was closer to the Puritan ethic than any other ethic ◦f Hundred Schools. In the same was as the Puritans，Mohists insisted on a form of woddly ascetic ethic in the field of economy. Both groups affirmed the legitimacj^ of pursuing benefits and collecting money, and highlighted the asceticism of hard work and frugalitj?; As Christians, the Puritans believed in God and in the love command, wMe Mohists believed in the will of heaven and insisted the principle of lodng each other as well. However, these similarities were merely superficial. There were qualitative differences between the Mohist etihic and that of the Puritans. Against the background of eternal salvation, the Puritan ethic founded the soteriological significance in the woddly works of career by the idea of Calling, and transformed the anxiety caused by predestimtion into the spiritual power of working and asceticism，which mtionally organized and planned life practice in society. Abo'N^e all, the)^ believed that rationalized organization and planning of economic activities would finally transform natural wealth into capital that would continue to malce a profit This economic rationalism was the core of the capitalist spirit. Mohist beliefs did not own such a religious culture. They insisted irathei: on the ascetically economic ethic of hard work and frugality in order to meet social needs, sharing social wealth and fulfilling the political appeals in the real world. These were their highest ideals. The modem commercial spirit did not exist in the Mohist ethic. The Mohist ethic belonged to an economic traditionalism which could not generate any real commercial spirit; having nothing to do with the capital-motivated spirit