Taoist logic?

[Wu Ming Jen]

Formal logic in China has a special place in the history of logic due to its repression and abandonment—in contrast to the strong ancient adoption and continued development of the study of logic in Europe, India, and the Islamic world.

 

In China, a contemporary of Confucius, Mozi, "Master Mo", is credited with founding the Mohist school, whose canons dealt with issues relating to valid inference and the conditions of correct conclusions. However, they were nonproductive and not integrated into Chinese science or mathematics.

 

Now to use logic it is logical why a group such as Mo pie would credit Mozi as some kind of pretend lineage due to the involvement of doctors and scientist to prove something. This ploy was meant to be attractive to the west due to the importance of logic within the culture. Many westerners who try to understand Taoism and chinese culture will try to adopt a form of logic to understand with pages and pages and pages of information. IMO

 

 

[Stosh]

1 hour ago, steve said:

 

Excellent point, although I don't know that it completely excludes the possibility that Daoist influence on Buddhism contributed to the form Chan/Zen has taken.

I'm thinking, true,  it probably doesn't exclude that possibility.

I'm only vaguely familiar with Zen , thinking it an ultra-simplified experiential relationship with ones awareness. As for Chan , I think its rather a broader umbrella of Chinese Buddhism in general which retains bells and whistles from both its parents, but again, I am not familiar enough with it to have a feel for its scope. 

[wandelaar]

@  Wu Ming Jen

 

The development of modern western logic has become possible precisely because of the use of concise well defined terms en symbols. The drawn out posts of Ilovecoffee and voidisyinyang are a sad parody on the modern scientific approach. I suggest you look at the video (earlier posted by Aletheia) of Graham Priest to see a real logician carefully and concisely expressing his opinion:

 

 

[Stosh]

36 minutes ago, steve said:

 

Interesting stuff -

 

"Buddhism was first identified to be "a barbarian variant of Taoism", and Taoist terminology was used to express Buddhist doctrines in the oldest translations of Buddhist texts,^[24] a practice termed "matching the concepts".^[26]"

 

I wonder if this could be a source to address the OP? Perhaps they matched Buddhist logic and debate to a Daoist equivalent...

 

Now that Would be an interesting comparison..though I'm thinking one would really need to look at the other schools of 'daoist' thought to fill the bill. 

Lao and Chuang , were more about Ethical behavior , firstly ,but using the logic systems of the day to explain , whereas The Mohists were perhaps? more interested in the pursuit of Nailing the logic systems down.,. Confucius with Governance , and so forth. 

Edited May 23, 2018 by Stosh

[Mudfoot]

15 hours ago, steve said:

 

Koans are designed to confuse and ultimately exhaust the rational mind.

Koans can work through the principle of frustration, which is useful for spiritual breakthroughs. 

 

I believe (what was his name, wrote Hoofprint of the OX) wrote that some of the Koans originally referred to well-known texts, so they were a short-hand reminder for a specific text to meditate on. 

But this morphed to something else under a period of buddhist decline. 

 

The what is the sound of one hand clapping do come close to an analysis of Anahata. 

 

Coincidence? 

 

[Wu Ming Jen]

4 hours ago, wandelaar said:

@  Wu Ming Jen

 

The development of modern western logic has become possible precisely because of the use of concise well defined terms en symbols. The drawn out posts of Ilovecoffee and voidisyinyang are a sad parody on the modern scientific approach. I suggest you look at the video (earlier posted by Aletheia) of Graham Priest to see a real logician carefully and concisely expressing his opinion:

 

 

Yes I watched it the first time posted. knowledge without application leaves one in the position of a scholar as we can see represented thousands of years ago with Chuang Tzu and Confucius. 

[wandelaar]

5 minutes ago, Wu Ming Jen said:

Yes I watched it the first time posted. knowledge without application leaves one in the position of a scholar as we can see represented thousands of years ago with Chuang Tzu and Confucius. 

 

Did you check out on that?

 

Quote

In addition to his work in philosophy and logic, Priest practiced Karate-do. He is 3rd Dan, International Karate-do Shobukai; 4th Dan, Shi’to Ryu, and an Australian National Kumite Referee and Kata Judge. Presently, he practices Taichi.

 

( Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graham_Priest )

[Stosh]

1 hour ago, Mudfoot said:

Koans can work through the principle of frustration, which is useful for spiritual breakthroughs. 

