Philosophers...

[Taomeow]

Tangential to Brian's thoughts:

 

One of the sings of mental/spiritual/physical health in TCM (yep, it does not conceive of one without the other without the other) is the ability to understand and be understood (sic!) by others. I am pretty sure that any truth can be expressed in words to the same extent it can be expressed via any other medium -- provided both parties to the exchange are mentally/spiritually/physically healthy. This, however, is hardly ever the case.

 

In a famous Russian novel, the famous exchange between Pontius Pilate and Jesus goes like this:

 

P: What is truth?

J: Truth is first and foremost that you have a very bad headache...

 

which indeed is the case, and the primary truth of the moment for Pontius Pilate, overshadowing and dwarfing all others. Then Jesus proceeds to remove it, and Pilate starts thinking clearly and grokking what he was unable to get before.

 

Wittgenstein was of the opinion, later in life, that all philosophy is ultimately an attempt at healing -- a futile one. Once he realized its futility he dropped it and took up gardening instead, the wise man that he was.

[Brian]

Thanks for reminding me of that exchange, Taomeow!

 

It actually reminded me of Feynman's premise that any physics principle should be expressible on a freshman level or the professor doesn't really understand it, either.

[Marblehead]

Once he realized its futility he dropped it and took up gardening instead, the wise man that he was.

Well, I took up gardening but kept the philosophy so I could come here and have something to argue about on a rainy day or when I was taking a break from work. Today was a rainy day - spent a lot of time here.

[Harmonious Emptiness]

Isn't an anti-philosophical stance no less a philosophical stance? It is a philosophy which purports that philosophy is of a particular value. This is a philosophical assertion itself, no?

[Marblehead]

Isn't an anti-philosophical stance no less a philosophical stance? It is a philosophy which purports that philosophy is of a particular value. This is a philosophical assertion itself, no?

I can't argue with that although you would likely never hear me say it. How does one not have a philosophical stance?

[Taomeow]

Isn't an anti-philosophical stance no less a philosophical stance? It is a philosophy which purports that philosophy is of a particular value. This is a philosophical assertion itself, no?

 

 

I wouldn't know about the philosophy of an anti-philosophical stance since I've never assumed it. My stance is non-philosophical rather than anti-philosophical. A non-philosophical stance is like a non-Single Whip stance in taiji when you assume the Snake Creeping Down stance, i.e. the stance you ARE assuming is not denying the stance you are NOT assuming, you are just doing what the moment in spacetime has led you to doing, not in order to invalidate something else but in order to do what is timely and meaningful, to the beat of your ability.

 

When the time comes for the Single Whip, you go through that, if you want to stop and meditate there, why not? -- but nothing in your microcosm or your macrocosm is threatened by your not getting petrified there forever. If you are alive and responsive, you don't assume a philosophical or any other stance and just stay there -- that, you do if you are a marble statue (no offense to the marble-headed among us). Ever wondered why most philosophers of yesteryear are made of marble now? But not the spirits of the eight directions, not the stars of the nine palaces, not the qi of the five phases -- nor animal helpers of the shamans, nor the rains they called or sent away, nor the rhythm of the drum they used for the purpose -- and most importantly, not the tao?..

[Harmonious Emptiness]

Oh well. What can we expect. I've always found Western philosophers insufferably pretentious. It's no wonder they don't like each other....

[Marblehead]

you don't assume a philosophical or any other stance and just stay there -- that, you do if you are a marble statue (no offense to the marble-headed among us). Ever wondered why most philosophers of yesteryear are made of marble now?

See? I read your posts. Hehehe.

 

No, you don't just take a stand and remain there. You get on a good horse and off you go. You know how to select a good horse because your philosophy is good. And you don't ride the horse into the ground. You treat it better than you treat your own legs. And you treat your philosophy even better than that.

 

And those of mable, are so because their philosophy has endured the onslaught of much criticism. They held firm when attacked by the herds of the herd-mentality groups.

 

I'll stop now. Your side is probably aching from laughter.

 

Oh well. What can we expect. I've always found Western philosophers insufferably pretentious. It's no wonder they don't like each other....

Well, I might be the only person who likes Nietzsche but that was one philosopher who had his shit together until his mind started rotting away from too much dancing with questionable women. All things in moderation - someone should have explained this to Fred.

[Harmonious Emptiness]

I wouldn't know about the philosophy of an anti-philosophical stance since I've never assumed it. My stance is non-philosophical rather than anti-philosophical. A non-philosophical stance is like a non-Single Whip stance in taiji when you assume the Snake Creeping Down stance, i.e. the stance you ARE assuming is not denying the stance you are NOT assuming, you are just doing what the moment in spacetime has led you to doing, not in order to invalidate something else but in order to do what is timely and meaningful, to the beat of your ability.

 

When the time comes for the Single Whip, you go through that, if you want to stop and meditate there, why not? -- but nothing in your microcosm or your macrocosm is threatened by your not getting petrified there forever. If you are alive and responsive, you don't assume a philosophical or any other stance and just stay there -- that, you do if you are a marble statue (no offense to the marble-headed among us). Ever wondered why most philosophers of yesteryear are made of marble now? But not the spirits of the eight directions, not the stars of the nine palaces, not the qi of the five phases -- nor animal helpers of the shamans, nor the rains they called or sent away, nor the rhythm of the drum they used for the purpose -- and most importantly, not the tao?..

 

Beautifully illustrated btw. Merci.

 

If Single Whip never rises from Snake Creeping Down stance, does anybody hear it?....