wandelaar

Crucial question here: did Chuang tzu promote an esoteric breathing practice, or was it just a manner of speaking?

As there are many versions of Taoism, there will also be many types of Taoists. But to me it's a person with a certain view of life (as described by Lao tzu and Chuang tzu) and a corresponding personality structure that makes it possible to joyfully and relatively effortlessly live according to that view of life. It may take some study and training to reach that stage.

This? https://www.quora.com/What-was-the-conversation-between-Lao-Tzu-and-Confucius

Actually I have already moved on from reading the Chuang tzu to reading the following modern commentaries on the Chuang tzu: https://www.amazon.com/Hiding-World-Discourses-Zhuangzi-Philosophy/dp/0791458660 https://www.amazon.com/Skepticism-Relativism-Zhuangzi-Chinese-Philosophy/dp/0791428923 https://www.amazon.com/Experimental-Essays-Zhuangzi-Victor-Mair/dp/1931483159

Enhanced it. The problem is that it's a mixed bag. Some later pieces seem to be from Chuang tzu himself while some earlier look like the work of others.

I recently (re)read the whole of Chuang tzu, and it appeared to me that some of the more inspired pieces came relatively late in the book...

@OldDog Some extra explanations might be necessary. One can use the proposed method of throwing the I Ching as an alternative to the coin or yarrow stalk method. If by using the I Ching concerning a real life question or situation it is more likely for specific hexagrams to turn up then others, than this should become visible in the picture of relative frequencies per run. The type of questions or situations concerning which the I Ching is consulted could be same as when using the coin of yarrow stalk method. One could use a ritual if one wanted. And also the method of interpretation need not be fundamentally different form the usual one, you just looks up the hexagram (or hexagrams) with the largest relative frequency and explores how those hexagrams relate to the question or situation. It can all be done at home, provided the computer program is developed and a true random generator is available. The scientific aspect of this proposed experiment consists in the pictures of the relative frequencies that result as one goes about consulting the I Ching. Could such pictures of relative frequencies have resulted by pure chance? When the I Ching somehow selects relevant hexagrams, the answer is NO. A preference of the I Ching for giving specific relevant hexagrams as answers must show up in the pictures of relative frequencies. And such a deviation from chance could then be investigated. Any more questions about the set up of this experiment?

I have read about the parapsychological experiments with the I Ching done so far, and the results found are not very robust. Even if there is an objective effect that goes beyond chance, it appears to be small. Now small effects are not per definition unimportant, in modern physics small effects can even be extremely important as soon as there are reliable methods to measure them. So scientifically speaking it all depends on finding a smart experimental set up that allows the small effects to manifest themselves, and make further research possible. Lets see. With the use of modern computers it is possible to calculate with huge amounts of random numbers, and that would make even small differences in the probabilities of different hexagrams stand out in their relative frequency of appearing. In this way one could try out perhaps thousands of throws in one run to generate a picture of the relative frequencies of the different hexagrams instead of just one hexagram a time with or without moving lines by the usual methods of throwing the I Ching. By this new methods even small differences in the probabilities of the different hexagrams would show up.

There is more. The spacetime interval, charge, rest mass, the laws of physics. No - I am not talking about that. That's an interesting game to play, but it's not Einstein's game. As if that were something about which western scientists and philosophers forgot to think about?!

There are opponents you can have an interesting discussion with, and there are also opponents you cannot have an interesting discussion with. Chuang tzu knew the difference when he walked past the grave of Hui tzu:

@GOOWDAY Well - another clear case of a believer who is immune to criticism. Added you to my ignore list.

And this is simply wrong, Relativity Theory doesn't mean "the relativity of all standards". There are important absolutes even in Einstein's two Relativity Theories.

Correct. I wouldn't say "Laozi + Zhuangzi = daoism" but rather: Just Laozi + Zhuangzi = also a (perhaps minimal) form of daoism. Further see:

Could you explain further...

https://www.amazon.com/Concordance-Chuang-Harvard-yenching-Institute-Sinological/dp/0674158504 https://iucat.iu.edu/iub/6292983 But are they readable for non-specialists?

@ zafrogzen Taoism doesn't need the I Ching. Lao tzu and Chuang tzu don't recommend it.

Problem with this experiment is that it doesn't prove or disprove that the results are objectively above chance. According to my current view of the I Ching almost all hexagrams can be interpreted as relevant for almost all questions or situations. See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barnum_effect That's why subjective evaluations of the relevance of results (even by myself) don't count as objective evidence of an above-chance performance of the I Ching.

Ideally the test would have to be such that anybody wishing to see for himself whether the I Ching objectively performs above chance could do it.

Not necessarily, but it's an example of a pattern that could be objectively investigated if it indeed has a repeatable character. I must have seen those pdf's somewhere before. The results of those experiments are mixed. It appears that very little parapsychological research concerning the I Ching has been done.

The question of circular logic in the story of the happy fishes has also been discussed here: https://www.thedaobums.com/topic/46757-einstein-and-zhuangzi/?page=2

@ OldDog The only thing about the I Ching I am sceptical about is the claim that the hexagrams that are found are specific to the questions or situations concerning which it is consulted in a way that goes beyond what is to be expected when the hexagrams that are found were purely random. But I am open to correction when it can be shown by way of experiment that I am wrong. I am also interested in any special mathematical properties of the I Ching, but that would be another topic.

@ Harmen I am looking for patterns that: 1. Can be repeatably and objectively verified. 2. Would be extremely unlikely to appear if the hexagrams found are completely random. Michael Sternbach already gave the following example: "receiving hexagram 4 (Youthful Folly) so many times that I soon stopped trying". See: However he writes: But why is that?

Now as regards the yarrow-stalk method there is the possibility of (consciously or unconsciously) influencing the probabilities of the lines that turn up by how you divide the heap of stalks. So perhaps for test purposes using the coin method seems to be better because of itself it is more closely random. Do you agree?

See the new topic: "Tests for the non-random character of the I Ching"

@ zafrogzen What exactly is your problem? How do you think the percentages should be?