wandelaar

I have been thinking a lot about the pro's and con's of science for decades now, but my conclusion is that the future is simply too unsure to make up the balance. Consider for instance the possibility of a big meteorite heading towards earth. Without science this could wipe out all life on earth as we know it, while with science we might well be able to change the meteorite's orbit so that it doesn't hit the earth. And there might be other dangers that we could only tackle with science. So we simply don't know whether in the long run science works out mainly for good or for evil.

The fact that the Chinese used in the TTC at the time it was written differs from today's Chinese is common knowledge among sinologists. The idea that Hoff is one of the first to have noticed this is absurd. So the question remains as to what are the additional sources about the original Chinese used in the TTC that Hoff used to come to his supposedly improved translation? Do you have an answer on that? And if not - how do you know that his translation is OK?

Personally I simply tend to avoid further discussion with people like Shadow_self who resort to discussion tricks to win a discussion no matter what. That also solves the issue. But it would indeed be more pleasant for everybody when Shadow_self would at least try to understand what others are saying before disputing it.

I'm not personally into esoteric Taoism but I found this a very interesting topic as to what happens when things go wrong in cultisch movements. Thanks to those who took the trouble to tell us about it.

What is this "O at a D" business? Is this something that was en vogue here when I was away at Original Dao?

That could be done but will not tell us much about what he's currently doing. It seems that he has become somewhat of a celebrity in the meantime.

Interesting figure, a lot more tolerant and open minded than Steve too. Is that the reason for the break between those two men?

Seems we are running in circles. There was hardly any activity left on the public part of the forum before it closed down. So even if the site owner had had the time, money or energy to continue than that would only have kept an inactive forum online. Apparently you have some information that I'm missing... For now I will see what happens, good luck.

Perhaps you could inform us if Steve is still teaching and has students? And how are you doing with your own practice?

@Straybird I think you have a point here. But in practice it doesn't work out that way. After all Original Dao slowly died for lack of interest, and your new attempt on Reddit is largely ignored. Those like you and me who would prefer a Taoist site where the whole political spectrum can feel at home appear to only form a small minority, and too small to make for a vibrant community. Furthermore those on the extremes are much more motivated to put their political statements wherever they can and so internet sites eventually tend to lean one way or the other. Unless of course politics is banned, or relegated to a separate (and sometimes hidden) subforum. You might not personally like Discord but those on the Right seem to be happy with it. So at the moment I don't see your attempt to start a neutral Taoist discussion site as viable.

Is that the same guy as in the video?

No - you haven't proven your point. The software on it's own can't do anything and you know it. In the same way feeding sense date to an empty brain (whether human or animal) wil have no effect at all. Both animals and humans start with a basic interpretative scheme at birth to effectively deal with the incoming sense data. Calling this interpretative scheme instinct only changes the words used but not the facts. Furthermore the brain does change as a result of cognition, experiences, etc. So you are wrong on multiple counts but unwilling to see it. Enough - goodbye.

It might be so that thinking is done on the brain, in a similar way that software can run on the hardware of a computer. It's senseless to ask if its really the hardware or the software that's doing the processing, because it's the combination of both that makes it happen. Yes partly so - but that doesn't prove your point. Besides formal types of knowledge like mathematics can also be developed internally without external input. What exactly are you trying to prove here?

One cannot interpret without an interpretative scheme, however primitive. Sense data on itself are meaningless. If we really knew nothing when we were first born than we wouldn't know how to eat or drink or what to do to get it. Even animals have a very basic understanding of the world when they are first born as shown in their behavior.

It's not necessary to believe in the independence of the mind from the brain (for which there is hardly any proof anyhow) to appreciate the value of a spiritual way of life. Only look at the original Epicureans who were hard-core materialists but who's doctrine largely agreed with Lao tzu on living a simple life. Not believing in an afterlife makes this life here on earth all the more precious and not to be wasted. And indeed matter according to the current theories of physics is just as mysterious as the spiritual realm, so even if matter were the ultimate stuff of the world than nothing of the wonder of existence would be lost.

It's logically impossible to only look outside and still see something meaningful. There has to be an inborn interpretative scheme to make sense of the incoming sense-data. One cannot start from zero. As one grows up the interpretative scheme can gradually be modified to accommodate new experiences. Furthermore the TTC clearly bears the marks of the historical times in which it was written. Some parts are simply obsolete now.

Can that info still be found somewhere on the internet? I didn't know that.

Probably some people will say they are healing, others that they are neither good nor bad, and still others that they are dangerous. Personally I would only trust the results of a string of carefully done scientific studies with appropriate research. The possibilities for self-deception based on anecdotal evidence in this kind of exercises are endless. I don't know if such research has already been done, if you find any let me know.

Try Paul Davies who writes quite understandable popular science books.

Happily the days when a topic would be completely destroyed by a barrage of pages-long post by voidisyinyang citing his own bizarre theories as soon as he noticed one or two keyword like non-commutative, music theory, Pythagoras or Quantum Mechanics seem to be over. It has become possible again on the The Dao Bums to orderly discuss a topic within the topic devoted to the topic. Lets hope this will stay so...

I don't know much about NeiGong, NeiDan, etc. That's not my kind of thing. But I know Steve from his time here, and later at OriginalDao. I think he can be rude at times but he is serious about what he is doing, and he wants to keep his particular lineage alive. As to whether what he teaches works and whether it is healthy I have no idea. But that goes for all things NeiGong or NeiDan related.

https://www.youtube.com/@TienShanTaoistInternalArts Take a look there.

He has written two book now (of which I have one) so for some background look there. There are also some video's with him talking and demonstrating exercises. I don't think he has many students, as he frequently complained that it was very difficult to find serious students to whom he could teach the ins and out of his system. I don't know whether his system works as I didn't try it.

Furthermore in ordinary circumstances the small things that make live valuable are already available here and now. Looking for satisfaction elsewhere is the real problem.