a dualistic singularity and the natural manner(Wu Wei)...

[et-thoughts]

What does the sage seeks to convey:

a dualistic natural manner(Wu Wei)

a singularitynatural manner(Wu Wei)

a bit more than the alternatives put forth

 

[Marblehead]

All Right!!!! Another Taoist Philosophy thread!! Yea!!!

 

As I mentioned in the other thread, this is a curious wonderment. This would be easy for me to answer if I were considering only Chuang Tzu but perhaps you would like to, at least initially, stick with Lao Tzu.

 

If the discussion goes well I think this thread might interlace with the "States Of Tao" thread.

 

And I think we should look at this from the perspective of the human animal and not from the perspective of Tao.

 

So I would like to first ask if anyone thinks it is possible to view life from a 'singularity' perspective?

 

Of course, we would need to define what a 'singularity perspective' is.

 

Would you like to take first shot, ET? Anyone?

[et-thoughts]

Ok here we go...

Note that the subject words arrangement used sort of plays a bit with the core ideas...

the natural manner

and

singularity

dualistic

My current appreciation seeks an integrative consolidation that shifts from a fuzzy dualistic judgmental comparative appreciation towards clearer distinctions akin to the shift done when moving from warm-cold distinctions towards a temperature scale. A different analogy that may be useful involves the notion of 'the map' / 'the territory'... The interchange can really get interesting when we consider 'the distinctions' (of the map, of the territory, of the distinctions).

What does the sage seeks to convey? My understanding would say: the sage seeks to convey "what be", nothing more and nothing less. I see that the sage often uses dualistic claims dew to 'inherited' (physical-cultural-emotional) traits though the diverse forms (messengers) point to and stem from a singular message.

How do we know that what we think actually corresponds to what happens to be? (for we can only experience what happens to be by what we think)

[ChiDragon]

The duality counterpart for Wu Wei(無為) is You Wei(有為).

You Wei(有為) is undesirable which is the opposite of Wu Wei.

 

LaoTze left out "You Wei" most of the time and almost put all his emphasis on Wu Wei throughout the TTC.

 

 

The natural manner has no intend.

So, a spontaneous action which was considered to be natural.

An action that was in a premeditated manner and expected a predictable result was considered to be unnatural.

 

The duality of Wu Wei and You Wei only happened one time literally.

However, the only intend of the TTC was You Wei by expecting all else to be Wu Wei.

Hence, the final expectation of the TTC was to be a singularity natural manner(Wu Wei).

Edited August 14, 2012 by ChiDragon

[Marblehead]

The duality counterpart for Wu Wei(無為) is You Wei(有為).

You Wei(有為) is undesirable which is the opposite of Wu Wei.

 

LaoTze left out "You Wei" most of the time and almost put all his emphasis on Wu Wei throughout the TTC.

Wait a cotton-pickin' minute. What cha' mean 'You Wei' is undesirable? And even if they are opposites (which thought I do not accept) why have distinctions of 'desirable' and 'undesirable' been placed on them? Can't they just be different states (conditions) of the same thing?

 

Yes, what you said is valid and can be well supported. However, I think that to demean the state of Yo (You) is an error and honestly believe that I can support this with words from Lao Tzu.

[et-thoughts]

All Right!!!! Another Taoist Philosophy thread!! Yea!!!

 

As I mentioned in the other thread, this is a curious wonderment. This would be easy for me to answer if I were considering only Chuang Tzu but perhaps you would like to, at least initially, stick with Lao Tzu.

 

If the discussion goes well I think this thread might interlace with the "States Of Tao" thread.

 

And I think we should look at this from the perspective of the human animal and not from the perspective of Tao.

 

So I would like to first ask if anyone thinks it is possible to view life from a 'singularity' perspective?

 

Of course, we would need to define what a 'singularity perspective' is.

 

Would you like to take first shot, ET? Anyone?

