A Science of Wu Wei?

[OldDog]

2 hours ago, wandelaar said:

But he seems to say that flow misses the feeling of becoming part of something bigger than oneself that gives wu wei its religious or spiritual flavour.

 

OK, makes sense. Spent a couple of hours checking out online lectures by Slingerland. Connection to something bigger is one of his main ccriteria for distinguishing a religion from other group behavior. Interestingly, the something bigger does not have to be a diety or something supernatural. Allows him to account for group behaviour where the something is a set of values or practices that are held in regard. I had heard this line of thinking before from Jonathan Haidt in his analysis of conservative vs liberal ideals ... and, sure enough, there was Haidt sitting in the audience along with Daniel Dennett.  

 

I like Slingerland's approach. He is big on allowing science and humanities to inform each other. If you have not already seen it, check out this video. Think it will appeal to you.

 

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=L3oVM4QQM1g

 

[wandelaar]

1 hour ago, OldDog said:

I like Slingerland's approach. He is big on allowing science and humanities to inform each other. If you have not already seen it, check out this video. Think it will appeal to you.

 

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=L3oVM4QQM1g

 

Just looked at the video. Very interesting! I also ordered his book:

 

https://books.google.nl/books?id=gSReaja3V3IC&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false

 

Edited November 9, 2018 by wandelaar

[wandelaar]

8 hours ago, OldDog said:

OK, makes sense. Spent a couple of hours checking out online lectures by Slingerland. Connection to something bigger is one of his main ccriteria for distinguishing a religion from other group behavior. Interestingly, the something bigger does not have to be a diety or something supernatural. Allows him to account for group behaviour where the something is a set of values or practices that are held in regard. I had heard this line of thinking before from Jonathan Haidt in his analysis of conservative vs liberal ideals ... and, sure enough, there was Haidt sitting in the audience along with Daniel Dennett.  

 

We have the same connection to something bigger in flow. Here's a screenshot from the earlier video about flow (see point 5. in particular):

 

[Marblehead]

I agree with all seven points above.  I would call that "wu wei" or sometimes "living spontaneously".

 

[freeform]

Flow tends to be momentary... or lasting for a period of time. And it also tends to be ‘draining’.

 

If you talk to people that regularly get into flow (free solo climbers for example) they will tell you that afterwards it takes time to recover - you feel low in energy and mood.

 

Flow does have the level of absorption that wuwei has. But it’s not ‘effortless’. 

 

Flow is a state achieved by ‘addition’... in the sense that you may be very skilled at doing something, but only when you add in a key ingredient (which in the case of flow tends to be danger) do you pop into a state of pure flow.

 

Wuwei is a state of ‘subtraction’... in the sense that step by step you let go of layers of the acquired mind and you reveal wuwei. It’s absorption but not focused, not intense and not draining. It’s (eventually) constant.

[Marblehead]

Constant is a long time.  Almost as long as eternity.  I don't think I can last that long.

 

[wandelaar]

It's probably best to reckon flow as a particular form of wu wei. The method used to get into flow is doing something you like and that takes your full concentration to do well. That would explain why flow cannot be kept on for very long.

[OldDog]

8 hours ago, wandelaar said:

Here's a screenshot ...

 

I think this is a fairly good representation of flow.

 

But, I think part of the difficulty with these points is that they are subjectively qualitative. That is, qualities of flow that are self reported by those who have experienced flow or being in the zone. Not that they should be discounted, just that they are a little nebulous without strict definitions in a scientific sense. In this sense, we are talking about an area that does not easily lend itself to the methods of science. This is what I found so interesting in the video of Slingerland, The Paradox of Wu Wei. His group is showing ... very convincingly ... how scientific methods can be used to study these kind of things as social phenomena.

 

Ha! As I was writing this and thinking of Slingerland's work, Asimov's character Hari Seldon (Foundation) came to mind. 

 

 

Edited November 9, 2018 by OldDog
Spelling

[wandelaar]

Brain function should be different in case of wu wei as compared to deliberate action because in wu wei conscious control would be greatly reduced. What happens in the brain is in principle objectively measurable, although that might be very complicated in actual practise.

[Marblehead]

I have often thought that I had no brain function at all because all my blood went to my penis.

 

[wandelaar]

Yes - there are many forms of wu wei but apparently until now nobody thought of (or dared to mention) the most obvious case. Thanks Marblehead!

[OldDog]

I like freeform's differentiation of flow and wu wei.

 

It seems that flow does require considerable effort to achieve ... and hence may be exhausting, depending on activity. For example, in the case of the free climber, I have no doubt that climbing as an activity is both physically and mentally exhausting. Indeed, I don't see how you can do it and not be in the zone ... and having completed the climb be overcome by a sense of exhilaration wrought from the focused exhaustive effort. But what about artists, musicians, craftsmen ... less physically demanding but still requiring some effort. His point being that you have to bring a lot of things to bear on achieving flow ... which cannot be maintained indefinitely.

