Mair 13:6

[Marblehead]

The master said, "The Way does not exhaust itself in what is great, nor does it absent itself from what is small.  Therefore, the myriad things are realized in it.  The Way is so broad that there is nothing it fails to accommodate, so deep that it is unfathomable.  Form, virtue, humaneness, and righteousness are trifles of the spirit, but were it not for the ultimate man, who could determine them?  The ultimate man holds the world - is this not a great responsibility?  But it is not enough to burden him.  All under heaven vie for the reins of power, but he does not accompany them.  He examines flawlessness, but is unmoved by profit.  He plumbs the truth of things and can guard what is fundamental.  Therefore, he puts heaven and earth beyond him, leaves the myriad things behind, and so his spirit is never encumbered.  He is conversant with the Way, joins with virtue, keeps humaneness and righteousness at a distance, and treats ceremonies and music as guests.  Something there is that steadies the mind of the ultimate man."

[Stosh]

" NO. HUMANS NEED FANTASY TO BE HUMAN. TO BE THE PLACE WHERE THE FALLING ANGEL MEETS THE RISING APE." 

Terry Pratchett

 

Edited February 6, 2018 by Stosh

[Taoist Texts]

On 2/5/2018 at 3:43 AM, Marblehead said:

Something there is that steadies the mind of the ultimate man."

Legge: the mind of the perfect man determines all things aright.

[Marblehead]

6 hours ago, Stosh said:

" NO. HUMANS NEED FANTASY TO BE HUMAN. TO BE THE PLACE WHERE THE FALLING ANGEL MEETS THE RISING APE." 

Terry Pratchett

 

You do know that I don't accept that thought, don't you?

 

[Marblehead]

5 hours ago, Taoist Texts said:

Legge: the mind of the perfect man determines all things aright.

Yes, I think that is a better phrasing of the concept.

 

[Stosh]

49 minutes ago, Marblehead said:

You do know that I don't accept that thought, don't you?

 

No, I dont. The extreme of logical development ,which denies the spiritual aspect of humanity, would be the the terminus of humanity. It would be ..

The destruction of what has any value in a person whatsoever. 

Sociopathy is not a virtue IMO. perfection of rationality is not a thing We could attain and remain virtuous. 

It requires irrationality, to have love as well as hate, fear as well as courage and so forth. But all that is gymnastics of mind.

[Marblehead]

You go ahead, I'll stick with logic.

 

And no, I do need hate or fear in my life in order to enjoy it.

 

[Stosh]

10 hours ago, Marblehead said:

You go ahead, I'll stick with logic.

 

And no, I do need hate or fear in my life in order to enjoy it.

 

Enjoyment is just as irrational as those other tools. Notice that it says you have to part with your music and friends as well, to have virtue.

[Marblehead]

Well, all I can say is that if anyone tries to take or destroy my music collection it will come down to do or die.  There are some things in my life that are beyond valuing.

 

Friends?  Well, that could end up being a do or die situation as well.

 

But I disagree, enjoyment (pleasure) is rational.

 

Logic still rules.

 

[Stosh]

8 minutes ago, Marblehead said:

Well, all I can say is that if anyone tries to take or destroy my music collection it will come down to do or die.  There are some things in my life that are beyond valuing.

 

Friends?  Well, that could end up being a do or die situation as well.

 

But I disagree, enjoyment (pleasure) is rational.

 

Logic still rules.

 

If logic is to rule you have to give up the pretense that pleasure is rational. And if you support what is said in the OP , then you are the one who needs to give the music a heave ho and alienate your friends. 

[Marblehead]

1 minute ago, Stosh said:

If logic is to rule you have to give up the pretense that pleasure is rational. And if you support what is said in the OP , then you are the one who needs to give the music a heave ho and alienate your friends. 

You totally misunderstand my priorities.  Pleasure is not a pretense.  It is physically real.

 

And I have never professed to be the ultimate man so those criteria do not apply to me.

 

[Stosh]

4 minutes ago, Marblehead said:

You totally misunderstand my priorities.  Pleasure is not a pretense.  It is physically real.

 

And I have never professed to be the ultimate man so those criteria do not apply to me.

