  The Mohists offer two sorts of arguments to justify inclusive care. One, which we will treat shortly, is that inclusive care is  Heaven’s intention.  The other, applied in all three of the “Inclusive Care” texts, is by appeal to its good consequences.  Social harm arises from excluding other people, families, cities, and states from the scope of moral concern. This exclusion leads to injury, crime, violence, and failure to practice the virtues associated with the fundamental social relations. By contrast, were we to practice inclusive care, we would eliminate these harms and promote “benefit to the world.” Or so argues the following passage, which interprets inclusive care as the attitude of being “for” — that is, concerned for the sake of — others’ interests just as we are “for” our own.