Why Follow Tao?

[Lost in Translation]

Tao nourishes all things, good, bad or indifferent.

 

Live  a good life? Tao nourishes you.

Live a bad life? Tao nourishes you.

Live an indifferent life? Tao nourishes you.

 

Be selfish? Take, take, take! Tao gives and does not begrudge.

Be generous? Give, give, give! Tao wants for nothing and does not need your charity.

Be indifferent? Tao does not care and treats you the same as all others.

 

So why follow Tao?

[Marblehead]

Because the Way of Tao is the most efficient as it is always the most natural flow of all movements.

 

Sure, we have free will to follow whichever path we wish to follow.  Good, bad, or indifferent.  But we should ask our self:  What are the effects of the actions we take?  Cause and effect are always present in anything we do or do not do.

 

That's the beauty of Taoist philosophy - its potential is absolute within the possibilities of the manifest.

 

Bottom line is the results.  But still, be evil and one day you will die; be bad and one day you will die.  I suppose it is more at how we want to be remembered after we die.

 

[wandelaar]

Good question! I think we are now at the point where we can see "following Tao" as acting in a way that respects the dynamics of the situation, and thus puts egocentric considerations second place. Letting egocentric considerations becloud your understanding of the situation leads to unwise and thus counterproductive action. So in a subtle way following Tao is just using common sense or practical wisdom. Of course you don't need to, but why should one knowingly sabotage one's own actions?

 

Still I am not quite sure about "following Tao" as regards the goals we set ourselves. You could set yourself the goal of becoming the biggest criminal in the world and be willing to pay the price when you don't succeed. That would be clearly against the unassuming way of Lao tse and Chuang tsu, but then why should you follow the way of Lao tse and Chuang tsu  when you are willing to live with the consequences. There is still an element of choice involved, and I don't see how to somehow prove that the way followed by Lao tse and Chuang tse is the one and only WAY OF TAO. If there is such a thing... Perhaps we should instead ask ourselves the following  question:

 

"What should be our way life if we want to maximize our chances on a long, peaceful and happy life?"

 

Then the question whether Lao tse and Chuang tse were right could in principle be answered. And the conundrum of the aspiring top criminal is also solved because he just doesn't care that much about ' maximizing his chances on a long, peaceful and happy life '.

Edited April 16, 2018 by wandelaar

[Daemon]

☮️

Edited October 5, 2018 by Daemon

[Lost in Translation]

4 hours ago, Marblehead said:

Because the Way of Tao is the most efficient as it is always the most natural flow of all movements.

 

"the Way of Tao is the most efficient". Yes, very astute!

 

But does efficiency play a role in judgement of value?  Good, bad, indifferent are descriptors of value. One can be good and efficient, or bad and efficient, or indifferent and efficient. Yes? No?

 

I think I'm missing some key element here, but I don't know what it is.

[wandelaar]

27 minutes ago, Lost in Translation said:

I think I'm missing some key element here, but I don't know what it is.

 

I personally don't see how the is-ought-barrier here could possibly be bridged. Taoism (even of the philosophical type) is just a religion among others. If you want to maximize our chances on a long, peaceful and happy life, then it might be your thing. But if you don't care or want a spectacular life full of excitement, it might very well not be your thing. How could we possibly prove Taoism to be the morally right way to follow? I don't think that's possible.

Edited April 16, 2018 by wandelaar

[Lost in Translation]

4 minutes ago, wandelaar said:

How could we possibly prove Taoism to be the morally right way to follow?

 

I don't think that's possible. Just the opposite, I think Taoism is very much not about morality, but as @Marblehead said, efficiency - specifically efficiency as it relates to one's own state of being. As one follows the efficient path - the path of least resistance in many ways - one gradually learns to live in harmony with others. This has the appearance of being good, but's it's not exactly good. Perhaps the cart is leading the horse in this regard?

 

I'm still working this out. There are so many things to work out...

[wandelaar]

@ Lost in Translation 

 

But than what is the problem? Couldn't you just accept that the correctness of morality (of whatever type) cannot be proved.

[thelerner]

The sun shines on the just and unjust.  Yet the sun is not the tao.

Straw dogs may be discarded, but thats after they've served there purpose. 