 

Marblehead,

 

I have quite a difficult time thinking like somebody else .-) I sort of just focus on the particular topic while considering the many possibilities... so If you can help me out with the particular distinctions that would be great... I am sure this thread will interlace with the "States Of Tao" thread and everything else .-) I trust we can direct the dialogue in enriching ways (evidently other possibilities also exists though I trust we can and will direct the dialogue towards wellness).

 

Its fine with me to use the perspective of the human animal, especially since we each be one instance of such animal... Of course, assuming such be the case... (who knows it may be that some here are from some other dimension, place and time, all are welcomed :-) The notion of 'the perspective of Tao' can be left for a latter interchange.

 

To define what a singularity perspective is I would like to first share an analogy that may help us grasp this... scratch that thought... the elephant experience seems quite applicable here. In a room there is an elephant. Several blind men enter the room and are asked to describe from their perspective the elephant: Its like a snake, its like a tree stump, its like a flat leaf, its like a boulder, its like a course paint brush. The oldest blind mind who only heard the descriptions of the other men triggers a childhood memory of seeing and elephant... Who can integrate the singular perspectives into and encompassing whole?

 

I thinks it is possible to view life from a 'singularity' perspective...

[Jeff]

Non-duality understanding and perspective applied in duality...

 

:-)

[Jeff]

Double post...

Edited August 14, 2012 by Jeff

[et-thoughts]

The duality counterpart for Wu Wei(無為) is You Wei(有為).

You Wei(有為) is undesirable which is the opposite of Wu Wei.

 

LaoTze left out "You Wei" most of the time and almost put all his emphasis on Wu Wei throughout the TTC.

 

Indeed, it be quite desirable, to focus most of the time and almost put all of one emphasis on 'the desirable' ...

[Marblehead]

Non-duality understanding and perspective applied in duality...

 

:-)

Even that little statement needs a lot to be said to it. (Understand, I'm not disagreeing.)

[Marblehead]

I hope I can respond well to this. If what I say doesn't seem logical please question me.

 

I have quite a difficult time thinking like somebody else .-) I sort of just focus on the particular topic while considering the many possibilities... so If you can help me out with the particular distinctions that would be great... I am sure this thread will interlace with the "States Of Tao" thread and everything else .-) I trust we can direct the dialogue in enriching ways (evidently other possibilities also exists though I trust we can and will direct the dialogue towards wellness).

 

Yes, it is difficult to think like someone else. I have practice with this as I have many times taken a position in a discussion that I do not personally hold myself. To do this we have to think like someone else. (Walk in another man's shoes.) (I will be speaking for myself here in this discussion.) Even what I just said is an example of duality and dualistic thinking.

 

Its fine with me to use the perspective of the human animal, especially since we each be one instance of such animal... Of course, assuming such be the case... (who knows it may be that some here are from some other dimension, place and time, all are welcomed :-) The notion of 'the perspective of Tao' can be left for a latter interchange.

 

I'm glad we agree here. It is so darned difficult to speak about singularity. Yes, we Taoists are supposed to acknowledge all for what they are. (I was very careful with the words I used in that last sentence.)

 

To define what a singularity perspective is I would like to first share an analogy that may help us grasp this... scratch that thought... the elephant experience seems quite applicable here. In a room there is an elephant. Several blind men enter the room and are asked to describe from their perspective the elephant: Its like a snake, its like a tree stump, its like a flat leaf, its like a boulder, its like a course paint brush. The oldest blind mind who only heard the descriptions of the other men triggers a childhood memory of seeing and elephant... Who can integrate the singular perspectives into and encompassing whole?

 

I thinks it is possible to view life from a 'singularity' perspective...

 

Okay, here you have demonstrated the dualistic perspective while the old man was able to see the connectedness of the different perspectives.

 

Let me state here that I am of the understanding that our brain functions naturally in a dualistic manner. Now, yes, it could be said that much of this is learned and I would have a hard time arguing against the suggestion.

 

I do, however, believe that we can train our brain to operate in a less dualistic manner, sometimes even attaining your "singularity perspective".