 

Wu wei seems to be a state where the difference is awareness vs focused ... if you will. Kind of effortlessly focused on everything. To be there you strive for the clarity by removing the mental obstacles that interfere with ability to perceive how things are and how they change.

 

Seems to me that in flow there is an end point ... total absorption in the effort has a limit ... totality. Whereas, in wu wei awareness is openended and can be maintained indefinitely ... and to varying degrees depending on how accomplished one has become. Interestingly, in this regard, Slingerland makes mention of ability to develop the less cognitive aspects of our awarenes. Part of the paradox would seem to be using cognitive abilty to direct one to develop the less cognitive.

 

 

 

 

[wandelaar]

On 3-11-2018 at 10:21 AM, wandelaar said:

What I like about the approach of Slingerland is that he tries to explain wu wei in terms of western psychology. I have also ordered his book on this:

 

https://books.google.nl/books?id=sTG0AAAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false

 

I am now halfway reading the above book. It is very good, and discusses the ideas on wu wei of Confucius, Lao tzu, Mencius, and Chuang tzu and compares them to modern psychological findings and insights. 

 

Edited November 10, 2018 by wandelaar

[OldDog]

2 hours ago, wandelaar said:

... compares them to modern psychological findings and insights. 

 

Any comparison to any western religions?

 

Ask because his research semed to be very broad.

[wandelaar]

8 hours ago, OldDog said:

Any comparison to any western religions?

 

Ask because his research semed to be very broad.

 

Maybe in the second half of the book, it looks like he is taking a more broad view from there on. I will keep you informed.

[wandelaar]

@ OldDog

 

In the second half of the book Slingerland gives us an evolutionary and social-psychological explanation of wu wei and te. It's a surprising vision and I have to let it sink in before further commenting on it.

[OldDog]

36 minutes ago, wandelaar said:

I have to let it sink in ...

 

I know what you mean. Clearly you consume written material much fsster than I do. Still, sinking in is important. For me it is a much slower process. Probably accounts for why it takes me so long to read a text. I look forward to hearing your observations.

[wandelaar]

One thing I can already say: according to Slingerland there is no superior foolproof method to achieve wu wei. It depends on personality, age, activity, etc. So he advices a sort of mixed art. But even then there remains something irreducibly paradoxical about trying not to try.

 

Edited November 11, 2018 by wandelaar

[OldDog]

16 minutes ago, wandelaar said:

It depends on personality, age, activity, etc

 

Reasonable set of observations. To that I would add experience.

 

I think it really important to recognize that we are all different and that we all receive teaching differently.

[Zhongyongdaoist]

5 hours ago, wandelaar said:

14 hours ago, OldDog said:

Any comparison to any western religions?

 

Ask because his research semed to be very broad.

 

Maybe in the second half of the book, it looks like he is taking a more broad view from there on. I will keep you informed.

 

I found Western Classical Philosophy particularly Aristotle's Four Causes and his concept of the "unmoved mover", better translated as "unchanged changer", to be very useful in modeling wu wei.  There are passages in both the Neiye and the Dao De Jing that support this comparison, especially in regard to the notion of "the One".  I have posted on these ideas in several places, but if you are interested I can work up a post and some references for here.

 

ZYD

[wandelaar]

1 minute ago, Zhongyongdaoist said:

I found Western Classical Philosophy particularly Aristotle's Four Causes and his concept of the "unmoved mover", better translated as "unchanged changer", to be very useful in modeling wu wei.  There are passages in both the Neiye and the Dao De Jing that support this comparison, especially in regard to the notion of "the One".  I have posted on these ideas in several places, but if you are interested I can work up a post and some references for here.

 

ZYD

 

I am very interested in books and articles comparing ancient Chinese and classical Greek/Roman philosophy. If you could post some book- and/or article-titles on wu wei that would be great.

[Zhongyongdaoist]

Let me start with two quotes, the first from the Neiye:

 

Quote

Chapter IX

 

1 Those who can transform even a single thing, call them "numinous";

 

2 Those who can alter even a single situation, call them "wise."

 

3 But to transform without expending vital energy; to alter without

expending wisdom:

 

4 Only exemplary persons who hold fast to the One are able

to do this.

 

5 Hold fast to the One; do not lose it,

 

6 And you will be able to master the myriad things.

 

7 Exemplary persons act upon things,

 

8 And are not acted upon by them,

 

9 Because they grasp the guiding principle of the One.

 

(Roth, Harold, Original Tao: Inward Training (nei-yeh) and the Foundations of Taoist Mysticism, Columbia University Press, 1999, p. 62-3, Emphsis added, ZYD)

 

4

內業:

一物能化謂之神，一事能變謂之智，化不易氣，變不易智，惟執一之君子能為此乎！執一不失，能君萬物。君子使物，不為物使。得一之理，治心在於中，治言出於口，治事加於人，然則天下治矣。一言得而天下服，一言定而天下聽，公之謂也。形不正，德不來。中不靜，心不治。正形攝德，天仁地義，則淫然而自至。神明之極，照乎知萬物，中義守不忒。不以物亂官，不以官亂心，是謂中得，有神自在身，一往一來，莫之能思，失之必亂，得之必治。敬除其舍，精將自來。精想思之，寧念治之。嚴容畏敬，精將至定，得之而勿捨，耳目不淫，心無他圖。正心在中，萬物得度。道滿天下，普在民所，民不能知也。一言之解，上察於天，下極於地，蟠滿九州。

(Chinese Text is from the Chinese Text Project, the Bold section is the text which Roth translates as "Chapter IX".  The number four before the text should be a working link to the text at that site.)

