Confucianism, Taoism and Buddhism have different perceptions of language and its role in society. The beliefs of philosophers from each of these Chinese philosophical traditions are set forth in the Analects of Confucian Philosophy, the Tao Te Ching of Taoist Philosophy, and the Platform Sutra for Buddhist Philosophy. Specific beliefs about language are stated in relation to its role in fundamental principles of societal relations. The perception of language in Confucianism is rooted in the relationship between words and their meaning. Definitions of key words in Confucian philosophy are vague because they represent broad terms and relationships. Despite the obscurity of the definitions of these words, they are concept words. While Confucius noted the importance of "correct" language in Taoism, language is believed to cause divisions and differences within society in Taoism, thereby taking away the wholeness associated with the Dao. The Tao is impartial towards all things, because it passes through everything and is eternally present in all things. In the first lines of the Tao Te Ching, it is said that “The unnameable is the eternal real. Naming is the origin of all particular things. While Confucius believed in the importance of naming things correctly and correcting language, it is evident that language is seen as less important in Taoism. In the previous quotation from the Tao Te Ching, we can understand that the “unnameable” does not need to be named or characterized. Things that can be named are not considered eternal by the Tao Te Ching philosophy. A potential explanation behind the perception that words play a lesser role is that the Tao cannot be expressed in language. If the Dao, the most fundamental principle of the philosophy of Taoism, cannot be expressed in words, then words should not be as important as they are in Confucian philosophy. Not only is language considered less important by Taoism, it is potentially harmful and divisive. When things are seen as having a particular characteristic, such as being good or beautiful, then other things are seen as bad or ugly. In Buddhist philosophy, it is considered ignorant if someone associates reality with language, because there is a separation between language and reality. True reality is present in the state of enlightenment, and the perception that ignorance arises from the association between reality and language is prevalent in Mahayana Buddhism. can only be associated with the external perception of things and cannot express the true nature of the object or idea. Language therefore has no real value since it is incapable of transmitting the nature of what it is trying to describe or characterize. create a false reality, thus perpetuating the ignorance of human beings. From this belief in Buddhism, we are led to question the value of the words spoken by Buddha. If words and language create a false reality, then how are we supposed to give importance to the words of Buddha? Buddhist philosophy states that there is a difference between the Dharma and the words used to convey it. The words of the Buddha are merely vehicles used to convey the true nature of what he teaches. The importance should not be given to his words, but to the essence of what he is trying to convey. The Buddhist perception of language is comparable to that of Taoism. In both philosophies, language is limited in what it can express. Language cannot really