OldDog

Let's take a little different reading on Ch 27. A good numer leaves no track. A good speech leaves no flaws for attack. A good reckoner makes use of no counters. A well-shut door makes use of no bolts, And yet cannot be opened. A well-tied knot makes use of no rope, And yet cannot be untied. Therefore the Sage is good at helping men; For that reason there is no rejected (useless) person. He is good at saving things; For that reason there is nothing rejected. This is called stealing the Light. Therefore the good man is the Teacher of the bad. And the bad man is the lesson of the good. He who neither values his teacher, Nor loves the lesson, Is one gone far astray, Though he be learned. Such is the subtle secret. - trans. Lin Yutang I sought this out because of the previous translations interpretstion of the bad man being the good man's job. But other parts seemed to stand out once I re-read it.

I think trying to make this site an exclusive Daoist forum is probably not the right way to go. Exclusivism is part of the problem. It means rejecting other input. True other input may not be consistent with teachings from the time of Laozi ... But this is not the time of Laozi. Daoism has to find its place in the modern world. Maintaining a grounding in the original teachings is important but trying to avoid interaction with other belief systems is unavoidable. Daoism has to stand on its own where ever it finds itself. I often think of the development of Buddhism, as it migrated out of South Asia north and east, and transformed into forms that suited the cultures and times it found itself. I think this has to happen with Daoism, if it is to remain viable. It's not so much about what you believe as it is how you believe. Just mho.

@silent thunder Nice post by Will Ackerman. Takes me back to my days investigsting New Age music. Have a number of Windham Hill and Narada CDs. An artist that caught my attention was Liz Story. She seemed to be able to move seamlessly between jazz and the New Age.

This is something that is important to understand. Certainly, the Bum community, already familiar with the notions of yin-yang and reversion, can easily see the reactionary response inherent in extreme rhetoric. The strength of reaction being in some sense proportional to the action. This is why restraint is called for. Unless, of course, the intent is not to reason over issues but rather have a good fight.

Indeed! Having written that just before bedtime that thought kept me awake for a while. I have not exhausted that line of thinking yet. It may be one of those things that has to steep a while. I certainly don't ... want ... to say self-distructing ... I dont think. Although I have to admit the image of lemmings did cross my mind. The thought that keeps coming to the foreground is that the introduction of artificial, fantasy based experiences means that we are developing reactions to conditions that do not necessarily occur in reality. How will they express themselves.

Yes, interesting line of thought. The way we learn and become efficient at something is by repeatedly working the pathways required to perform the something. When we have "learned" something, we no longer have to think hard about how to do it. We can then simply give the action over to a well worked pathway. Perhaps the reason why VR/AR works so effectively is that it takes place in a controlled environment where real consequences of actions don't have to be taken into consideration in the learning. Indeed, one can substitute unreal consequences that support the goal of the learning. VR and AR are not RR.

While I agree somewhat with your reasoning, these historical monsters had imprints of their own. We will never know the nature of those imprints but we can be sure they existed. Something caused them to develop as they did. I have no doubt that our "entertainment", whether it be video games, movies, fantasy stories, whatever, is making an imprint. The thing with it is that with advances in technology these media, as source material for imprints, are much more readily and broadly available. Much greater numbers of people are being exposed. Can you imagine what we might have ended up with had the imprints that produced Hitler and Pol Pot had had the ability to imprint on thousands. Also, it is more than just desensitization, I think. In these fantasy worlds unreal ethics and behaviors are acceptable, even necessary to participate successfully. So, how does someone exposed to these fantasy worlds make the distinction, the switch back to our other reality. I can't help but believe that the ethics and behaviors will carry over. Maybe not in the numbers generated but the likes of Hitler or Pol Pot but with the potential for there to be more instances on a smaller scale. Hence 249 ... as reported elsewhere ... such instances. The even more disturbing notion is whether this could be humanity self-correcting. Now that's really frightening. If true, it might mean it is beyond our control! That is really sobering.

I'm with Zork on this one. The whole issue of gun violence would have been obviated had they never been invented ... But then we'd be talking about knife violence, or some such. There have been incidents of mass stabbings. No, the root of the problem lies in what culture/society has permitted/promoted.

The question I have is ... How and when did use of a gun become a viable mode of expression? I mean, we had to learn this somewhere.

Strangely enough, as I settled down to read last night, the following quote presented itself ... If you want to get to the plain truth, Be not concerned with right and wrong. The conflict between right and wrong Is the sickness of the mind. - Seng Ts'an, as quoted by Raymond M Smullyan in The Tao Is Silent Naturally enough, my mind substituted left and right for right and wrong. Just sayin'

Sunday morning jazz ...

It has more to do with the manner of discourse than the content. if aggressive, denigrating, profane and argument manner of speech is allowed, it becomes a thing of its own. Any effort to reach understanding is lost and the whole subject becomes mired in ego driven one-upmanship, shouting down everyone else. Some subjects ... especially politics ... tends to attract this kind of rhetoric. I think one has to decide what kinds of subject matter they want to see on a site.