 

 

 

 

Possibly, accurate , but I am not of an opinion that the universe is ever in actual conflict with itself .

While our models can conflict , being just fabrications of the mind ,they are about a reality that is always true.

Since its tautologically true that -what is , Is , and no falsity actually exists, apart from some mental gyrations.  

So presented with the 'one hand clapping' koan, .. it doesn't happen , and there's a false possibility presented by the Koan.

Same goes for Schrodinger's cat, Just because we are not aware of the cats situation , doesn't mean the cat doesn't die -until we open the box. 

If you did a forensics exam on the cat , you would be able to determine time of death as being earlier.

So a koan isn't going to bring me to any spiritual revision. Even if I incurred puzzlement , I'd dismiss it , I don't claim to know everything, or expect to , I don't have to , because the universe- is what it is , always. 

[Marblehead]

20 minutes ago, Stosh said:

... but I am not of an opinion that the universe is ever in actual conflict with itself .

 

Good post except that I don't agree with the above statement.

 

[Stosh]

3 minutes ago, Marblehead said:

Good post except that I don't agree with the above statement.

 

You do not agree that I am of that opinion ? That would be incorrect. 

You do not agree that the universe is not ever in conflict with itself ?... 

Too bad , you should agree with it. 

What do you think represents an instance where the universe is self conflicted? 

Edited May 23, 2018 by Stosh

[Marblehead]

There is no conflict.  There simply "what is".  Gotta' get beyond duality.  Hehehe.

 

[Stosh]

1 minute ago, Marblehead said:

There is no conflict.  There simply "what is".  Gotta' get beyond duality.  Hehehe.

 

I think I agree,

I thought you were heading for the argument that , A person , as a human , which may be in conflict, is part of the universe ,and so the universe allows conflict to exist. 

[Marblehead]

6 minutes ago, Stosh said:

I think I agree,

I thought you were heading for the argument that , A person , as a human , which may be in conflict, is part of the universe ,and so the universe allows conflict to exist. 

That thought did enter my mind but it is really contradictory as view from the objective.

 

[voidisyinyang]

Quote

The drawn out posts

 

Once again the "form" of my posts are supposedly a reason to dismiss the content. Music Logos as "logic" is the "form of the formless" as 1:2:3:4 - the T'ai Chi secret is from music theory as logic. haha.

 

So it is quite hilarious - music harmonics also creates "ethics" inherently due to direct knowledge of the Heart-Pineal Gland and small intestines as the three brains. The ethics are build into the deep psychophysiological intuition as a direct engagement with the Ether as the foundation of reality.

 

Yes it makes sense that Chinese would have to rely on Daoist philosophy to translate Buddhism into China. haha.

 

Westerners can not even "engage" with what Daoism is. For example when I posted on rumsoakedfist - about the right hand as the tiger and the left hand as the dragon - and how this relates to Santi Shi as a standing posture for training as Daoist alchemy - no one could even answer me.

 

I was dismissed outright. These are supposed "teachers" of the martial arts. haha. So I had to keep digging on my own. Finally I found two sources - both Chinese - stating the secret of Santi Shi is the right hand (yin) is the tiger that resonates harmonically with the left foot which is the dragon (yang) and vice versa - the left hand with the right foot.

 

So if you look, as a Westerner, to a person training in Santi Shi - you would never realize this is the Daoist Logic as the Harmonic Logos of complementary opposites - not only would not realize this but TEACHERS of this Santi Shi in the West were supposedly teaching people this Santi Shi stance without even knowing the Daoist logic of how the Yi or intention of the mind is to visualize the energy harmonizing. haha.

 

So that is the "drawn out" form of the formless.

[Marblehead]

But then I'm not an Alchemic Daoist so I couldn't speak to the tiger and dragon.  But what you said about left foot/right hand(arm) and right foot/left hand(arm) I silently agreed with because that is the way of our nature when moving - left foot (leg) forward with right hand (arm) forward.  That is for balance.  How it applies to alchemy, I have no idea.

 

[Wu Ming Jen]

With out conflict we would not be able to walk with two forces moving in opposite directions. once we are unified there is harmony

Edited May 23, 2018 by Wu Ming Jen

[steve]

1 hour ago, Stosh said:

Possibly, accurate , but I am not of an opinion that the universe is ever in actual conflict with itself .

While our models can conflict , being just fabrications of the mind ,they are about a reality that is always true.

