wandelaar

@ silent thunder Nothing. There is always the possibility that somebody purely by chance did "the right thing" in the spirit of Lao tse and Chuang tse. But that is missing the point. I did not ask for unequivocal proof! Just some stories from modern life that illustrate what a Taoist approach to daily life might look like. There are lots of sublime philosophies that when applied to daily life result in a hopeless mess. So to me it's a big thing whether or not Taoism will pass this test. I am yet at the point where I like Taoism as a philosophy, but ultimately the proof of it's worth has to be that it works as a practical way of life. And not only in specially prepared circumstances in certain forms of art.

Polarities are everywhere, that seems to be the idea. And as an antidote to the use of too simplistic static representations of reality it might well be a good idea. But what I don't understand yet is the categorizing of almost everything as either yin or yang. Isn't that too schematic itself? What is the use of this big categorization of yin and yang things compared to just keeping an open eye on polarities (and their dynamics).

Things, situations, properties, etc. can be defines both on the basis of what they are and on the basis of what they are not. Is this the intrinsic meaning of the yin and yang aspects of things, situations, properties, etc. ?

I am very happy for having been pointed to this forum. It's the only forum I know of where I can ask questions about (mainly philosophical) Taoism and get answers that actually help to deepen my understanding.

I wondered whether this chapter should be considered to point at some esoteric practice by which one could get a sort of "behind the scene" view of the operations of the universe. But then again may be the idea simply might be that the whole wonderful world of the ten thousand things is already implicit in the Tao considered as the laws of nature. Or might that be too much of a modern distortion of the ancient meaning?

That's too cryptic for me, could you be more concrete?

So we have two meanings (one objective and one subjective) of there being a kernel of yin inside yang and of yang inside yin: 1) OBJECTIVE Things tend to change into their opposite (so things can be considered to contain the seed of there own destruction or reversal). 2) SUBJECTIVE Properties tend to be perceived by way of contrasts (when things are going steady nothing at all seems to happen and when a property is uniformly distributed there appears to be no property at all). Are there any other meanings of there being a kernel of yin inside yang and of yang inside yin?

Seems you don't like it. I very much doubt whether we would be better of with such a generation of doers. It rather looks to me like we are much too busy already and would do good to slow down a bit and allow some time for meditation, contemplation, or taking a walk. More non-productive stuff please! But I agree with "getting things done" as being a possible way to happiness. I am a (much too?) busy guy myself. May be that option will become available in the future. You won't be able to block that by telling young people to stay away from drugs and other short cuts. It will just make those things the more desirable as "forbidden fruits".

There are lots of discussions where "I don't know" would be preferable, but not here. There is not one argument for "free will" that has any substance beyond the mere feeling that you can choose whatever you like. But that doesn't prove anything as your liking and choosing are natural processes themselves. There is no substantial argument for free will to consider. But let's stop. Knowing when to stop can save us a lot of trouble, as Lao tse would say.

One cannot win a discussion with believers. Whatever experiments might be done, or whatever logical arguments might be brought forward. So I stop. There are more productive topics to discuss.

Having no 'free will' doesn't mean being incapable of making your own decisions, it only means that your decision making process isn't independent of the laws of nature. And introspection does not suffice to determine whether or not your decision making process follows the laws of nature because the process is largely unconscious and one doesn't currently know all the laws of nature that could play a part. That's why arguments for free will never prove their point.

There is not a shred of evidence that I (or you, or anybody) has "free will". The real irony is that even some Taoists seem to think that they as human beings are that special that the laws of nature don't apply to their process of decision making. That's hubris if you ask me.

@ Lost in Translation Great! That are good examples to think about.

Still not getting it. At the heart of it lies the opposite. But what does that mean? Can you give concrete examples of situations where you can point at the elements that are represented by the yin and yang, and the yin inside the yang, etc.

Some more dots here:

Why do you think your mind is somehow beyond the laws of nature? Are you that special?

I also think 'free will' is an illusion, because people are part of nature and thus fall under nature's laws. But that doesn't take away the necessity of making choices in our daily life's. You may object to the term choosing because free choice is impossible in the absolute sense, but however you call it people continue to somehow go from "stages of not knowing what to do" to "stages of knowing what to do", and that process doesn't disappear because of the impossibility of free will. The openingsquestion of this topic: "Why Follow Tao?" is referring to this psychological process of going from "stages of not knowing what to do" to "stages of knowing what to do". The openingsquestion thus asks what reasons might play a role in individual decisions people make to follow or not follow a Taoist approach. Even when those decisions are not free in the absolute sense we can still legitimately ask which reasons might be expected to play a role in reaching such a decision.

A great example of a Taoist intervention. Acting on the right moment, with minimal effort, and standing back to let things unfold without attempting to taken any credit. Thanks! Who said Taoism is impractical.

So thinking in terms of yin and yang is a way to keep alert to the possibility that "at extremes things can becomes there opposite"? That one I don't understand...

Do you mean "following Tao"?

The same thing keeps coming up, doesn't it?! What difference does it make whether your choices (whatever they happen to be) are or are not ultimately manifestations of Tao. In daily life you still have to make your own choices no matter how you wish to answer the metaphysical question of free will that's engendering all these ruminations. There are ways of life to choose from, and it's up to you what you do. Maybe the process of making a choice is just another manifestation of Tao (as I think it is) and maybe not, but it's still you deliberating and deciding what you do. There is no escape from being responsible for your own choices. And indeed as Stosh wrote: "we can be self destructive., come to crazy unsubstantiated conclusions, dream of things that don't exist , ignore our real situation , and operate as if we were in some other world. We heavily use ,and often rely on, abstractions which may or may not be true." This may be called in a non-metaphysical, subjective sense "not following Tao". The question whether we follow Tao in this non-metaphysical, subjective sense is completely distinct from the question whether we can refuse to follow Tao in the metaphysical sense. Mixing up those two meanings leads to endless confusion.

There is no Way that does not somehow diminishes one's options. The whole idea of choosing a Way is that you (perhaps temporarily) ignore other Ways. A Way is defined as much by the road itself as by the ways not taken. No doubt the butcher would accept some resistance in case of emergency. So the story presents an idealized picture of the preferred Taoist approach to get things done.

I think the story of the ox butcher is crucial in (at least) four respects: 1. Unlearning has to be preceded by (possibly years of) learning. One does not automatically know the anatomy of an ox. 2. Real mastership arrives only then when the things you learned have become second nature and are no longer consciously used (they have to be "forgotten"). 3. Using empty spaces is just as important as using solid things. 4. Let the (easy) opportunities the situation offers be your guide.

No - I don't think it was meaningless. I am collecting the basic principles of a Taoist approach (as I see it) in the topic: So it isn't completely beyond words. But I am not yet in a position to capture the approach in a few words, and that might very well prove impossible. We will see. I'm still exploring the Way. @ Michael Sternbach Sun tse (and Lieh tse also) might be added later. One thing at a time.

There is a huge misunderstanding here. I thought by "they" you meant the postmodernists, and that's why I said further discussion would be a waste of time. But of course I want to discuss the way of Lao tse and Chuang tse! That's why I joint this forum. So if you want to tell me what you think Lao tse and Chuang tse were up to, please do so.