 

I didn't say it was a pretense , I said its not a logical/rational product. ( there is no actual ultimate man - and I said so already , so , I agree on that point ) 

[Wu Ming Jen]

The way is not above or below anything even that which is regarded as good character or the worst of humanity the ultimate man in this sense is not controlled or conditioned by knowing the way. living in the world but not stained by suchness. What is beyond the myriad things in the world is source of creation the birth and death solving methods.

 

The hermit is the super hero of ancient China who renounces the seduction of the natural and man made world. If one lives in society and carries over the lesson of the hermit  their life will be rich in what is truly theirs. So even the seduction of great friends and music is only a guest in his life, not the source of creativity and boundless state of being.

 

If one finds himself rich or poor in life knowing the way is like having a priceless treasure that is never exhausted. All the wealth and beauty of this world is only a cheap imitation of the real thing that is form and no form.

 

My teacher talked about nature. He said some look at the world and the natural beauty and proclaim look how amazing this all is. Their energy leakes and is taken from them. The person who steals from nature is whatever he sees and that energetic value of thing will fill the store house with great treasures. So it is a matter of spending or saving and seduction just because it sounds fun and enjoyable..

[Marblehead]

3 hours ago, Stosh said:

I didn't say it was a pretense , I said its not a logical/rational product. ( there is no actual ultimate man - and I said so already , so , I agree on that point ) 

Nice that we agree on something now and then.  Hehehe.

 

But then I still insist that it is logical and rational for a person to seek out pleasure.  My friends and my music offer me pleasure.

 

Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

 

[Marblehead]

2 hours ago, Wu Ming Jen said:

The way is not above or below anything even that which is regarded as good character or the worst of humanity the ultimate man in this sense is not controlled or conditioned by knowing the way. living in the world but not stained by suchness. What is beyond the myriad things in the world is source of creation the birth and death solving methods.

 

 

The Way is what it is.  The processes of nature and all within the universe.  This affords the universe balance and harmony.

 

My way is to follow my true nature.  Harmony comes into my life not only internally but also from my friends and my music.  It is my true nature.

 

[Stosh]

38 minutes ago, Marblehead said:

Nice that we agree on something now and then.  Hehehe.

 

But then I still insist that it is logical and rational for a person to seek out pleasure.  My friends and my music offer me pleasure.

 

Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

 

Hey, Dude, It Ain't me telling you it isn't virtuous , its this translation in the OP! , that is. ( and ,by extension, You , since you quoted it)   

Personally , I don't think these chapters depict the same flavor of the earlier ones, which were formulated in such a way that , when read carefully , embodied a different spirit/intention. 

 

Once one has set the goal of being in a pleasurable state , you've already circumvented the issue, of whether that state is a rational one. However, Tautologically , anything that exists , does actually exist , and is real. ( by definition)

While Happiness is very real ,and very important, its not a rational endpoint of some sort of calculation. The end user, is really the person who is happy . The existence of the universe is also not a rational conclusion. It does not have to be here. We have no provable reason why it needs to exist , nor does a 'need' for it to exist , even make sense.

 

I think the prohibition against social embroilment is to help a person avoid the pitfall of getting- remaining wrapped up in everyone else's insanity. And the thing against the devil music , likewise is intended to keep one grounded in reality.  As stated though , I think the thing is phrased too open ended-ly. 

The viewpoint of the universe,  being one of complete neutrality , and simply existing - is not for humans , and the bias to say that being a vulcan ,or computer chip, or walking pachinko game ,would be the greatest thing since sliced bread .. should Not be ones goal . 

 

I like motown a lot , it has soul. 

 

[Marblehead]

I will agree that these later chapters seem to have an agenda whereas the earlier ones do not.

 

Again, these chapters are said to be likely written by Chuang Tzu's disciples.

 

And I agree, happiness in not a destination.  But I believe it should be part of the journey.

 

 

 

Motown?  They ruined the original Soul music of the early and mid 1960s.  Motown commercialized the music and took the spontaneous art out of the music.

 

[Stosh]

1 hour ago, Marblehead said:

I will agree that these later chapters seem to have an agenda whereas the earlier ones do not.

 

Again, these chapters are said to be likely written by Chuang Tzu's disciples.

 

And I agree, happiness in not a destination.  But I believe it should be part of the journey.

 

 

 

Motown?  They ruined the original Soul music of the early and mid 1960s.  Motown commercialized the music and took the spontaneous art out of the music.