Looks like we are slipping into chaos again. This whole issue is being driven from extremist power positions. Left/right, liberal/conservative, socialist/nationalist, communist/fascist. Is it not clear that identification with an extreme positions causes the real issues to be obscured. We need to learn to abandon the extreme positions ... and their rhetoric ... and move to a place where common ground can be found. In reality, there is truth to be found on both sides of any issue. It is in recognizing those truths ... and accommodating to them ... that real progress takes place. Insisting on a winner take all course only ensures continued chaos. There are those that understand this and use it to ensure that chaos maintains so they can continue working towards their goals without any real attention being paid to them. Let's not go there.

@Nungali Thought you might like this. Ran across Hamza El Din years ago in my world music foray. Liked it enough to buy it.

@Encephalon post reminded me of Joni Mitchell

A toe tapper ...

Can't say that wasn't in the back of my mind ... sort of subconscious ... maybe.

We may have turned a corner on this thread. Started out with the shock of the sanctions imposed and outrage over the justice or injustice of those sanctions. We worked our way through the personal rights questions. The conversation seems to have evolved to ... How can we best deal with sensitive issues in a respective civil manner. A lot ideas have been offered. Should be enough common ground now to formulate a new direction. Very encouraging Bums!

@wandalaar Hey, long time, no see. Yes, Daoist discussion would be a very delicate thing, indeed. It would help if we could confine ourselves to exploring social issues and avoided taking up a politicised position. Would require the ability to suspend judgement. Not sure we are capable of that, though.

Absolutely. Done that a few times myself. Periodically have to do a self check asking ... Do I have a worthwhile point of view to express? Worthwhile mostly meaning am I soliciting meaningful feedback. Do I even know enough to have a point of view? Or, am I being tempted to push my own view just for the sake of hearing myself carry on? ... discretion being the better part of something. 😁

Some restructuring does seem to be in order ... But, yeah, simplicity is always a good idea. And, don't forget, we still have our personal practice threads, which often seem to be used to express narrower points of view.

To me the roots of racism lie in looking at others and realizing they are different ... and then making a relative judgement that leads to either embracing or denigrating those differences. The latter being a decidedly more self-centered and self-aggrandizing position.

On the value of having "other" discussions ... One line of consideration that is emerging is whether TBD should have any discussions at all that are not directly relevant to the philosophic or spiritual traditions are interested in. That, in itself, has some interesting implications. Many of these traditions are about selfrealization. They don't spend much time or attention on social issues. Yet, we all, to some degree or another, live in social contexts. So, the real question is whether anything we have learned in our individual pursuits can inform our social views. Or, do we, when dealing with worldly issues, simply revert to old habits, leaving our learning behind. From the Daoist point of view, I have often asked myself whether or not there is such a thing as Daoist morality. Morality ... distinction of right and wrong ... having mainly social implications. Are there lessons from the sages that we can take into the dealings with the world? It's not unheard of that students be told that they need to return to the world to test their learning. If what I learn in my studies can't be taken back into the greater world, what good is it. If there is a place for "other" discussions, it would seem it could be in the area of applied philosophy or spiritualism. How does what we personally hold in higher value inform our participation in worldly affairs? Just a random thought.

Like vonKrankenhaus,, I have not really participated in the political threads. That is not what I come here for. The internet is rife with sites where political rants abound ... from both sides. TDB does not need to be one of them. It is an unfortunate fact of the current environment that the baser aspects of human nature have become so dominant. This did not hsppen over night. it's been coming for a long time. I would just as soon see all such activity be shut down if it can't be civil. We seem to not be able to rise above it. Still, I think there may be a place on this site for discussion of issue ... without mentioning the names of those that support or oppose them. One thing TDB does fairly well is have meaningful discussion on ideas and issues surrounding them. If we could have similar discussion on social issues, the kind of discussion that helps people find their way, find their position on such topics, that might be worthwhile. What would such a site look like: Foul language would be strictly prohibited Denigrative speech prohibited, whether it is about people or issues Name calling and labeling others prohibited There are those that will argue that this violates freedom of speech. Perhaps so, in a strict sense. But what we have devolved to is not what the spirit of freedom of speech intended. Like my grandmother used to say ... If you have nothing nice to say, don't say anything at all. Ideas should not be advanced by by these negative means ... that's the kind of restiction that leads to meaningful discussion. It's called civility. It seems this is a defining moment for TDB. One where the ultimate fate of the site is in balance. Following this recent turn of events, it may not be possible for TDB to return to the way it was. But that does not mean that we can't learn from this experience and that a better site cannot emerge from the turmoil. Perhaps a discussion thread on what an ideal site looks like would be helpful in redefining what we want TDB to be all about would help. A redefinition of the principles of this site seems to be in order. I just don't want to see the baby thrown out with the bathwater.

Sunday morning jazz ... almost forgot!