wandelaar

Tao and the Laws of Nature

Recommended Posts

On 11/29/2018 at 7:43 PM, wandelaar said:

1) Does Tao simply consists of the Laws of Nature?

 

1 hour ago, Wu Ming Jen said:

1) No, it makes the laws of nature possible

 

1 hour ago, dawei said:

1. Dao is akin to emptiness.   An empty mental concept of a non-mental state.   Laws of nature are a part of dualistic mindset.  The two are separate till they merge as One non-separation. 

 

 

Man follows the earth.
Earth follows heaven.
Heaven follows the Tao.
Tao follows what is natural.

 

I understood Tao follows what is natural as Tao follows Nature. Is this interpretation incorrect?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, KuroShiro said:

I understood Tao follows what is natural as Tao follows Nature. Is this interpretation incorrect?

 

It's difficult to say what is correct or incorrect, but it seems to me that the above interpretation makes Tao superfluous.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, KuroShiro said:

Man follows the earth.
Earth follows heaven.
Heaven follows the Tao.
Tao follows what is natural.

 

I understood Tao follows what is natural as Tao follows Nature. Is this interpretation incorrect?

 

We have to remember, Tao is an idea or thought or a black box for  how things move.  It is not a thing.  So when Laozi put it together with 'things', it is more a cosmological sequence, IMO.  

 

So, Tao follows nothing; all follows, or all is a description of how Tao represents all things.   This DDJ25 is incredibly difficult to truly translate as the four lines are completely parallel but the last line is to be understood differently from the previous three, unless there can be a parallel translation.

 

The word here 'follows' is fa, which means law but maybe better meant as a pattern, or follows. 

 

I commented here:

https://www.thedaobums.com/topic/17504-ttc-study-chapter-25-of-the-tao-teh-ching/?do=findComment&comment=245597

 

But I later said I really like how Dusty treated the lines:

 

https://www.thedaobums.com/topic/17504-ttc-study-chapter-25-of-the-tao-teh-ching/?do=findComment&comment=589579

 

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, dawei said:

 

We have to remember, Tao is an idea or thought or a black box for  how things move.  It is not a thing.  So when Laozi put it together with 'things', it is more a cosmological sequence, IMO.  

 

So, Tao follows nothing; all follows, or all is a description of how Tao represents all things.   This DDJ25 is incredibly difficult to truly translate as the four lines are completely parallel but the last line is to be understood differently from the previous three, unless there can be a parallel translation.

 

The word here 'follows' is fa, which means law but maybe better meant as a pattern, or follows. 

 

I commented here:

https://www.thedaobums.com/topic/17504-ttc-study-chapter-25-of-the-tao-teh-ching/?do=findComment&comment=245597

 

But I later said I really like how Dusty treated the lines:

 

https://www.thedaobums.com/topic/17504-ttc-study-chapter-25-of-the-tao-teh-ching/?do=findComment&comment=589579

 

 

 

Thank you.

I'll check those links.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, KuroShiro said:

 

 

 

 

Man follows the earth.
Earth follows heaven.
Heaven follows the Tao.
Tao follows what is natural.

 

I understood Tao follows what is natural as Tao follows Nature. Is this interpretation incorrect?

Tao is the manifestation of what is natural as opposed to supernatural or not from this world. To follow means to listen, listen to the nature and it will teach us how everything works. The laws applies to all manifestation within the laws of yin and yang there is also what is outside of the laws of yin and yang but that is not physical, it is the non physical energies we all are born with.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Wu Ming Jen said:

Tao is the manifestation of what is natural as opposed to supernatural or not from this world. To follow means to listen, listen to the nature and it will teach us how everything works. The laws applies to all manifestation within the laws of yin and yang there is also what is outside of the laws of yin and yang but that is not physical, it is the non physical energies we all are born with.

 

Then what is the foundation of the non physical world? Did that precede even the Tao? 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/30/2018 at 4:33 PM, KuroShiro said:

 

I've just tried this and it can be done with the right hand, it actually seems easier than left. Have you tried it?

 

Quote

Recently McManus, et al., inferred from the data of normal subjects that the right-hand superiority in inter-tap intervals was a consequence of cerebral dominance in control mechanisms.

 

https://moscow.sci-hub.tw/1279/36e06ca93edf42c252f151c229517625/kashiwagi1989.pdf#view=FitH

Hemispheric asymmetry of processing temporal aspects of repetitive movement in two patients with infraction involving the corpus callosum

Author links open overlay panelAsakoKashiwagi

ToshihiroKashiwagiTakashiNishikawa§Jun-IchiroOkuda||

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 29/11/2018 at 7:43 PM, wandelaar said:

What is the relation between Tao and the Laws of Nature?