 

I suppose if one is considering Tao as the universe, it doesn't moralize.  Yet Taoism as religion takes Te seriously (& has writings way beyond the TTC).   (imo) Most religious Taoists live by a relatively strict code.  You can say a philosophical Taoist doesn't, yet to live without Te.. grace.. is probably not moving along the Way.

 

This is as good a definition of Te as any- https://personaltao.com/taoism/de/

 

[wandelaar]

It's not that I promote living without Te but that I think it impossible to prove that one ought to live as a Taoist. That is something different.

[Stosh]

You get to live a life in accord with your nature, whether its 100 yrs or 50. 

No, its not offering magic, but it is something, and it should have meaning. 

Whether you mow lawns or preside in the supreme court, is up to you and the tide of circumstance. 

When the time comes and you look back at it all, as some say you get to do,

You can be one of those who said "I did it my way"

that was me , that was the best I could work out, It was good. That was my part in it all. 

You are not prevented from being evil , but the consequences are yours.

It is presumed that your human nature , in prevailing, fits the definition of human goodness.  

And in recognizing the ebb and flow of tao , you will do much the same things as any culture would deem good. 

 

The sun shining on both the wicked and the just , makes some things possible for both...

BUT , dark doings are befitted by obscurity , while noble acts are presentable for all to see. 

So the impartial sun, still has its influence. 

 

[Marblehead]

4 hours ago, Daemon said:

@Marblehead

 

You remind me of something attributed to Marcus Aurelius, although he took it a bit further.

 

I didn't steal that from him.  Those were my own thoughts.  Perhaps I could have taken it further but those questions Marcus had never occurred to me.  (I'm an Atheist.  What can I say?)

 

[Marblehead]

2 hours ago, Lost in Translation said:

 

"the Way of Tao is the most efficient". Yes, very astute!

 

But does efficiency play a role in judgement of value?  Good, bad, indifferent are descriptors of value. One can be good and efficient, or bad and efficient, or indifferent and efficient. Yes? No?

 

I think I'm missing some key element here, but I don't know what it is.

Yeah, you missed one point.  We are supposed to be beyond the value judgements of good/bad.  Beyond dualities.

 

[Marblehead]

46 minutes ago, thelerner said:

The sun shines on the just and unjust.  Yet the sun is not the tao.

Straw dogs may be discarded, but thats after they've served there purpose. 

 

I suppose if one is considering Tao as the universe, it doesn't moralize.  Yet Taoism as religion takes Te seriously (& has writings way beyond the TTC).   (imo) Most religious Taoists live by a relatively strict code.  You can say a philosophical Taoist doesn't, yet to live without Te.. grace.. is probably not moving along the Way.

 

This is as good a definition of Te as any- https://personaltao.com/taoism/de/

 

You cheated.  You brought in the concept of Te - (Taoist) Virtue; not to be confused with Confucian virtue.  Now we have to make value judgements.

 

 

[Lost in Translation]

24 minutes ago, Marblehead said:

Yeah, you missed one point.  We are supposed to be beyond the value judgements of good/bad.  Beyond dualities.

 

 

But "supposed to" is, itself, a value judgement.

[Marblehead]

12 minutes ago, Lost in Translation said:

 

But "supposed to" is, itself, a value judgement.

True but I have no better way of saying that.

 

To say we are beyond value judgements would be a lie.

 

But we could be.

 

[Mig]

If that is the question, should we ask, why the Dao doesn't follow you? If there are imperfections in our nature and we are a cheat copy of nature, why should we follow, it is there or within us??

[Marblehead]

Good question.  I can't answer it at the moment.  Maybe someone else will.

 

[Lost in Translation]

I think what I am getting at is simply that Tao does not judge. Neither good nor bad come in to play. But that does not mean there are not good reasons to follow Tao. As we've already said, to follow Tao is to follow the path of least resistance, which means the path of least effort. Presumably a life of greater effort is less desirable that a life of lesser effort.

 

Ironically, or not, leading a life of less effort begins to take on the trappings of goodness - at least in the realm of personal interactions. It is less effort to leave people alone than to meddle in their affairs, for example. Most people would agree that a good person meddles less and a bad person meddles more.