 

 

In the above the phrases "But to transform without expending vital energy; to alter without expending wisdom" is practically a description of wu wei and the phrase "Exemplary persons act upon things, And are not acted upon by them" is very close to the notion of the "unchanged changer" of Aristotle which I mentioned above, and finally "Only exemplary persons who hold fast to the One are able to do this" points to the importance of the One as a causal factor in this type of "non action".

 

The second is from the Dao De Jing:

 

Quote

 

39	道德經:	昔之得一者：天得一以清；地得一以寧；神得一以靈；谷得一以盈；萬物得一以生；侯王得一以為天下貞。其致之，天無以清，將恐裂；地無以寧，將恐發；神無以靈，將恐歇；谷無以盈，將恐竭；萬物無以生，將恐滅；侯王無以貴高將恐蹶。故貴以賤為本，高以下為基。是以侯王自稱孤、寡、不穀。此非以賤為本耶？非乎？故致數譽無譽。不欲琭琭如玉，珞珞如石。
	Dao De Jing:	(The origin of the law) The things which from of old have got the One (the Dao) are - Heaven which by it is bright and pure; Earth rendered thereby firm and sure; Spirits with powers by it supplied; Valleys kept full throughout their void All creatures which through it do live Princes and kings who from it get The model which to all they give. All these are the results of the One (Dao). If heaven were not thus pure, it soon would rend; If earth were not thus sure, 'twould break and bend; Without these powers, the spirits soon would fail; If not so filled, the drought would parch each vale; Without that life, creatures would pass away; Princes and kings, without that moral sway, However grand and high, would all decay. Thus it is that dignity finds its (firm) root in its (previous) meanness, and what is lofty finds its stability in the lowness (from which it rises). Hence princes and kings call themselves 'Orphans,' 'Men of small virtue,' and as 'Carriages without a nave.' Is not this an acknowledgment that in their considering themselves mean they see the foundation of their dignity? So it is that in the enumeration of the different parts of a carriage we do not come on what makes it answer the ends of a carriage. They do not wish to show themselves elegant-looking as jade, but (prefer) to be coarse-looking as an (ordinary) stone.

 

(The number 39 above should work as a link to the Chinese Text Project.  I believe the above translation is Legge's version, the emphasis is mine, ZYD)

 

This points out that even the Dao De Jing recognizes the importance of the One.

 

In the West Plato outlines a "Metaphysics of the One" in his dialog Parmenides and Aristotle's Four Causes and the "Unmoved Mover" is developed in several works, mostly his "Physics" and "Metaphysics".  During the period between 200 BCE and 300 CE the "Middle Platonists" worked to synthesize these ideas, this diverse body of work was further synthesized and systematized by Plotinus, whose work marks the transition from Middle to Late Platonism usually called Neoplatonism.

 

In my next post I will expand upon this with both references to my posts here and more internet links as well as some important books.

 

ZYD

 

 

 

Edit: Spacing and minor corrections.

[Taoist Texts]

Quote

 

1 Those who can transform even a single thing, call them "numinous";

 

2 Those who can alter even a single situation, call them "wise."

 

1 and 2 are hopelessly bad translations

 

Quote

 

3 But to transform without expending  altering vital energy; to alter without

expending  altering wisdom:

 

4 Only exemplary persons  a king who  only by holding fast to the One are able

to do this.

 

3 and 4 are just bad 

 

2 hours ago, Zhongyongdaoist said:

is practically a description of wu wei and ...... very close to the notion of the "unchanged changer" of Aristotle

this is correct, yes quite close

[freeform]

7 hours ago, wandelaar said:

according to Slingerland there is no superior foolproof method to achieve wu wei. 

 

 

Better leave that to the Daoist practitioners...

[wandelaar]

1 hour ago, freeform said:

Better leave that to the Daoist practitioners...

 

No - we will not! Wu wei is a human phenomenon, and no ethnic, religious or esoteric group has the right to monopolise its study, investigation and cultivation. Besides, Taoism itself contains widely divergent practices, and wu wei isn't even an exclusively Taoist concept and phenomenon. So your suggestion is widely off the mark.

 

Sectarian claims on offering a superior foolproof method to achieve wu wei don't prove anything. 

 

 

Edited November 11, 2018 by wandelaar