 

1) Does Tao simply consists of the Laws of Nature?

2) But if so - than Tao isn't beyond description...

3) So maybe Tao lies deeper and forms the foundation of the Laws of Nature?

4) Does Tao determine the outcome of quantum mechanical chance events?

5) Or is a fundamental indeterminacy (or if you want: creativity) an essential part of Tao?

 

 

Hey! Here are my direct answers, if I may :)

 

1) In a nutshell, yes.

2) Also yes. It's easier to observe and feel as opposed to describing it. But you can paint a fair picture

3) No, I would say it's all encompasing

4) I am intrigued to hear an elaboration on this question. Taking it at face value, I have to say Tao determines nothing amd quantum mechanics is only theory

5) Sure...everything is an essential part of Tao

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Rara said:

4) I am intrigued to hear an elaboration on this question. Taking it at face value, I have to say Tao determines nothing amd quantum mechanics is only theory

 

I agree with all your answers except the above one, quantum mechanics isn't only theory. Semiconductors and all equipment that is based on them (such as computers and the internet) wouldn't work if quantum mechanics were just a theory that were no better than for instance classical electrodynamics.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, wandelaar said:

 

I agree with all your answers except the above one, quantum mechanics isn't only theory. Semiconductors and all equipment that is based on them (such as computers and the internet) wouldn't work if quantum mechanics were just a theory that were no better than for instance classical electrodynamics.

 

Perhaps, it's not an area I'm all that read up on. But what do you mean by chance events?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, dawei said:

 

Sorry, but I don't think those links are very helpful. Taking Tao as the ultimate foundation of everything (as I do) explains its elusive qualities and rules out the possibility that Tao itself was created. If Tao itself was created than one would have to suppose that there is a super-Tao that created Tao, but that is pure and unhelpful speculation. We don't know what the ultimate foundation of everything (called Tao) is, and we can only experience its results as they manifest in both the physical world and in our inner thoughts, feelings, etc. The original Taoists didn't like theological speculation.

 

Edited by wandelaar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, wandelaar said:

we can only experience its results as they manifest in both the physical world and in our inner thoughts, feelings, etc. The original Taoists didn't like theological speculation.

 

We change what we experience by changing the depth of our being.

Laozi / Chuang tzu were not experiencing what you are experiencing, because they cultivated their being and experienced deep currents of existence, then they spoke about them.

One cannot understand from a distance because there is no understanding without deepening your being, that in itself is understanding.

The mind is able to "think" about things of which it does not know .... which might on occasion be useful but of course it because fake and misguided and missing the point, and a big headache going nowhere.

Taoists didn't like speculation because they didn't need to, they deepened their being every day, and every day they understood more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/29/2018 at 12:43 PM, wandelaar said:

What is the relation between Tao and the Laws of Nature?

 

1) Does Tao simply consists of the Laws of Nature?

2) But if so - than Tao isn't beyond description...

3) So maybe Tao lies deeper and forms the foundation of the Laws of Nature?

4) Does Tao determine the outcome of quantum mechanical chance events?

5) Or is a fundamental indeterminacy (or if you want: creativity) an essential part of Tao?

 

Just keep meditating-

 (I am thinking of embroidering this on a sitting cushion for folks who over think- you will never get there with just thinking mind)  LOL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let me add some extra thinking ;):

 

The idea that there is such a thing as pure deep experience independent of thinking is simply wrong. Such an experience would lack meaning and cognitive content. What we see in actual fact is that mystical experiences and forms  of enlightenment are interpreted according to the spiritual, religious, or ideological perspective of the person having the experience. The reasoning of rideforever is a good example. He supposes that deep experiences are somehow more true or real than shallow ones. But how do we know that? Answer: we don't know it, it's just a dogma that's current in certain spiritual paths. So Bums (and others) who in their spiritual practice claim to go beyond reasoning actually don't go beyond it but only follow an irrational form of thinking with accompanying unprovable suppositions that are hidden from view by refusing to discus the theoretical underpinnings of the path. Nevertheless there clearly are such underpinnings (if only implicit) for otherwise there would not be a specific path to follow. His criticism of my rational approach already shows that the path proposed by rideforever has its own do's an don'ts.

 

So my stance is that as a human being one cannot do without thinking and that followers of spiritual paths that claim to do so are fooling both themselves and others.

 

Edited by wandelaar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, wandelaar said:

Let me add some extra thinking ;):

 

That feeling you have that thought is important ... it flowers into consciousness.

