I would need a mountain of good scientific evidence to accept any claims of alternative medicine. — Tom Storm

Good! if so, we should focus on figuring out the philosophy.
The power behind the long life is philosophy.

I offer here the most definitive, authoritative sources of the West on your topic, and my best interpretation of them, which will no doubt be disputed here. — unenlightened

I think for general Taiwanese and Chinese, even in ancient time illiterate people,
we study equality philosophy like Laozi ＆ Zhuang Zi because people are using Chinese medicine.
Studying the philosophy is for our health.
If people do inequality things or abusing others, we'll think that person will be short life or unhealthy.
(Maybe Greeks think as the same way as Chinese? If they claim their long life is because of their equal mind and society?)

Confucius is taught in the school, about moral.
School teachers don't let us understand Laozi ＆ Zhuang Zi too much when we are young.
Because teachers and parents will be afraid young students will think getting 0 scores in the exam is equal to getting 100 scores in the exam.

What is the motivation for westerners to do equality?
I think the most basic motivation for Taiwanese and Chinese to do equality is for health.

What is the motivation for westerners to do equality?
I think the most basic motivation for Taiwanese and Chinese to do equality is for health. — YiRu Li

Preventing suffering and promoting flourishing - often based on a human rights or sacredness of the individual frame.

If people do inequality things or abusing others, we'll think that person will be short life or unhealthy. — YiRu Li

I'm known many abusive, nasty people who lived very long lives. Hence the well known expression 'only the good die young.'

Is your question how to be the same in a world of difference? — tim wood

I think so!
In Zhuang Zi, it is translated to 'The Identity of Contraries'.
But it's very hard to understand sometimes.
I hope the discussion here can make it easier to understand.
I heard a Taiwanese philosophy professor said western philosophy is very good at 'The Identity of Contraries'.

I think so!
In Zhuang Zi, it is translated to 'The Identity of Contraries'.
But it's very hard to understand sometimes. — YiRu Li

As with many things, it becomes easier to understand when you stop trying so hard to understand it.

And I understand that process as at first trying to shoehorn a new idea into old understandings, where it does not fit and will not go. In time the understanding absorbs the new idea as a new idea and goes about the process of getting used to it and seeing both what it is and how it works. For me an example of this process was my learning what a function is in math - it took a while.

There is no need to ping everybody. The thread goes to the top of the site everytime someone posts on it.

Which is achieved through Absolute Knowing. But to figure out how this is achieved, students of Kabbalah and the Gnostic Ogdoad will need to first watch the reboot, Neon Genesis EvanHegellion.

I see now, Adam and Eve must be the last — or first, from where everything sprang — thesis and antithesis.

Now I ask, what is the synthesis, the absolute spirit of our Yebisu premium?

I see now.
Equality has different kinds and levels.

Is that possible for you to describe 'Neon Genesis EvanHegellion' & 'Human instrumentality' you are talking about?
It may help us understand our OP by seeing different equality?

e.g.
I'd say that the western equality unenlightened post is 'equality by law'.

If I don't use Chinese medicine or Eastern Philosophy or Greeks' long life secret to describe the equality of our OP,
I'd say our OP is about : Matthew 19:21: Jesus said to him, “If you would be perfect, go, sell what you possess and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me.” or Socrates' death.

Amor Fati, and Yea Saying?... From Nietzsche's Joyful Wisdom Aphorism 276:

"I have wished for myself today, and what thought first crossed my mind this year, a thought which ought to be the basis, the pledge and the sweetening of all my future life! I want more and more to perceive the necessary characters in things as the beautiful: I shall thus be one of those who beautify things. Amor fati: let that henceforth be my love! I do not want to wage war with the ugly. I do not want to accuse, I do not want even to accuse the accusers. Looking aside, let that be my sole negation! And all in all, to sum up: I wish to be at any time hereafter only a yea-sayer!" — Vaskane

This will work if we stop listening to the publicity and marketing. — L'éléphant

:up:


-----
"Before conditions existed, Tao was. Before definitions existed. Speech was. Subjectively, we are conscious of certain delimitations which are:

Right and⁠ Left
Relationship⁠ and Obligation
Division and Discrimination
Emulation and Contention
These are called the Eight Predicables."
...
"The true Sage," answered Tzŭ Ch'i, "keeps his knowledge within him, while men in general set forth theirs in argument, in order to convince each other. And therefore it is said that in argument he does not manifest himself."
[Others try to establish their own subjective view. The true Sage remains passive, aiming only at the annihilation of contraries.]

--Chuang Tzŭ (Giles)/Chapter 2 The Identity of Contraries [24]
-----

What did give Speech definitions? What can hide the truth by using speech?