 

I like using the tree as an example. A tree is a tree by definition. Any additional attributes are a matter of choice and perspective.

[GeoBall]

Those who know, do not need to be told.

Those who don't, seldom listen.

[et-thoughts]

Wait a cotton-pickin' minute. What cha' mean 'You Wei' is undesirable? And even if they are opposites (which thought I do not accept) why have distinctions of 'desirable' and 'undesirable' been placed on them? Can't they just be different states (conditions) of the same thing?

 

Yes, what you said is valid and can be well supported. However, I think that to demean the state of Yo (You) is an error and honestly believe that I can support this with words from Lao Tzu.

 

Marblehead,

 

If I shared with you the thoughts surrounding 'you wei' that I just had you would probably be ROTFLOL... I am completely ignorant in regards to the translations in use... so it someone said to me 'You Wei' is this or that I would just accept it and proceed on. In regards to the distinctions of 'desirable' and 'undesirable'... sure these two can be replaced by something else that includes them both just like hot and cold can be replaced by 'the temperature'...

BTW the desirable:

is undesirable to the undesirable

is desirable to the desirable

The undesirable :

is desirable to the undesirable

is undesirable to the desirable

 

Note the singular notion of desirable being 'what be' be 'what be'

where as the undesirable claims 'what is' isn't and 'what isn't' is

 

When someone who is wrong tells somebody who is right "Hey somebody, you are wrong"? that someone just projected their state towards somebody and demonstrated how wrong someone really is. getting a bit sidetracked ... the point being made here is Hey lets focus on the core topic at hand... what the appropriate translation of "'You Wei'

[et-thoughts]

Those who know, do not need to be told.

Those who don't, seldom listen.

 

Indeed, and to know if they will listen or not

well one has to tell the story and observe what happens...

of course one may observe that others may not listen ...

- this may be because they know and do not need to hear it

- or because they don't know and do not care to know

Of course those who know, know whether its the first reason or the second reason

and regardless may choose to smile and tell the story again or walk away

[Marblehead]

Marblehead,

 

If I shared with you the thoughts surrounding 'you wei' that I just had you would probably be ROTFLOL...

No, you didn't wei on the floor and neither did I. Hehehe.

 

Simply put, and this is about as simple as it gets:

 

Wu Wei - Action without intent

You Wei - Action with intent

 

Yes, this is over-simplified. Get over it! Hehehe.

 

Non-dualistic, what is desirable for one may be undesirable for another. Is either wrong?

 

I don't think we have gotten side-tracked. I think we are setting the stage. We do need to know how the others in the discussion will be using certain words and phrases. I am quite sure we will be getting to the works of Lao Tzu when the time is right.

[Marblehead]

... tell the story again ...

Hehehe. I do that. I like telling my stories to anyone who will listen.

[Marblehead]

Time for me to water my gardens then shut down for the day. C U tomorrow.

[et-thoughts]

Okay, here you have demonstrated the dualistic perspective while the old man was able to see the connectedness of the different perspectives.

 

Let me state here that I am of the understanding that our brain functions naturally in a dualistic manner. Now, yes, it could be said that much of this is learned and I would have a hard time arguing against the suggestion.

 

I do, however, believe that we can train our brain to operate in a less dualistic manner, sometimes even attaining your "singularity perspective".

 

I like using the tree as an example. A tree is a tree by definition. Any additional attributes are a matter of choice and perspective.

 

Please elaborate what you meant by " here you have demonstrated the dualistic perspective". When I mentioned the old man I sought to convey the notion that old man was the only one to completely grasp the elephant as the elephant and was able to incorporate all the singular perspectives peaces within a cohesive whole. Remember that the challenge was to define singular perspective. I think it was clear the each ones description corresponded to a singular distinct perspective. I do not grasp at this time what you meant by "you have demonstrated the dualistic perspective"...