 

Took the spontaneity out? trying to fill a formula ? well , that would be a down side , but I still like it. Do you have an example of what you mean that preceded it ? 

Frankly , it reads like they don't think much of happiness at all, or personal fulfillment, or meaningful social relations. Its like they want to be,,, non-existing or , inorganic material.  

 

I suppose this means that I think that if there is virtue for human beings , it is in being fully human. And it suggests That I should perhaps be more accepting of the downside stuff , because I don't think we can still be what we are without the whole shebang. Package deal.

And that if there is an ideal , it would be in finding a balance between blending in with the background , and exerting ourselves in some non-destructive ways on that background. 

The idea of a perfected person , always rubbed me the wrong way , one cannot be perfect , simply because the most adaptive traits in a situation , depends on the situation itself. 

My mom was not athletic , but , she floated like a cork , and when the titanic went down , if she was there , she probably would have survived. 

My dad, was not a kind man , but , that too can be just the thing ,when surrounded by hostiles. 

 

The example I usually drag out though, is that of Roman soldiers, they weren't overly big, its said that on the long hot marches , it was the biggest guys who flopped over first. Because virtue is situation dependent , and dependent on what we have as our ideal..

 .. I don't see how one could call it virtue , to see ones own children as no more important than strangers. Or that one should eschew things one enjoys, so they can pursue some sort of unending homogeneity, or some kind of brainiac numbness, unless all the best of life you can muster is just that. 

 

To me it seems like one of the pervading paradigms , is that the world trends towards a sort of cyclic balance. Push things to their very extreme and you get to a tipping point. the sharpest sword would have the flimsiest edge, too much sun blinds the eye , and so forth. It just works that way or you would have a runaway trend. And so , at the greatest pinnacle of mental development towards seeing unadulterated fact , one is confronted with the irrationality of the universe itself. 

These disciples seem to be promoting toward that pinnacle , they think one can get there, they think virtue and non virtue are polemic fact , which they arent. ( because the poles connect at the ends : )  )

I guess I am rehashing ,But  to me, It makes no sense to say that one can have a perfect virtue of truth. ( because truth conflicts with rational perfection --- truth is that which is , and perfection is just a biased opinion about what things should be )  I think that gets missed and there's a reversion to seeing things as polemic good and bad again. 

Truth and perfection can be mentally reconciled , but only if one calls everything that exists , to be perfectly .. what ever it is., but that makes all men perfect as they are, and so no one man can have more virtue than another, and there's no reason to read any of the Classics when you're already perfection personified. 

 

 

 

 

Edited February 7, 2018 by Stosh

[Marblehead]

You expressed yourself well with that.

 

I have no problem or anything to add to what you said.

 

[Stosh]

13 hours ago, Marblehead said:

You expressed yourself well with that.

 

I have no problem or anything to add to what you said.

 

! now I have to go back and change something!

 

Ah! I can undermine it all! 

I can't remember chapter 82 because I am perfection personified

Edited February 8, 2018 by Stosh

[Stosh]

I read a safety promotion pamphlet that said ...

Item 1) Convince everyone that all accidents are 100% preventable. 

[Marblehead]

1 hour ago, Stosh said:

! now I have to go back and change something!

 

Ah! I can undermine it all! 

I can't remember chapter 82 because I am perfection personified

Well, if you change too much there's a good chance I will end up disagreeing with you.

 

[Marblehead]

1 hour ago, Stosh said:

I read a safety promotion pamphlet that said ...

Item 1) Convince everyone that all accidents are 100% preventable. 

Yeah, I've heard that too.  Wasn't long after that I stepped in some bear shit.

 

[Stosh]

1 hour ago, Marblehead said:

Yeah, I've heard that too.  Wasn't long after that I stepped in some bear shit.

 

Yep , that struck me as ..problematic , too.  But the funny thing to me was , that it was step one , like convincing everyone of something one just DOES , like sharpening a pencil.  

It comes to mind because I am eading the rest of the hogfather story , having found an online print of it. I don't recall if it was Death speaking at the time, but , the character said.. the problem isn't so much step one,, its the thousands of steps after.

[Marblehead]

Yeah, step one is almost always a test.  The question is always, "Do we continue forward or do we step back?"