wandelaar

As to the existence of the Tao, that is obvious. There certainly is a structure to the world, and there are patterns and laws of nature. But Tao isn't a thing itself, because in that case it would just be one of the ten thousand things, and not the way the world functions. Nobody can honestly deny the existence of the Tao because by living in the world one continuously uses the way the world functions to get things done. Even the very act of denying the Tao would involve the use of Tao.

There may not be one single religion to replace it, but many religions and forms of spirituality and even some extreme political ideologies (that serve the same purpose for their true believers).

The notion of ziran is exactly what I am arguing for. Philosophical Taoism agrees with the result of rationally thinking this matter trough to the very end.

A big obstacle to the popularity of philosophical Taoism as I see it is the widespread (but nonsensical) lingering belief that ultimately everything happens for the best, and that we are being cared for by some transcendental power. Philosophical Taoism is a hard form of spirituality that doesn't depend on make-believe. I don't think it will ever become as popular as the more cozy types of religion that promise some form of shelter against the bad outside world.

There sure is a reason for not believe in a reason for the world as a whole, because the very idea of a reason for the world as a whole is nonsensical. Reasons only make sense for conscious beings. So the idea of there being a reason for the world as a whole supposes a Creator who made the world for a reason. But that only pushes the problem back one step further, for now we can ask why a Creator with this particular reason existed in the first place. And that would than necessitate a Super-Creator with a reason for creating the Creator, and so on... But even with an infinite sequence of Creators we would still not have THE REASON. In all probability the nonsensical idea of "the reason for the world as a whole" is the result of applying the original idea of a reason (being the conscious deliberation regarding some action by a human being) far beyond its sphere of applicability. And the reason for doing so clearly lies in the widespread human urge to "explain" to oneself why things are as they are. Or when that doesn't succeed, to at least believe that there is a purpose behind the things that befall us. But as reasoning is powerless against the will to believe, I will not press this matter further.

@ LiT You are creating your own problem. There is no reason to suppose that the world as a whole has a reason. Reasons only make sense as motivational deliberations in some conscious being. But than as a consequence you have to suppose the existence of a Creator. And there the whole circus begins again: What is the reason behind the existence of the Creator? There is no answer, because the question simply doesn't make sense. The dogmatic answers of old-time religion are just that: unfounded proclamations. But let us - just for the sake of argument - suppose that there is a reason. Than we have the problem that there is no reason to suppose that humans play any substantial role in that reason. For the earth with everything on it could just as easily be destroyed by some meteorite.

@ LiT It isn't necessary for the world to make sense or to have a meaning as a prerequisite to living a spiritually fulfilling life. After all - Tao is spontaneously as it is. Or in other words: there is no underlying reason. And that makes (philosophical) Taoism an appropriate option for modern critical people who have outgrown the old-time faith-based religious systems. In place of unfounded dogma's comes the great wonder at the existence of the ten thousand things and their coming and going. The real miracle isn't to be found in the miraculous exploits of religious supermen, but simply in the existence of our everyday world.

See what I mean?

Sorry - we are in the reincarnation topic right now, if you want to talk about physics you will have to ask me in the topic on the speed of light. In the mean time I will start up the relevant sectors of my internal computer...

It's called philosophy. And yes - for the western world philosophy started in ancient Greece and Rome.

That's right. History repeats itself (with some variations), as long as we ignore its lessons.

I have had enough of this childish quibble...

There is no end to human fantasies, particularly religious ones....

Lao tzu and Chuang tzu are not clear about what happens after death.

Trumpism?

That makes more sense. When you take mind or consciousness as foundational than brains and bodies have to be epiphenomena.

I once experienced dreaming to have woken up, and then woke up again. Maybe Chuang tzu knew the phenomenon? But as to reincarnation: would you still feel as being the same person you were before you "fell asleep" in case almost all of your memories would be gone, when you no longer would know your own name, or how to speak or walk, or the basic facts of your occupation or hobbies, or how the world looks like? Even when there were something like reincarnation, it would not be you but only a minute fragment (some flashes or vague intuitions) of what you once were that would return. And actually most people don't even recognise that fragment for what it supposedly was. So why bother? In my opinion the modern belief in reincarnation in the West mainly consists of a mixture of muddled thought and wishful thinking. Christian ideas about life after death are losing their grip on many western people and so they are searching for something else to believe in to avoid facing the black hole of death.

In who's brain?

Thank you. I accept the limitations posed by the facts of life, so I don't need a belief system to escape. You could call that realism. Consequently I only accept those components of Taoism (and spirituality generally) that make sense when confronted with and applied in the real world.

Then how do you determine an invisible colour? Example: what is the colour of this topic?

@ rene It's more like: 1. X looks like a fact of life 2. I don't want to be limited by facts of life 3. Belief system Y pretends to deliver an escape from X 4. Thus I will belief in Y. Greatly simplified we then have: In the West: X = death is the end, because when the brain stops functioning all psychical experiences disappear Y = the doctrine of reincarnation In India: X = reincarnation Y = the supposed way to escape from reincarnation. And this explains the paradox.

That's the silly thing about reincarnation. Those who think reincarnation is a fact are doing their very best to escape from future reincarnations, and those who are not sure about it hope to reincarnate!

Source: https://www.laphamsquarterly.org/animals/miscellany/plato-and-diogenes-debate-featherless-bipeds

There is a third way which I prefer: striving for optimal precision and clarity of thought, while at the same time realising that definite answers will stay beyond reach for finite mortals like myself.