 

I would say that each ones brain functions naturally whatever the manner each one has chosen (consciously or not)...

 

The example of the tree seems interesting... is a tree a tree by definition or because a tree be a tree... this is a bit like the notion of figuring out if a tree falling makes a sound when no one hears it...

[ChiDragon]

Wu Wei: let Nature take its course; be natural, take no unnatural action; unintentional action.

 

You Wei: take unnatural action, interfere with the course of Nature, intentional action.

Edited August 14, 2012 by ChiDragon

[et-thoughts]

No, you didn't wei on the floor and neither did I. Hehehe.

 

Simply put, and this is about as simple as it gets:

 

Wu Wei - Action without intent

You Wei - Action with intent

 

Yes, this is over-simplified. Get over it! Hehehe.

 

Non-dualistic, what is desirable for one may be undesirable for another. Is either wrong?

 

I don't think we have gotten side-tracked. I think we are setting the stage. We do need to know how the others in the discussion will be using certain words and phrases. I am quite sure we will be getting to the works of Lao Tzu when the time is right.

 

Hehehe didn't see that particular interpretation until your post... Still working on understanding what is meant by "Wu Wei - You Wei"... I understand Action for action's sake... I do because I choose to do regardless of the prize or punishment involved... gains and/or losses mean nothing when fully committed ...

 

'Desirable' gives each what they want... to those who seek the desirable it gives the desirable ... to those who seek the undesirable it gives the desirable (which they find quite undesirable)... so some see only the abundance of the desirable and some see only something else...

[et-thoughts]

duplicate post...

Edited August 14, 2012 by et-thoughts

[et-thoughts]

Wu Wei: let Nature take its course; be natural, take no unnatural action; unintentional action.

 

You Wei: take unnatural action, interfere with the course of Nature, intentional action.

 

That sort of clarifies the issue a bit IF one knows what be the natural course be...

death dies

life lives thus eventually only life remains

[Marblehead]

Please elaborate what you meant by " here you have demonstrated the dualistic perspective". When I mentioned the old man I sought to convey the notion that old man was the only one to completely grasp the elephant as the elephant and was able to incorporate all the singular perspectives peaces within a cohesive whole. Remember that the challenge was to define singular perspective. I think it was clear the each ones description corresponded to a singular distinct perspective. I do not grasp at this time what you meant by "you have demonstrated the dualistic perspective"...

 

I would say that each ones brain functions naturally whatever the manner each one has chosen (consciously or not)...

 

The example of the tree seems interesting... is a tree a tree by definition or because a tree be a tree... this is a bit like the notion of figuring out if a tree falling makes a sound when no one hears it...

 

The old man was able to determine what it was not based on the individual perceptions of the others. It was not a leaf, nor a tree trunk, not, etc. It was an elephant. 'Is' and 'is not' is dualistic thinking. I think we have to think dualistic before we can think 'what is'.

 

The tree. Yes, a tree just be. But we must first define what a tree is before we can agree that it is a tree. But the tree doesn't care what you call it.

 

What? The tree fell? All fall down! Did it make a sound? Was there anyone to hear it? If yes then it made a sound. If ne then all that happened was energy vibrations were sent out around it until the energy disipated (changed into something else). In this case there would have been no sound, only vibration.

[Marblehead]

Wu Wei: let Nature take its course; be natural, take no unnatural action; unintentional action.

 

You Wei: take unnatural action, interfere with the course of Nature, intentional action.

Thank you ChiDragon.

[Marblehead]

Hehehe didn't see that particular interpretation until your post... Still working on understanding what is meant by "Wu Wei - You Wei"... I understand Action for action's sake... I do because I choose to do regardless of the prize or punishment involved... gains and/or losses mean nothing when fully committed ...

 

'Desirable' gives each what they want... to those who seek the desirable it gives the desirable ... to those who seek the undesirable it gives the desirable (which they find quite undesirable)... so some see only the abundance of the desirable and some see only something else...

That is so close I'm not even going to speak to it.