Taoist paradoxes

[wandelaar]

Aha!! Found it!

 

See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialetheism

 

Now lets see whether there are some studies of its relation to Taoism...

[Stosh]

1 hour ago, Lost in Translation said:

 

I follow.

 

 

I do not follow.

 

Can you please elucidate, perhaps with an example specific to the sage?

Its my personal take , that the sage is a sort  of object lesson , People Can be sagely , its just that they can't end up superhuman. 

 

They tell the story of the sage , who became so dis-embroiled from the tumult of human confusions , so that although he knew all the mysteries of the universe , there was nothing to be gained from him, and he wandered off to float somewhere by himself. 

 

The fact that we are imperfect, means we have to work to a degree, to get along with one another , to sacrifice to forgive etc. 

that we can be brave because we have fears , know pain and empathy . etc and blah blah blah. 

This is human virtue , to rise above , but for one who is already beyond it all ,... its just not the same. 

 

Its just my take on it , not that the sage represents false ideas , or ones that cannot work.. is that enough of an explanation? 

 

(Another being the sage who never sharpens his knife because he avoids all the tough spots , or the one who is happy to sit with his baggage when travelling  because he is happy wherever he is.

At the extremity the rational nature of the thing is lost and to the reader , it looks crazy. 

The one farthest ahead ends up at the end , ( because those who chase accolades are continually looking for the next hill to conquer ,- its cyclic. 

Perhaps one is generous, so he gives everything away , penniless and a pauper ,he now relies on the charity of others. They're all like that. The ol hunchback thats such a horn dog he lets the women walk all over him ,,, OOOh  I almost forgot my favorite ...Robber Chih , who is such a bad-ass that he takes Confucius to school !

 

Edited April 26, 2018 by Stosh

[Lost in Translation]

1 hour ago, Stosh said:

The fact that we are imperfect, means we have to work to a degree, to get along with one another , to sacrifice to forgive etc. 

that we can be brave because we have fears , know pain and empathy . etc and blah blah blah. 

This is human virtue , to rise above , but for one who is already beyond it all ,... its just not the same. 

 

In other words, our humanity is tied to our struggle? To cease struggling is to lose our humanity?

 

1 hour ago, Stosh said:

Its my personal take , that the sage is a sort  of object lesson

 

1 hour ago, Stosh said:

They tell the story of the sage , who became so dis-embroiled from the tumult of human confusions , so that although he knew all the mysteries of the universe , there was nothing to be gained from him, and he wandered off to float somewhere by himself. 

 

The Sage has no need to struggle, has moved beyond our conventional human experience and lives life as a force of nature, as it were?

 

 

[Stosh]

Just now, Lost in Translation said:

 

In other words, our humanity is tied to our struggle? To cease struggling is to lose our humanity?

 

 

 

The Sage has no need to struggle, has moved beyond our conventional human experience and lives life as a force of nature, as it were?

 

 

If there is such a one , I would say that indeed that is a reasonable interpretation. The Tao never falters , never struggles , expresses no sentiment or preference ... so  yep Sage as a force of nature makes sense. 

(And yes, its not our lot to be perfectly happy, satisfied, finished, refined, know all ,be unaffected, or unbiased . ) 

[Stosh]

However I would add , that I can also see the wu-wei idea, that a person not exerting any personal bias or interference can also be seen as perpetuating forces which are in play around him , and therefore his acts could be seen as- not his , and so his participation is actually that of the forces outside. Like a water molecule perpetuating a wave it did not begin , might not be seen to be existing independently. 

[Lost in Translation]

13 minutes ago, Stosh said:

I can also see the wu-wei idea, that a person not exerting any personal bias or interference can also be seen as perpetuating forces which are in play around him , and therefore his acts could be seen as- not his , and so his participation is actually that of the forces outside.

 

We need a Star Wars as metaphor for Tao thread...

[dawei]

13 hours ago, wandelaar said:

 

Could you give a practical example to see how that works? A paradoxical sentence from the Tao Te Ching would be nice.

 

The Laozi is full of such examples... soft conquers hard, etc...

The one really etched in chinese thinking comes from chapter 58 and sometimes called the Taoist Farmer:

 

There was a farmer whose horse ran away. That evening the neighbors gathered to commiserate with him since this was such bad luck. He said, “May be.” The next day the horse returned, but brought with it six wild horses, and the neighbors came exclaiming at his good fortune. He said, “May be.” And then, the following day, his son tried to saddle and ride one of the wild horses, was thrown, and broke his leg.

Again the neighbors came to offer their sympathy for the misfortune. He said, “May be.” The day after that, conscription officers came to the village to seize young men for the army, but because of the broken leg the farmer’s son was rejected. When the neighbors came in to say how fortunately everything had turned out, he said, “May be.”

 

The paradox effect is to show that things are not just black and white but two seemingly opposing sides that are really just part of a whole, and you can even find the opposite in each other...  Seems this came up in the Yin Yang symbol and why that is a good visual example.

I think in other traditions it is like:   Form=Void

[Stosh]

Agreeing with Dawei, the taiji  is symbolic of the authors holistic view of things. It should be kept in mind that this is their mindset, that the yin and yang complement each other , literally making up the whole. That's the basis of Laoist taoism for you. 

So when you read the ddj , you should be literally looking for that irony, which is pervasive.

If one doesn't see it , then you are not getting in the mindset of the author and you're missing the whole point of what the writer was getting at. 

Take , Those who know don't speak, Well, they don't speak because they both know the same stuff.

If they disagree there Is plenty to talk about. SO one should expect contention , spoken or unspoken, when the they understand the things they are about to say , are not already shared by the listener... and so they may not say anything, because they don't want the headache , and have nothing to gain.