What can annihilate contraries? Dialectic?

Did politicians already use 'Dialectic' in their talks?

That is interesting, Nietzsche says those who share their secrets are no longer in love with their knowledge. — Vaskane

True, sharing sounds better than argument.

I wish to be at any time hereafter only a yea-sayer!" — Vaskane

Maybe when Nietzsche said the above, he did keep his knowledge within him?

To Nietzsche that which annihilates contradictories, is the "redemption" a person feels when they are performing their "art." By that I mean, like a martial artist practices until their mind and body are like one, they do not have to think about their movements, the martial practitioner has taken their trade to the level of an art. Same goes with an author, or a computer engineer, a mathematician, a skateboarder, a chef. But for Nietzsche one does not want these contradictories to disappear fully, they are responsible for creating the tension, the suffering, in which one experiences to be motivated to overcome and achieve. — Vaskane

Do you think Nietzsche knew Chuang Tzŭ?
Chuang Tzŭ also has a similar concept in the following very popular allegory:

-------

MY life has a limit, but my knowledge is without limit. To drive the limited in search of the limitless, is fatal; and the knowledge of those who do this is fatally lost.

In striving for others, avoid fame. In striving for self, avoid disgrace. Pursue a middle course. Thus you will keep a sound body, and a sound mind, fulfil your duties, and work out your allotted span.

Prince Hui's cook was cutting up a bullock. Every blow of his hand, every heave of his shoulders, every tread of his foot, every thrust of his knee, every whshh of rent flesh, every chhk of the chopper, was in perfect harmony,—rhythmical like the dance of the Mulberry Grove, simultaneous like the chords of the Ching Shou.

[Commentators are divided in their identifications of these ancient morceaux.]

"Well done!" cried the Prince. "Yours is skill indeed."

"Sire," replied the cook; "I have always devoted myself to Tao. It is better than skill. When I first began to cut up bullocks, I saw before me simply whole bullocks. After three years' practice, I saw no more whole animals.

[Meaning that he saw them, so to speak, in sections.]

And now I work with my mind and not with my eye. When my senses bid me stop, but my mind urges me on, I fall back upon eternal principles. I follow such openings or cavities as there may be, according to the natural constitution of the animal. I do not attempt to cut through joints: still less through large bones.

[For a curious parallelism, see Plato's Phaedrus, 265.]

"A good cook changes his chopper once a year,—because he cuts. An ordinary cook, once a month,—because he hacks. But I have had this chopper nineteen years, and although I have cut up many thousand bullocks, its edge is as if fresh from the whetstone. For at the joints there are always interstices, and the edge of a chopper being without thickness, it remains only to insert that which is without thickness into such an interstice.

[These words help to elucidate a much-vexed passage in ch. xliii of the Tao-Tê-Ching. See The Remains of Lao Tzŭ, p. 30.]

By these means the interstice will be enlarged, and the blade will find plenty of room. It is thus that I have kept my chopper for nineteen years as though fresh from the whetstone.

"Nevertheless, when I come upon a hard part where the blade meets with a difficulty, I am all caution. I fix my eye on it. I stay my hand, and gently apply my blade, until with a hwah the part yields like earth crumbling to the ground. Then I take out my chopper, and stand up, and look around, and pause, until with an air of triumph I wipe my chopper and put it carefully away."

"Bravo!" cried the Prince. "From the words of this cook I have learnt how to take care of my life."

[Meaning that which informs life, sc. the soul.]

--Chuang Tzŭ (Giles)/Chapter 3, Nourishment of the Soul

-------


1. Why can a person annihilate contradictories, it will reflect to his career like 'art'?
I guess that's because he knows the way to deal with everything according to 'The Identity of Contraries'?

2. Why can a person do his career like 'art', he can annihilate contradictions?
I guess he learned the skill through practice?

What are you referring to? — Tom Storm

I don't see how that works. — Vera Mont

his favorite philosopher was, he replied (after a bit of thought), Jesus Christ. — jgill

Equality is like the concept of perfection, totally unrealistic, but an ideal mark to shoot for, one which in fact will never be reached. — boagie

And the King shall answer and say unto them, ‘Verily I say unto you, inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these My brethren, ye have done it unto Me — Matthew 25:40

:up:


I summarized the core logic from Chuang Tzŭ about dealing with inequality. 
Maybe it will help answer your questions.

—-Chuang Tzŭ (Giles)/Chapter 2, The Identity of Contraries—
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Chuang_Tz%C5%AD_(Giles)/Chapter_2

*Belong to
White horse belongs to horse, black horse belongs to horse. 
White horse and black horse both are horses. 
So black house and white horse are the same.

*As a whole thing
A monkey gets 3 fruits in the morning & gets 4 fruits in the evening. 
V.S. gets 4 fruits in the morning & gets 3 in the evening. 
In both situations, the monkey gets a total of 7 fruits a day. 
So both situations are the same.

*Existence
Everything on the earth didn't exist before. In the future it'll not exist. 
All the time only the universe or heaven exists. 
So everything on the earth is the same.

*Compare to infinite space or time 
From outer space to looking at the earth, everything on the earth looks very small. 
Compare the time from the beginning of the universe until now, everything on the earth almost exists in a 0 time. 
So everything on the earth is the same, because all are super small or lasting in a very short time.


So if we apply this logic to Jesus’ verses.
‘the least of these My brethren’ belongs to a human. Jesus belongs to a human.
‘the least of these My brethren’ and Jesus are the same.
So things done to ‘the least of these My brethren’, is the same as things done to Jesus.

From Chinese civilization's view, Jesus provides many examples to apply these abstract equality logics in every aspect of our daily life, in the Gospel.

This logic is also applied to Chinese medicine to keep a peaceful mind.
If the emotions favor something too strong, it will trigger the unbalance of the Autonomic Nervous system and Endocrine system.

Chinese medicine is about philosophy, Qigong, acupuncture (healing power from our own body), and herbs (healing power from nature. e.g. forest).
It is a preventive medicine.
It thinks small sickness will accumulate to big sickness, then big sickness will lead to death.
Chinese medicine is very promised to prevent and treat small sicknesses.
But not that focus on treating big sickness as western medicine.
(I’m afraid the philosophy behind is:  ‘Life<->Death’ is the same. 
It actually doesn’t suggest taking too much extra effort to pursue ‘life’. 
It should go with nature, e.g. healthy lifestyles.)

There is lots of scientific research about how Chinese medicine treats the Autonomic Nervous system and Endocrine system.

I provided some history in our discussions, because Chinese civilization is from other older civilizations or races, reformed.
I think a similar concept is also in western philosophy.

Do you think equality will be easier to achieve, if we think it in a logical & scientific way, and apply it to daily life? 
instead of in a ‘law’ way?
Of course we need equality at the 'law' level.
Not everyone can have enlightenment in philosophy.

Thank you, I appreciate the effort, but I am unable to make sense of any of this. Perhaps some others will find it useful.

:up:

In the previous post, I delineated four logics for equality.
I believe the 'social policy' you mentioned is an application of at least one of the equality logics I listed. Can you identify which of these logics corresponds to the 'social policy'?


**Belong to:**
The white horse and the black horse both fall under the category of horses.
In essence, both the white and black horses are horses, highlighting their similarity.

**As a whole thing:**
In one scenario, a monkey receives 3 fruits in the morning and 4 fruits in the evening,
while in another scenario, it gets 4 fruits in the morning and 3 in the evening.
Regardless of the variation, both situations result in the monkey acquiring a total of 7 fruits a day, establishing the equivalence of both scenarios.

**Existence:**
Nothing on Earth existed in the past, and nothing will persist in the future.
Throughout time, only the universe or heaven endures.
Consequently, everything on Earth shares the same transitory nature.

**Compare to infinite space or time:**
When viewed from outer space, everything on Earth appears minute.
Similarly, considering the expansive timeframe from the beginning of the universe until now, everything on Earth virtually exists within an infinitesimally small span.
In this context, everything on Earth is alike, as each entity is extremely small or exists for an exceedingly brief period.

The thing is I don't find such allegories (shall we say abstractions?) helpful. I would like to see an articulated social policy strategy, along with a specific a plan for implementation in the real world. Sorry, but when it comes to dealing with human disadvantage I am a concrete thinker.

For instance -

**Existence:**
Nothing on Earth existed in the past, and nothing will persist in the future.
Throughout time, only the universe or heaven endures.
Consequently, everything on Earth shares the same transitory nature. — YiRu Li

So what? I take this as a given. But it is not a helpful frame in dealing with a homeless woman and child on the street who are starving. I can't see how this is any different to the economist Keynes' often misused quote, "In the long run we are all dead".

When viewed from outer space, everything on Earth appears minute.
Similarly, considering the expansive timeframe from the beginning of the universe until now, everything on Earth virtually exists within an infinitesimally small span.
In this context, everything on Earth is alike, as each entity is extremely small or exists for an exceedingly brief period. — YiRu Li

A very unhelpful frame when dealing with a man who is dying of cancer in a deserted building, unable to get medical treatment and any type of assistance owing to poverty. How do we apply the above: "Don't worry, Sir. Your suffering doesn't amount to anything significant when measured against the infinity of space and the tininess of our planet?" As an approach to the matter of human suffering, I would call this sociopathic.

In most instances inequality and injustice equate to suffering and exclusion. These can be addressed with practical support and resources. We also know from history and current interventions around the world that the suffering and inequality can be alleviated.

There is no question that there are some people who think poverty is merely a fact of life (some may even misuse a Bible quote from John, "For the poor always ye have with you...") and therefore can be safely avoided. This is generally a variety of right wing thinking that I personally find abhorrent and sociopathic.

:up:

It's Amazing you can see these logics from poor people's view.

‘It is more blessed to give than to receive.’

How about seeing these logics from the givers' view?
Will it help the givers to donate more of his money, instead of only keeping his money for his own children or family or his personal enjoyment?

Can you identify which of these logics corresponds to the 'social policy'? from the givers' view?


**Belong to:**
The white horse and the black horse both fall under the category of horses.
In essence, both the white and black horses are horses, highlighting their similarity.

**As a whole thing:**
In one scenario, a monkey receives 3 fruits in the morning and 4 fruits in the evening,
while in another scenario, it gets 4 fruits in the morning and 3 in the evening.
Regardless of the variation, both situations result in the monkey acquiring a total of 7 fruits a day, establishing the equivalence of both scenarios.

**Existence:**
Nothing on Earth existed in the past, and nothing will persist in the future.
Throughout time, only the universe or heaven endures.
Consequently, everything on Earth shares the same transitory nature.

**Compare to infinite space or time:**
When viewed from outer space, everything on Earth appears minute.
Similarly, considering the expansive timeframe from the beginning of the universe until now, everything on Earth virtually exists within an infinitesimally small span.
In this context, everything on Earth is alike, as each entity is extremely small or exists for an exceedingly brief period.

As I said, abstracts don’t work for me. Maybe you could demonstrate?

It's Amazing you can see these logics from poor people's view. — YiRu Li

What do you mean? Are you saying that it is amazing that we could know that food, housing, medical treatment are critical to people who are poor and have none of these things?

As I said, abstracts don’t work for me. Maybe you could demonstrate? — Tom Storm

:chin:

e.g.
For 'belong to',

If a 'giver' acknowledges that poor people also 'belong to' the category of humans, they can feel empathy or compassion towards them.
Alternatively, they may consider the possibility that one day they themselves could face financial struggles.

Many individuals perceive poor people as being similar to themselves, prompting them to support social policies.

Social policy exists because people have 'belong to' this concept, not because this world has lots of poor people.

That seems to be an excellent frame and good explanation.

There are good inequalities and bad inequalities. A good inequality is a due inequality. A bad inequality is a condition where there is privation of a due equality. In this case we have to introduce equality to face the inequality.

There are good inequalities and bad inequalities. A good inequality is a due inequality. A bad inequality is a condition where there is privation of a due equality. In this case we have to introduce equality to face the inequality. — IP060903

How can we recognize whether we are in a situation of positive or negative inequality?
Often, we may not be fully aware of the circumstances we find ourselves in.
This lack of awareness is why minor health issues can escalate into major ones, eventually culminating in fatal outcomes."

That seems to be an excellent frame — Tom Storm

:chin:

Is it 'Plato's Theory of Forms'?

It seems peculiar; essential to the world, yet it takes us a considerable amount of time to comprehend.

Is it 'Plato's Theory of Forms'?

It seems peculiar; essential to the world, yet it takes us a considerable amount of time to comprehend. — YiRu Li

I think it is empathy. I suspect humans, as a social species, are hard wired for empathy which is likely foundational to morality and human rights. It helps us survive as a speciies if we all collaborate and work together for the common good. The advantage of this is often described by philosophers and evolutionary biologists as reciprocal altruism.

I think it is empathy. I suspect humans, as a social species, are hard wired for empathy which is likely foundational to morality and human rights. I — Tom Storm

Not empathy, or not just empathy. Remember that empathy is hard-wired, based on mirror neurons. Whereas our notions of social equality have changed radically in mere decades and centuries.

I think moral progress is social, and primarily consists in expanding the circle of who gets to be a moral agent, worthy of empathy. Moral regression is just the opposite, constricting that circle.

The poor are always a hotly contested area in this regard. There are always those who consider them unworthy, unimportant, deserving of their condition, and fundamentally unequal with their economic betters.

I agree.

Perhaps look into which inequalities are manufactured and can be reversed rather than the ones that simply are inherent within ourselves? — Vaskane

:up:

Do you mean our life is an 'ART'?
It's most beautiful in its 'natural' ways.
However, we may or may not treat it as 'ART,' and this deviates from the 'natural' way.
Manufactured inequality is an example.
As artists, can we examine the manufactured and reversible aspects and restore them to their original natural beauty?

That seems to be an excellent frame — Tom Storm

If it's not 'Plato's Theory of Forms'?
Maybe you resonate with the concept of 'Tao'?

A moral equality is stipulated. — unenlightened

Authentic Chinese civilization has never stipulated the concept of equality or morality; it is referred to as 'Tao.'
'Tao' could be translated as 'The Way', 'Science', 'Key Point', '20/80 Principle', or 'Enlightenment Thinking'. or even 'Holy spirit'.

The following allegory explains 'Tao':

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chuang Tzŭ (Giles)/Chapter 24, Hsü Wu Kuei [316]
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Chuang_Tz%C5%AD_(Giles)/Chapter_24

When the Yellow Emperor went to see Tao upon the Chü-tz'ŭ Mountain,
Fang Ming was his charioteer, Chang Yü sat on his right, Chang Jo and Hsi P'êng were his outriders, and K'un Hun and Hua Chi brought up the rear.
[Commentators tear this passage to tatters.]

On reaching the wilds of Hsiang-cheng,
[The limit of the known.]

these seven Sages lost their way and there was no one of whom to ask the road. By and by, they fell in with a boy who was grazing horses, and asked him, saying, "Do you know the Chü-tz'ŭ Mountain?"

"I do," replied the boy.

"And can you tell us," continued the Sages, "where Tao abides?"

"I can," replied the boy.

"This is a strange lad," cried the Yellow Emperor. "Not only does he know where the Chü-tz'ŭ Mountain is, but also where Tao abides! Come tell me, pray, how would you govern the empire?"

"I should govern the empire," said the boy, "just the same as I look after my horses. What else should I do?

"When I was a little boy and used to live within the points of the compass,
[In Vanity Fair.]
my eyes got dim of sight. An old man advised me to mount the chariot of the sun
[I.e. of Intelligence.]

and visit the wilds of Hsiang-ch'êng. My sight is now much better, and I continue to dwell without the points of the compass. I should govern the empire in just the same way. What else should I do?"

"Of course," said the Yellow Emperor, "government is not your trade. Still I should be glad to hear what you would do."

The boy declined to answer, but on being again urged, cried out, "What difference is there between governing the empire and looking after horses? See that no harm comes to the horses, that is all!"

Thereupon the Emperor prostrated himself before the boy; and addressing him as Divine Teacher, took his leave.

[Divine Teacher means "inspired by God." The term used is that employed in modern times for the head or Pope of debased Taoism, often wrongly rendered as the "Master of Heaven."]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So, equality or morality is one of crucial paths to ensure 'no harm comes to the horses' or effective 'management'.
Confucianism emphasizes fulfilling 'Tao' to pursue perfection, while Taoism is more focused on restoring things to their original nature by fulfilling 'Tao.'

For me an example of 'this process' was my learning what a function is in math - it took a while. — tim wood

May I ask for your advice on how to learn math, or an example of effective math learning?

Because my math skills are quite weak.
I failed five semesters of math in high school.
It was only when I started memorizing and practicing all the examples my math teacher taught that I saw improvement.
Eventually, I achieved a score of 96 on the final college entrance exam in the sixth semester. Unfortunately, this pattern seems to repeat in my life.

I'm concerned that my poor performance in math might lead me down the wrong path in 'this process'?

A moral equality is stipulated.
— unenlightened

Authentic Chinese civilization has never stipulated the concept of equality or morality; it is referred to as 'Tao.'
'Tao' could be translated as 'The Way', 'Science', 'Key Point', '20/80 Principle', or 'Enlightenment Thinking'. or even 'Holy spirit'. — YiRu Li

I have read Chuang Tzŭ a long time ago, and have an outsider's understanding of Tao. I think morality as understood in the West is more in tune with Confucius' thought. A matter of duty in a social world. Confucius is more secular, and Taoism more spiritual. Ruling a country is like cooking a small fish (don't over do it.) It's a great government that can take that sort of advice!

If it's not 'Plato's Theory of Forms'?
Maybe you resonate with the concept of 'Tao'? — YiRu Li

Neither of those resonate with me.

What you said is this -

If a 'giver' acknowledges that poor people also 'belong to' the category of humans, they can feel empathy or compassion towards them.
Alternatively, they may consider the possibility that one day they themselves could face financial struggles. — YiRu Li

This in Western terms generally expresses 1) a human rights perspective and 2) reciprocal altruism.