Since its tautologically true that -what is , Is , and no falsity actually exists, apart from some mental gyrations.  

 

Where is the separation between the universe and mental gyration? 

[Wu Ming Jen]

1 hour ago, wandelaar said:

 

Did you check out on that?

 

 

( Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graham_Priest )

Professor should sum up the position of scholar if that is what you are referring to in checking out

[wandelaar]

7 minutes ago, Wu Ming Jen said:

Professor should sum up the position of scholar if that is what you are referring to in checking out

 

That is not what I was referring to. You wrote  "knowledge without application leaves one in the position of a scholar", thereby suggesting that Priest is just another armchair philosopher without any practical experience. That's why I posted the quote about his experience in the martial arts.

[Stosh]

27 minutes ago, steve said:

 

Where is the separation between the universe and mental gyration? 

The subset of you, is not all of the universe, its localized , though not separate as we consider it , the universe allows it, so its still in harmony with the rules of the universe. 

But it does bring up the question , in what form does conflict exist ? and frankly,  it doesn't. 

Lets say you like bananas , and yet you do not like bananas, I might call that a conflict because I have the idea that these two things cannot exist simultaneously true.. but that's not really so , its your true sentiment. The perception of this being error , also resides in a mind mine , and again , the universe allows it , so it is not in contravention of any universal law. 

Our mental model ordinarily allows for error , falsity , badness etc, these do not exist outside the mental gyrations. You could grind the universe to dust , and yet never find a grain of it.  Because they are mental representations of relationships and things which do not have to abide as physical objects , and do not have those constraints, they break no law. 

 

 

[wandelaar]

Consider the following statement P: "We can not make a true statement on the Tao.

 

If P is true, than we cannot make a true statement on the Tao. But P is a statement on the Tao, so than P must be false. Thus if P is true than P is false. This can not be the case, so we have to conclude that P is false.

 

By this proof we have found that P has to be false. And so we have proven the following statement Q to be true:  "We can make a true statement on the Tao."

 

But what is the true statement about the Tao that we can make? Well, at least we have the statement Q that is both true and about the Tao. 

 

 

 

[Rara]

Agh, I've been away too long and missed pages and pages of threads. I can't read everything here but my answer is:

 

Taoism itself IS logic. The most pragmatic of all philosophies.

 

Don't try to fit cubes into round holes etc.

[Rara]

On 20/05/2018 at 3:58 PM, wandelaar said:

 

But Taoist logic - if it exists - should be a form of reasoning that shares some of the typical characteristics of Taoism. Because formal reasoning is looked down upon in Taoism, in a strict sense Taoist logic would be impossible. (That's why I wrote "some" .) But in a wider sense perhaps there could be something like Taoist logic.

 

Well, it's a matter of semantics, right?

 

There's "logic", the human construct, which is an intellectual approach and not Taoist. Then there is common-sense/spontaneity, arguably still logical approaches but more associated with Taoism.

 

Put an intellectual and a Taoist in a room to debate (see what I did here?) "what is logical" and I think we'd be in for quite an evening

[wandelaar]

1 minute ago, Rara said:

Put an intellectual and a Taoist in a room to debate (see what I did here?) "what is logical" and I think we'd be in for quite an evening

 

Could be one and the same person - that's why I always have someone to talk to.

[voidisyinyang]

2 hours ago, steve said:

 

Where is the separation between the universe and mental gyration? 

 

I recommend reading the Qigong Medical Textbook on what "concentrated thinking" means.

 

I blog on it - http://elixirfield.blogspot.com

 

But you can also listen to Dr. Christina Donnell - she was an international T'ai Chi martial artist and then she studied meditation in the Andes with shamans - but she says she was born with this ability - her book is called Transcendent Dreaming - precognitive healing dreams.

 

So it starts around 20 minutes in - 23 or so...

 

You can see the comment I posted - 7 months ago:

 

Voidisyinyang Voidisyinyang 8 months ago

Quote

The evil that Eldon refers to is in the realm of emotional energy and as Dr. Donnell says - the realm of form. Whereas the oneness is from reverse time or "zero time" and reverse entropy from the future - the "pilot wave" in quantum relativity. Most of nature is based on symbiosis - just read the book "The Social Conquest of Nature" by E.O. Wilson - the overall morality of eusociality, that includes humans, is sharing and cooperation.