Cautious as a one crossing thinning ice of the spring thaw... Well , one may be very slow and deliberate trying not to break through , OR they may just charge ahead to get the hell off.  

Polite as one who is a guest,, Well , being a guest is already an imposition and so its far more polite not to burden the host in the first place. 

Like I already said , this mindset is pervasive , and I am aware it can be hard to see this forest because of all the trees. 

With the soft overcoming the hard , the useless being useful , the un-carved wood being the most developed state, the good ruler being inactive, and the yin succeeding the yang  .. one should come to recognize that the DDJ is not promoting one half of the taiji at the expense of the other. It is not telling one they need be timid , it is not telling one they need to be PC, not telling everyone to be industrious etc . 

 

As my dad used to say , with exasperation, who was not a taoist sage ," You're damned if you do , and damned if you don't. " 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited April 27, 2018 by Stosh

[Rocky Lionmouth]

23 hours ago, wandelaar said:

@ Rocky Lionmouth

 

So the idea is that real virtue is beyond conventional virtue, because conventional virtue doesn't cover all possible cases? That was also my interpretation.

 

That is part of it yes, i think another meaning is that true virtue springs not from any virtuous action or person and that the highest of virtues are manifested when you follow the Dao and your nature fully without ever considering or wanting any virtue at all.

[Starjumper]

21 hours ago, wandelaar said:

Now there seems to be a possibility that reality itself is paradoxical. In which case paradoxes could simply be statements of fact.

 

How about that?

 

I think that it isn't reality that is paradoxical, it's the way the human mind works that makes it seem paradoxical, but thinking is way over rated so in fact I don't know.

[Stosh]

"That is part of it yes, i think another meaning is that true virtue springs not from any virtuous action or person and that the highest of virtues are manifested when you follow the Dao and your nature fully without ever considering or wanting any virtue at all."

 

So what would be the inverse of that?

ans.. Wanting to be what you are not , not knowing who you are spiritually , and being confused about the real state of things, taking things to a self destructive extreme etc. 

Edited April 27, 2018 by Stosh

[Michael Sternbach]

Study Taiji. It derives its power from paradoxes.

[wandelaar]

On 26-4-2018 at 9:27 PM, wandelaar said:

Aha!! Found it!

 

See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialetheism

 

Now lets see whether there are some studies of its relation to Taoism...

 

I haven't found anything useful on dialetheism and Taoism but there are interesting articles by for instance Graham Priest on dialetheism and Buddhism. And those articles are relevant to this topic  because of the similarities between Taoism and Buddhism. See Priest's web page:

 

http://grahampriest.net/publications/papers/

 

Just finished reading the following article (very helpful in understand the different meanings of paradoxes!):

 

The Way of the Dialetheist: Contradictions in Buddhism
Yasuo Deguchi, Jay L. Garfield, Graham Priest
Philosophy East and West, Volume 58, Number 3, July 2008, pp. 395-402
 

 

 

 

Edited April 27, 2018 by wandelaar

[Lost in Translation]

7 hours ago, Starjumper said:

On 4/26/2018 at 9:06 AM, wandelaar said:

Now there seems to be a possibility that reality itself is paradoxical. In which case paradoxes could simply be statements of fact.

 

How about that?

 

I think that it isn't reality that is paradoxical, it's the way the human mind works that makes it seem paradoxical, but thinking is way over rated so in fact I don't know.

 

Well put! We humans assume that our observations/thoughts are correct. Perhaps that assumption is wrong?

[wandelaar]

17 minutes ago, Lost in Translation said:

Well put! We humans assume that our observations/thoughts are correct. Perhaps that assumption is wrong?

 

And that might very well include the idea (derived from classical logic) that reality itself has to be free from contradictions....

I used to be a firm supporter of the idea that real paradoxes (that is: concerning nature or reality) are impossible. But dialetheism has some strong arguments to the contrary. It did cost my a rather heavy headache today, but now that it's over I am much more tolerant to the proposal that there might be real (insoluble) paradoxes in reality itself.

 

Read the article: The Way of the Dialetheist: Contradictions in Buddhism.

Edited April 27, 2018 by wandelaar

[9th]

I once knew a guy that claimed a paradox was an expression of fullness and completion, rather than a confusion or obstruction.

 

But then again, he was an unusual fellow.

[Stosh]

33 minutes ago, Lost in Translation said:

 

Well put! We humans assume that our observations/thoughts are correct. Perhaps that assumption is wrong?

To the extent to which our mental model renders accurate predictions , and is successfully cross reference-able between people , I would say its correct , personally. And especially so, when we aren't engaging in rough subjective presumptions. 

Subjective experience is true as such , but doesn't guarantee a correlation to physical facts.. ( which are true as facts,, not false or correct, as modeled assumptions are).

When blended, these mental presentations have some inherent shortcomings rendering truth. IMO

[Lost in Translation]

13 minutes ago, Stosh said:

To the extent to which our mental model renders accurate predictions , and is successfully cross reference-able between people , I would say its correct , personally.

 

Agreed, but we must acknowledge this to be a subjective measure. I am sure that a trail of ants in my yard can cross reference their perceptions and build an accurate model of reality, but that does not mean they any concept of mathematics or metaphysics, much less the ability calculate algebraic equations or realize non duality. Similarly, we have a model that works, but is certainly contains many holes of which we are unaware of our ignorance.

[Stosh]

1 minute ago, Lost in Translation said:

 

Agreed, but we must acknowledge this to be a subjective measure. I am sure that a trail of ants in my yard can cross reference their perceptions and build an accurate model of reality, but that does not mean they any concept of mathematics or metaphysics, much less the ability calculate algebraic equations or realize non duality. Similarly, we have a model that works, but is certainly contains many holes of which we are unaware of our ignorance.

I'm not aware of any holes in my mental model.