 

Circles within circles...

[Stosh]

4 hours ago, Mig said:

If that is the question, should we ask, why the Dao doesn't follow you? If there are imperfections in our nature and we are a cheat copy of nature, why should we follow, it is there or within us??

When I was a kid , my dad had this saying , which was peppered in any conversation, "Ya follow me?" And what he was asking was reassurance that the other person understood his point , not necessarily that they agreed, ( It was probably assumed , that if they understood they also agreed   ) 

This agreement , would be a sort of , a common rationale , a common sequence of considerations , rather than obedience , since obedience kind of means that you don't agree but are forced to go along with the plan , wouldn't it? 

And so when I hear this thing about heaven following , and tao following and man following , and societies and families and all the rest Follow ,,,,, it is that they share a common rationale , a common set of considerations , and one can draw analogies about one from the other.

So when the quail ,and the cicada ,and the ,li Peng, and the royalty , and everything ! else from Chuang understanding the mind of fishes  ... it is that they all follow the way , despite differences in scale etc... 

So yes, Dao could be said to follow you similarly ..  except that as a human being you have imagination and forethought and desires and can make errors etc so we would be a crappy template to learn from , about the workings of the real universe. 

 

Edited April 16, 2018 by Stosh

[Mig]

3 hours ago, Stosh said:

When I was a kid , my dad had this saying , which was peppered in any conversation, "Ya follow me?" And what he was asking was reassurance that the other person understood his point , not necessarily that they agreed, ( It was probably assumed , that if they understood they also agreed   ) 

This agreement , would be a sort of , a common rationale , a common sequence of considerations , rather than obedience , since obedience kind of means that you don't agree but are forced to go along with the plan , wouldn't it? 

And so when I hear this thing about heaven following , and tao following and man following , and societies and families and all the rest Follow ,,,,, it is that they share a common rationale , a common set of considerations , and one can draw analogies about one from the other.

So when the quail ,and the cicada ,and the ,li Peng, and the royalty , and everything ! else from Chuang understanding the mind of fishes  ... it is that they all follow the way , despite differences in scale etc... 

So yes, Dao could be said to follow you similarly ..  except that as a human being you have imagination and forethought and desires and can make errors etc so we would be a crappy template to learn from , about the workings of the real universe. 

 

 

I guess we walk always forward, even if we fall down, we either retreat or keep going forward, thus giving the impression to follow. Now if we follow the Dao, and I would assume in this case, nature, then what happened when there is a natural catastrophe? Do we still follow, or what do we do? Survival for the fittest? As catastrophe, I am thinking an earthquake, a lightning, hurricane or something out of our control or nature control. I can imagine, people will say, when you shouldn't be there then I would respond but I am following the Dao. Am I clear?

 

[Boundlesscostfairy]

So with the knowledge of Good and Evil, one can find and attain the source which is 

 

Either, good, or neutral..

[Lost in Translation]

2 minutes ago, Boundlesscostfairy said:

So with the knowledge of Good and Evil, one can find and attain the source which is 

 

Either, good, or neutral..

 

Does knowledge of good and evil lead to the source, or does knowledge of source reveal the good and evil?

[Boundlesscostfairy]

Probably both, depending on your level of spirituality..

 

There might be a bit of in and out, out and in..

[Stosh]

2 hours ago, Mig said:

 

I guess we walk alonge fall down, we either retreat or keep going forward, thus giving the impression to follow. Now if we follow the Dao, and I would assume in this case, nature, then what happened when there is a natural catastrophe? Do we still follow, or what do we do? Survival for the fittest? As catastrophe, I am thinking an earthquake, a lightning, hurricane or something out of our control or nature control. I can imagine, people will say, when you shouldn't be there then I would respond but I am following the Dao. Am I clear?

 

Yes, sort of. You want confirmation that you are doing the "right" thing", but there is no absolute right thing. 

There is nothing that one can properly assert is Always right, or the consequences will all pan out as you would have it.

You have to believe In yourself and live with the consequences. Then too, you have to accept those consequences. 

Daoism suggests some basic things which trend towards a life at peace with yourself, but doesnt guarantee a rose garden.

If you want smoke blown up your ass, theres other faiths.