Final answer:
Yi Yin would likely perceive a significant overlap between a ruler's public and private life, as the ruler is seen as a moral exemplar whose personal virtues are expected to influence their public roles according to ancient Chinese philosophy.
Step-by-step explanation:
According to the provided information, there are different perspectives on the difference between a ruler's public and private life. For example, Wang believed that there should be one integrated system where the state has control over everything, including a ruler's private life. In contrast, Sima believed that as long as the ruler does not abuse public office for personal gain, their private life should be separate from the state's business. Confucius emphasized the importance of rulers following ethical principles in both their public and private life, as their behavior sets an example for their subjects.
Considering the historical context and the philosophical beliefs during Yi Yin's time, it is likely that Yi Yin would believe there is a significant intersection between the public and private life of a ruler. Ancient Chinese political philosophy, especially Confucianism, emphasized that rulers should be moral exemplars, indicating that their private virtues would reflect in their public duties. In historical texts, we find sage-kings like Yao, Shun, and Yu being depicted as living frugal and hardworking lives, not for personal praise but as moral guidance for their subjects. Additionally, Confucius taught that the behavior of the ruler had a direct influence on the people, stating, "Let your evinced desires be for what is good, and the people will be good," indicating little difference between the ruler's personal morality and their public role. Given that a ruler's subjects must emulate those above them in social hierarchy, and that personal ethical conduct of the ruler is emphasized as a model for others, it can be inferred that the distinction between the public and private lives of rulers was not pronounced in Yi Yin's view.