http://listverse.com/2015/05/05/10-completely-unorthodox-systems-of-mora...
The first one might explain a lot:
The philosopher Yangzi, from the fourth century BC, left no surviving works, meaning that his ideas must be gleaned from hostile critiques and semi-mythological tales. According to these limited sources, Yangzi believed that human beings should only ever do what is in their self-interest or the interest of their family and close friends. Under the philosophy of wei wo (“everything for myself”), Yangzi emphasized the importance of sustaining your own life, staying genuine to yourself, and avoiding entanglement in external affairs.
Yangists believed that an individual should strive for a long and healthy life, while avoiding overindulgence in sensory pleasures (which are generally damaging to long-term health). Yangzi himself was described as a man who would “not give one hair of his shin for the great profit of the world,” instead believing that no external possession was worth personal risk, and nothing, not even the throne, was worth risking your life. While political involvement might lead to benefits (such as wealth and status), the Yangists still viewed it as a risky move, and therefore not worth it. Yangzi also believed working for the good of society was foolish, since it’s not possible to have a relationship with all of society. Living life for the sake of abstract and noble ideals alienates an individual from what is really important—those close to you.
The noted scholar A.C. Graham, who reconstructed much of the Yangist philosophy from the remaining fragmentary sources, characterized it thusly: “[Yangism's] question is not ‘How shall we benefit the world?’, but ‘What is truly beneficial to man?’, more specifically, ‘What is truly beneficial to myself?’ Is it wealth and power, as the vulgar suppose? Or the life and care of the body and the satisfaction of the senses?’ The Mohists cared only for the useful, the Yangists asked ‘Useful for what?’” Contemporary critics saw Yangism as selfish egoism, but the Yangists argued that higher ideals are fictions, which feed our own egos with no real benefit to anyone. Better to keep your own house in order than attempt to save a world that is beyond anyone’s ability to control.
I think Mo Zi (the leading thinker of the Moist school) is a great exception to the trend you mentioned. Most of the Chinese philosophies are very much historical in their base form (the Warring States period is also considered to be the richest period for Chinese philosophy... so much of what appeared are solutions to the problems of that time)
Moism just looks quirky compared to the rest though. A lot of the philosophies find their roots in how "the ancient kings were like this, so it's also what we should do" Moism literally presents its self defense and explanation in strings of perfectly thought out logical processes, A resulting in B, B resulting in C, and C blah blah blah.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rational_egoism
"Rational egoism (also called rational selfishness) is the principle that an action is rational if and only if it maximizes one's self-interest"
See also (which is linked in the above) Psycological Egosim, and Ethical Egosim.
The difference being - what is defined as "self-interest". If volunteering at a hospice makes me feel better to see others get better, then it is a form of "self-interest".
Yangism is sort of like this - but I think Yang doesn't think such emotional considerations are important - only the physical/material ones.
(hey! my major was in philosophy, and I liked most of all Ethics! )
Meh... Take one system of morality, imagine a whole society working with that system, and try to evaluate the survival prospects and the average life standards. Any system leading to a shitty average status quo is probably not that much of a great idea. Other societies with other systems leading to significantly better survival prospects will prosper and convert others. Example : if we all become monks living out of other's generosity, nobody grow food and we would be quickly a few hungry ghouls living of roots and nuts.
With Yangism, things can float but with a far-from-optimal average life standards, with an extreme version of Tragedy Of The Commons at play
The philosophy of cravenness? He does sound like a self-absorbed coward.
Stay alive at all costs? TCM welcomes you, and is sensitive to your concerns. Payment in advance, sucker.