Edited by rideforever
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/12/2018 at 1:51 PM, wandelaar said:

 

Right, I get ya. And also, then, I would also ask, does Tao determine consciousness? To which, I would simply say, yes. So yes to your question, but not to confuse with it governing chance events.

 

If Tao is all encompasing, but non judgemental, all things are within the Tao. But we are not here to understand what man cannot understand.

 

From your artice, "it is impossible to predict when an atom will decay". Tao knows, but knows nothing too. The phenomenon of chance, or something seen as random or unexpected is still what we can call an act of nature. Just like seasons changing, Tao determines this. But it is unknown whether one day it decides to put a tornado into a town, or whether this is from a butterfly effect of some other incident.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, rideforever said:

That feeling you have that thought is important ... it flowers into consciousness.

 

Sure enough, and I recognize that it does. But the feeling that thinking isn't important also flowers into consciousness, and that goes unrecognised by those who refuse to think about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Rara said:

 

Right, I get ya. And also, then, I would also ask, does Tao determine consciousness? To which, I would simply say, yes. So yes to your question, but not to confuse with it governing chance events.

 

If Tao is all encompasing, but non judgemental, all things are within the Tao. But we are not here to understand what man cannot understand.

 

From your artice, "it is impossible to predict when an atom will decay". Tao knows, but knows nothing too. The phenomenon of chance, or something seen as random or unexpected is still what we can call an act of nature. Just like seasons changing, Tao determines this. But it is unknown whether one day it decides to put a tornado into a town, or whether this is from a butterfly effect of some other incident.

 

When the OP says "radioactive decay" that just means he has not really studied qigong masters. So he's just imposing the wrong Western science worldview onto qigong and therefore is confused.

 

Quote

"Conclusions: The results from the two sets of experiments demonstrated that the external Qi emitted by Yan Xin from the United States to Beijing (China) could cause an astonishing 12% change in the radioactive decay rate of the radioactive source 241Am, as well as significantly affect de-ionized water, and change its ultraviolet absorption spectrum."

http://www.highstrangeness.tv/0-7796-yan-xin-qigong-science--practice.html

Quote

I read about that in a book. Yan Xin could change the decay rate of radioactive elements from 10 feet away while the control groups remained unchanged! Then one day he was stuck in traffic and running late. So, he called in to apologise and said he'd have to project qi from 10 miles away!

http://www.wolfspiritradio.com/tune/qi-of-qigong/

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, voidisyinyang said:

 

When the OP says "radioactive decay" that just means he has not really studied qigong masters. So he's just imposing the wrong Western science worldview onto qigong and therefore is confused.

 

http://www.highstrangeness.tv/0-7796-yan-xin-qigong-science--practice.html

http://www.wolfspiritradio.com/tune/qi-of-qigong/

 

I don't think that's what the OP is saying at all. In fact, they said nothing to impose a Western science view, but merely asked how "chance events" are affected by Tao (if at all)

 

I already already stated my opinion on quantum mechanics, but I ask why you feel the links that you provided hold up equally to the quantum theory argument? Both articles are journalistic and to the best of my knowledge, misinformed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/29/2018 at 2:43 PM, wandelaar said:

What is the relation between Tao and the Laws of Nature?

 

Does Nature respect laws?

My impression is that "laws" of Nature are simply consistencies in our limited sphere of observation.

 

On 12/12/2018 at 12:43 PM, wandelaar said:

The idea that there is such a thing as pure deep experience independent of thinking is simply wrong. Such an experience would lack meaning and cognitive content. 

 

Such is opinion of a mind that has yet to experience anything other than identifying with its contents.

Meaning and cognitive content do not define existence or experience, they are simply intellectual reflection and communication stimulated by experience.

 

On 12/12/2018 at 12:43 PM, wandelaar said:

So my stance is that as a human being one cannot do without thinking and that followers of spiritual paths that claim to do so are fooling both themselves and others.

 

Clearly there is and will always be thinking.

It has great value.

And it has limits. 

Those who never go beyond thought will never know how much richness and possibility they are missing.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/13/2018 at 6:55 AM, Rara said:

 

I don't think that's what the OP is saying at all. In fact, they said nothing to impose a Western science view, but merely asked how "chance events" are affected by Tao (if at all)

 

I already already stated my opinion on quantum mechanics, but I ask why you feel the links that you provided hold up equally to the quantum theory argument? Both articles are journalistic and to the best of my knowledge, misinformed.

you can find my answer here https://elixirfield.blogspot.com/2018/12/the-i-thought-is-non-commutative.html

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites