Thank you for this topic, TC. — Caldwell

You're welcome, but I'm mostly doing this for myself. This is fun.

You're welcome, but I'm mostly doing this for myself. This is fun. — T Clark

LOL! You embody the good man, indeed! :grin:

You're talking about affect and valence. What do those mean in this context? Value? Preference? Is it like one of those surveys - on a scale of 1 to 10, how do you rate this? Is that what you mean by "relational?" — T Clark

Affect consists of valence/attention and arousal/effort, and is measurable only by one OR the other of these - like a photon. When we quantitatively measure one aspect, that measurement is in necessary qualitative relation to the other aspect. This is what I think Lao Tzu is trying to describe here. He’s referring to the ‘on a scale’ part of those surveys. To differentiate affect, we qualify upper and lower limitations of experience on a particular scale or value structure: good and bad, beautiful and ugly, one and ten, and then we can not just name but quantify the 10,000 things in necessary relation to these limitations and each other.

Except I don't think Lao Tzu is talking about judgments and distinctions as shades of gray. I think he's saying they are illusions. "Illusion" is probably not the right word. That's more of a Buddhist thing, but it's something like that. — T Clark

You’re right, illusion is the wrong word. I think of them as constructs, like scaffolding. I agree that this qualification of upper and lower limitations is arbitrary, but it’s a dimensionally different kind of naming to the 10,000 things. Good and bad, black and white, beautiful and ugly - these are not naming things or concepts but boundaries to value structures that differentiate our relation to the Tao.

I’m saying that black and white, for instance, we have arbitrarily named as upper and lower limitations to the variable quality of greyness. Good and bad, beautiful and ugly, etc are also nothing but constructs of our own limited relations. I’m saying that the variability of greyness can be differentiated and named as particular ‘shades’ only in relation to black and white. The variability of our experience can be differentiated and named as particular things only in relation to these upper and lower limitations of value structure. This is how we make initial sense of our relation to the world.

I think it’s important throughout the TTC to keep in mind the qualifications set up from the beginning: that we can’t really tell anything about the Tao (any description is partial); and that we must recognise our understanding as coloured by desire (affect).

If you overesteem great men,
people become powerless.
If you overvalue possessions,
people begin to steal.

The Master leads
by emptying people's minds
and filling their cores,
by weakening their ambition
and toughening their resolve.
He helps people lose everything
they know, everything they desire,
and creates confusion
in those who think that they know.

Practice not-doing,
and everything will fall into place.

I’m not sure how much I have to say on this verse. Others, please see if you can fill in the blanks.

I do have this overall comment – There is a general theme, maybe more of an undertone, in the TTC. Emptying, releasing, shrinking, weakening, losing, surrendering, waiting, withholding, giving things up, allowing, seeing, not doing. — T Clark

In Western culture, we don’t like these words. There’s a sense of humility to them that undermines what we tend to think of as individual achievement. Our interpretation of this verse is very Westernised - the concepts jar in a similar way to Buddhism’s approach to suffering. Submission, loss and not-doing carry a negative value for us - but in the previous verse we learned that this negative value is nothing but a construct from our affected relation to the Tao. If we were free from desire (affect), there would be no negative value or unpleasantness to loss, weakness or emptiness. They would simply be a quality of greyness that is closer to black than to white.

He’s not saying don’t esteem great men or value possessions - that’s black and white thinking. The Master has ‘mastered’ the art of balancing the variability of experience, despite affect that renders ‘surrender’ for instance as a negative term.

Not-doing refers to the earlier verse: to act without doing anything, or teach without saying anything, is to recognise that mastery is not about control but about balance. It’s not about always striving for ‘good’ and eliminating ‘bad’, but about recognising that sometimes we need to let relatively ‘bad’ things happen, or to give people silence to work things out for themselves, or to seek nothing. If we’re constantly trying to do, say and be everything, then we end up exhausted, unappreciated and seemingly thwarted at every turn.

Got it. I will stand clear from relating the discussion to other points of reference than the text you are interested in.

Got it. I will stand clear from relating the discussion to other points of reference than the text you are interested in. — Valentinus

No, no, no, no, no. You've misunderstood me completely. I'm happy to have you bring in stuff from other sources. I'm just not as familiar with the Chuang Tzu as I am with the Tao Te Ching. Feel free to bring in more if it seems relevant.

I was struck by the following:

What is a good man but a bad man’s teacher?
What is a bad man but a good man’s job?
If you don’t understand this, you will get lost,
however intelligent you are.
It is the great secret. — Tom Storm

I think it helps to relate this to verse 2 - where ‘good’ and ‘bad’ are relational constructs and a masterful teacher can teach without saying anything. A ‘good man’ is named as such only in relation to a ‘bad man’, but he should then redress the balance in this experience, to share the ‘good’ value ascribed to him with those who lack it. When we label a ‘bad man’ we are relating this to our own apparent ‘good’. So it is not enough to simply label him - in doing so we should recognise that we have a comparative ‘good’ that we have not shared with him.

Verse 4 – Stephen Mitchell

The Tao is like a well:
used but never used up.
It is like the eternal void:
filled with infinite possibilities.

It is hidden but always present.
I don't know who gave birth to it.
It is older than God.

Here’s Ellen Marie Chen’s translation, which I like better. Mitchell takes liberties with the text when the mood strikes him. Chen has included the Chinese words in parentheses in some cases:

Tao is a whirling emptiness (ch'ung),
Yet (erh) in use (yung) is inexhaustible (ying).
Fathomless (yuan),
It seems to be the ancestor (tsung) of ten thousand beings.

It blunts the sharp,
Unties the entangled,
Harmonizes the bright,
Mixes the dust.

Dark (chan),
It seems perhaps to exist (ts'un).
I do not know whose child it is,
It is an image (hsiang) of what precedes God (Ti).

According to this verse, the Tao is:

• A whirling emptiness
• Inexhaustible
• Fathomless
• An image of what proceeds God.

Emptiness doesn’t whirl, does it? Inexhaustible in doing what? Maybe in creating and recreating the 10,000 things. There is a theme of return in the TTC. It comes up more in later verses. I struggled with the idea for a long time. Now, I’ve come to think the Tao doesn’t create the world once, but is creating it over and over again, continuously.

And what about “an image that proceeds God?” So, the Tao is older than God. That means, I guess, that God is one of the 10,000 things. That can’t be right. Can you imagine a more radical idea than that? This is my favorite line in the TTC.

According to this verse, the Tao seems:

• Not to be anyone’s child
• To be the ancestor of 10,000 things
• To exist, maybe.

I’m not sure what Lao Tzu means by “seems.” It usually means “appears” and may imply that appearance is misleading. Nothing can be before or greater than the Tao. It comes before God. The Tao can’t be “anyone’s child.” It is the ancestor of, creates, the multiplicity of things. Lao Tzu sometimes uses family relationships to describe spiritual connections. This is Chen’s translation of a stanza of Verse 52:

The world (t'ien hsia) has an origin (shih),
Which is the world's (t'ien hsia) mother (mu).
Having reached the mother,
(We) know her child.
Having known the child,
Return and abide by its mother.

As for “It seems perhaps to exist,” I have always thought that the Tao doesn’t exist. It is, after all, non-being. Does “seems” mean that it is misleading to think of the Tao as existing? I don’t know.

It is only relevant if it is relevant. I understand keeping the frame of reference within one's experience to discuss it honestly. Suggesting that something is outside of a matter of interest is always something to reference. On that basis, saying: "Feel free to bring in more if it seems relevant." is an odd invitation. Nobody would bother to do so for any other reason.

What do you make of 'you will get lost'. To me it sounds something like infinite regress.

What you've written in this post is a very good summary of the issues addressed in the TTC. You have a way of talking about the text that's different than mine. It helps me see things from a different direction. Speaking of which, you posted a response before this one that I haven't responded to yet. That's because I'm struggling with it a bit. I'll get back to you.

In Western culture, we don’t like these words. There’s a sense of humility to them that undermines what we tend to think of as individual achievement. — Possibility

Throughout the TTC there are verses that make this point over and over - The danger of success. The damage done by the struggle for advancement and recognition.

Not-doing refers to the earlier verse: to act without doing anything, — Possibility

I was thinking about this too. Not-doing and acting without acting are certainly related, but I don't think they are the same thing. I've gotten in discussions previously - "So, is Lao Tzu saying we should just sit back and wait for things to happen?" Well.. I guess sort of. For me, not-doing is a reflection of patience and trust in the natural way of things. Letting things take their natural course. Wu wei, acting without acting, refers to action that is spontaneous.

My image of a Taoist sage is aged, bearded, oriental. OK maybe that's a cultural stereotype. The Taoist practices are like forms of yoga, that are intended to retain vitality and increase chi, and are associated with magic, alchemy, dietary rules and martial arts. That is what it takes to 'follow' or 'practice' taoism in practical terms.

The references to the 'nameless', the 'formeless' and so on, have many counterparts in other forms of Asian mystical spirituality, they arise from trance states (samadhi) which is hardly known in Western philosophy. The Taoist adept 'realises' unity with the source through these states, which is far from the intellectual philosophy of the Western tradition. I suppose one of the nearest analogs is 'theosis' in the Orthodox monastic tradition, although that is a more theistically-oriented tradition than Taoism. Carl Jung was one of the early pioneers of this study and wrote extensively on the Taoist text, The Secret of the Golden Flower.

My image of a Taoist sage is aged, bearded, oriental. OK maybe that's a cultural stereotype. The Taoist practices are like forms of yoga, that are intended to retain vitality and increase chi, and are associated with magic, alchemy, dietary rules and martial arts. That is what it takes to 'follow' or 'practice' taoism in practical terms. — Wayfarer

It is my understanding that Taoism is both a philosophy and a religion. They both grew out of Lao Tzu's and other sage's work, but they are different. Taoist philosophy does not include magic, alchemy, sexual practices, immortality, or any of the other practices sometimes attributed to it. Certainly the To Te Ching does not. Or do I have it wrong?

I'm not saying you're wrong, and I agree the Tao Te Ching is a classical literary and philosophical work in its own right, but I don't know if it's as clearly differentiated from the other aspects of Taoism as you might think. Just regard it as a footnote to the conversation, that's all.

Just regard it as a footnote to the conversation, that's all. — Wayfarer

I don't mean to give the impression that your post is not welcome.

Oh, no, not at all. I just felt that I should call out the mystical aspects of Taoism. I'm not any kind of expert. I recall, when I did assigned reading for Taoism, one of the books I studied was a translation of a Taoist doctor's journal from around 400 or 500 AD (I think). It was a fascinating book, full of village tales, strange rostrums, arguments about cattle, day-to-day anecdotes about life in those ancient times. It was one of the books which gave me a feel for how intertwined Taoism was with Chinese culture. I should also mention Burton Watson's well-known translation of the Chuang Tzu which was also one of the readings. It is a companion piece to the Tao Te Ching.

"So, is Lao Tzu saying we should just sit back and wait for things to happen?" Well.. I guess sort of. For me, not-doing is a reflection of patience and trust in the natural way of things. Letting things take their natural course. Wu wei, acting without acting, refers to action that is spontaneous. — T Clark

My issue with this is how do you apply this approach to creating social change? In relation to progress created by activists in women's suffrage, race equality, gay rights, etc - should they just have waited? Or is there a different nuance to acting without acting?

a translation of a Taoist doctor's journal from around 400 or 500 AD — Wayfarer

Do you remember what book it was. Sounds interesting.

I can't, too long ago.

My issue with this is how do you apply this approach to creating social change? — Tom Storm

Taoism is traditional and is likely not 'woke' in my opinion. It's generally pretty indifferent to politics, Lao Tzu was anarchist in spirit.

Affect consists of valence/attention and arousal/effort, and is measurable only by one OR the other of these - like a photon. When we quantitatively measure one aspect, that measurement is in necessary qualitative relation to the other aspect. — Possibility

I really don't know what your post means. The terminology you use is not familiar. Are they psychological? Philosophical?

You might want to have a look at Reflective Equilibrium

I must warn you though, the Western spirit of wanting to make sense of the world in terms of generalities still persists in that concept.

Throughout the TTC there are verses that make this point over and over - The danger of success. The damage done by the struggle for advancement and recognition. — T Clark

I think it’s the danger of particular success, individual advancement and personal recognition, especially in a way that divides the Tao with ignorance, isolation and exclusion. This is different to a more general idea of working (including not-doing) in awareness of, connection to and collaboration with the Tao. I don’t think the TTC advocates for stagnation so much as a dynamic overall balance. Advancement, for instance, requires a linear view of time, but even physics now tells us that the universal aspect of time is not linear - a fact we ignore at our local level.

I was thinking about this too. Not-doing and acting without acting are certainly related, but I don't think they are the same thing. I've gotten in discussions previously - "So, is Lao Tzu saying we should just sit back and wait for things to happen?" Well.. I guess sort of. For me, not-doing is a reflection of patience and trust in the natural way of things. Letting things take their natural course. Wu wei, acting without acting, refers to action that is spontaneous. — T Clark

I agree with your description here of not-doing, but I’m not sure if I quite agree with wu wei as spontaneous action. I think perhaps this has something to do with intentionality. It’s more about our insistence on being the one to act, which relates again to seeking personal recognition. We can intend an outcome and set up conditions for it to occur without being the one to perform any action that can be credited with the outcome. For me, wu wei is collaboration that resists localised attribution of success, advancement or recognition.

Taoism is traditional and is likely not 'woke' in my opinion. It's generally pretty indifferent to politics, Lao Tzu was anarchist in spirit. — Wayfarer

I understand. I wasn't looking for 'woke' just support of progress.

What do you make of 'you will get lost'. To me it sounds something like infinite regress. — Tom Storm

I think it has to do with losing sight of our relation to the Tao. There is a risk in focusing only on what is ‘good’ or only on what is ‘bad’ that loses sight of these as constructs naming the upper and lower limits of one qualitative relation. It’s not the good or the bad that matters, but the ongoing relation between them.

Affect consists of valence/attention and arousal/effort, and is measurable only by one OR the other of these - like a photon. When we quantitatively measure one aspect, that measurement is in necessary qualitative relation to the other aspect.
— Possibility

I really don't know what your post means. The terminology you use is not familiar. Are they psychological? Philosophical? — T Clark

Sorry - the terms I’m using here refer to a collaboration of neuroscience and psychology in understanding how the mind constructs and utilises concepts in relation to sensory information. The work of Lisa Feldman Barrett in describing both brain states and conceptual predictions using affect not only demonstrates its significance in dissolving any apparent mind-body problem, but helps to align the temporal relativity of consciousness with that of physics.

This may seem unrelated, except that the TTC is very clear about us being bound by affect (desire), and the implications this has on our ability to understand the Tao (objective reality). This is something that Barrett is also clear about. So when Lao Tzu talks about value concepts in this way...

When people see some things as beautiful,
other things become ugly.
When people see some things as good,
other things become bad. — T Clark

...he’s talking about the role of affect in how we make sense of the world. Beautiful, ugly, good and bad are the “manifestations” we see (that we construct) while “caught in desire”. I think it helps for us to understand what affect is and how we construct these value hierarchies from our affected relation to the Tao.

The bottom line is this: the human brain is anatomically structured so that no decision or action can be free of interoception and affect, not matter what fiction people tell themselves about how rational they are. Your bodily feeling right now will project forward to influence what you will feel and do in the future. It is an elegantly orchestrated, self-fulfilling prophecy, embodied within the architecture of your brain. — Lisa Feldman Barrett, ‘How Emotions Are Made”

You won’t find it.

Very interesting. I was just reading a post from a Zen teacher about how Zen enlightenment is realised by and in the body. I have a feeling that if I understood that better I’d be in a much better place.

You won’t find it. — Wayfarer

I thought not. Mind you using the word progress was a bad word and bound not to fit.

What are the similariities/differences between Buddhism and Taoism?

I ask because both are recognized to be "eastern" in spirit but there's a major difference.

Buddhism makes a big deal out of logic and professes to be rational in spirit and it's systematic approach to reality as we know it bears a striking resemblance to mathematical axiomatic systems beginning as it does with four postulates aka four noble truths and Buddhism is presented as a set of beliefs and practices that proceed logically from them.

Taoism, on the other hand, doesn't lay so much stress on logic, relying on common sense rather any rigorous logical systems. Plus, Taoism's emphasis on exceptions to rules maybe intended to expose the utter uselessness of logic considering the fact that, drawing from Aristotle, for at least categorical syllogisms there must be at a minimum one universal statement (All A's are B's or No A's are B's).

The two meet in Zen and that's where it gets interesting I suppose.

one of the books I studied was a translation of a Taoist doctor's journal from around 400 or 500 AD (I think). It was a fascinating book, full of village tales, strange rostrums, arguments about cattle, day-to-day anecdotes about life in those ancient times. It was one of the books which gave me a feel for how intertwined Taoism was with Chinese culture. I should also mention Burton Watson's well-known translation of the Chuang Tzu which was also one of the readings. It is a companion piece to the Tao Te Ching. — Wayfarer

Thanks for this. I think it is in reading such stories that we can see the importance of the Tao to everyday life in China. And possibly to any of us commenting on the Tao Te Ching today.

Like @T Clark your post made me want to read this journal. Or about how Chinese medicine is intertwined with the Tao. I know this is taking the thread away from the original intention.
However, I thought this small excerpt might be useful and wouldn't harm...

From: read://http_fiveimmortals.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Ffiveimmortals.com%2Fwudang-tao%2Ftaoist-medicine%2F
[Sorry, link doesn't seem to work]

In ancient times nine out of ten Daoists were healers. Only the people who thoroughly grasped the laws of heaven and earth and understood the movement and transformation of the mysterious principles of yin yang, could become healers...The numerous contents of the tradition of Chinese medicine all originate from the study of the Dao. In China’s history there has been a multitude of medicine sages, for the most part they all excelled in the study of the Dao...

Provided one has mastered the secret formulae, the following saying is not just simply empty talk:

“In the mysterious gate studying medicine is like catching chickens inside a cage”

Wow, that last saying made me smile. Right now in TPF there's a discussion about Kafka's aphorism:
' A cage went in search of a bird'. I read somewhere that he extracted his aphorisms from the journals that he kept. A big thumbs up to all those wise birds who captured their meditations in golden pages.

https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/10031/a-cage-went-in-search-of-a-bird-

My last year of undergrad history, we had an eloquent and charming Chinese scholar as lecturer for one unit. We considered the question as to why the industrial revolution did not occur in China, despite the fact that in early medieval times Chinese culture was well ahead of Europe. One of the factors was that Chinese culture looked backwards to an original golden age from which everything since had been a deterioration. Whereas European culture was looking forward - originally towards the ‘second coming’, but then later to it’s secular equivalent, which became the ‘myth of progress’.

What are the similariities/differences between Buddhism and Taoism? — TheMadFool

Popular wisdom says that Chinese Buddhism in particular was deeply influenced by Taoism and that Ch’an Buddhism (Japanese Zen) had many Taoist elements. However, a Zen teacher I know and respect is highly critical of this interpretation. But I differ with him on that, I think there is a well-documented influence between the two.

It’s not right to say Buddhism is ‘rational in spirit’. The Buddha by definition is not limited ‘by mere logic’ - ‘the dharmas I teach are deep, subtle, difficult to fathom, beyond mere logic, perceivable only by the wise.’ Buddhism employs logic but it’s ultimate aim is beyond logic - not irrational, but supra-rational, which is an important distinction.