Taoist logic?

[wandelaar]

@ Aletheia

 

Thank you. But I am not looking for an explanation or criticism of western philosophy in this topic. I am looking for forms of Taoist logic, if they exist. It appears that very little has been done in that direction. Maybe it isn't a fruitful concept after all... I don't know.  

[Marblehead]

3 hours ago, Aletheia said:

 

In everyday experience we are always already reaching ahead of ourselves in anticipation of what will become. Likewise there's a retention of what has been. What opens up as the gathering of future and past is the temporal event horizon of the present, which is the spatial zone where entities encounter one another!

 

So the myth of creation is not something which occurred in the corridor of time with sequential causal nexus. It's an on going singular event!

 

Granted, I do anticipate the future and I do recall the past but I live (interact) in the present.  And pretty much my interactions will be influenced by the past any my anticipated future.

 

To the video:  I can't talk about nothing.  I do sometimes say things the have no meaning.

 

As opposed to "Negation (not)" I am more of an "Affirmation (is)" kind of guy.  I really don't like negating things (or concepts symbolized with speech).  I prefer affirmation and agreement whenever possible.

 

 

[Marblehead]

2 hours ago, Aletheia said:

 

 

It doesn't relate to Taoist thought unless one deconstructs western metaphysics ...

 

I have been told that I do that on occasion.  I had never thought about it until the first person mentioned it to me.

 

[Marblehead]

And no, I never could read Sartre's "Being and Nothingness".  And I really did try hard but it just wouldn't fit in my brain.

 

[voidisyinyang]

8 hours ago, wandelaar said:

 

Maybe time to ask again. As I said logic by definition is a kind of reasoning. Now it may be that one doesn't like reasoning or that one thinks reasoning (particularly of the formal type) is antithetical to Taoism. That's all right with me. In that case there simple is no Taoist logic. And that would be your answer to my question.

 

But if there are forms of Taoist logic than they have to be forms of reasoning, for if not the term logic (as currently used) would be inappropriate.

 

As I happen to know something about mathematics and physics the post of voidisyinyang on first sight looks like the right thing to delve into. But unhappily it's an illogical jumble of words. Take this:

 

 

This is the typical pick and choose of somebody who doesn't know what he is talking about, but nevertheless thinks he knows better than more than two millennia of Western mathematics. Gödel used formal logic of the Western type, so if that type of logic is wrong how can you accept his proof as correct? And what on earth is "symmetric mathematics of irrational magnitude and logarithms"? And yes - I know what irrational magnitudes and logarithms are.

 

 

Yes I agree with you. Westerners assume that Logic has to be conceptual thinking as "reasoning" - when this excludes the most definitive form of logic: Logical Inference - as when Socrates asked: Who Am I? So in Daoism - I agree with you that there is no reasoning in the sense of creating sentences that are supposed to be factual, based on proofs, etc. But on the other hand what I am saying is that Logic originates from Logos which is in fact music theory. And that Daoism also in fact originates from music theory - this is my claim. There is evidence that backs this up. I have cited it in my research.

 

I typed out a long answer but it got erased since the computer logs you out if you don't reply fast enough. haha. That's fine - all my research - just look at the Eddie Oshins thread for details - or on my blog(s).

 

 

[voidisyinyang]

3 hours ago, Marblehead said:

And no, I never could read Sartre's "Being and Nothingness".  And I really did try hard but it just wouldn't fit in my brain.

 

 

Actually I just grabbed my dad's copy of that book - as I remembered my high school friend being impressed my dad had it in his library. My high school friend got the "top" senior thesis among 50,000 students at University of Minnesota - on Heidegger and went on to a Ph.D. in philosophy but his parents are from Taiwan - and so he moved back to TAiwan and now studies Buddhism. He just did a talk on Nietzsche that you might find interesting - as it relates to the Lower Tan T'ien of Daoism.

 

 

[wandelaar]

8 minutes ago, voidisyinyang said:

I typed out a long answer but it got erased since the computer logs you out if you don't reply fast enough. haha. That's fine - all my research - just look at the Eddie Oshins thread for details - or on my blog(s).

 

A short answer is much better anyway! Why don't you keep it short and simple as you did just now?

 

Could you post a link to your research?

[vonkrankenhaus]

9 hours ago, wandelaar said:

Gödel used formal logic of the Western type, so if that type of logic is wrong how can you accept his proof as correct?

 

You could take a look at what Marshall McLuhan writes about literacy.

 

And you could check out this book:

 

https://www.amazon.com/User-Illusion-Cutting-Consciousness-Penguin/dp/0140230122/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1526930193&sr=8-1&keywords=the+user+illusion

 

 

 

-VonKrankenhaus

[wandelaar]

How does that relate to Gödel's proof?

[voidisyinyang]

49 minutes ago, wandelaar said:

How does that relate to Gödel's proof?

 

O.K. I will post links to my research. Just so you know - there are two answers to Godel's proof, as I cite math professor A.K. Dewdney, in my 2012 free pdf - either Godel is correct or Western math is logically inconsistent.

So this is a Daoist website. My approach was - I realized that Pythagorean Logos was actually the same as Daoist alchemy - based on the logic of music theory. I then experienced qigong master Effie P. Chow in 1995 - so I knew that the qi energy was real and very powerful. So then I kept researching the issue. I then met qigong master Chunyi Lin and so I tested out the meditation on myself and discovered - yes it is all very real.

 

Western philosophy has no idea what they are missing out on. So yes 2000 years of Western math is wrong. But like I said - noncommutative phase or noncommtutative geometry is based on music theory - as Alain Connes details. So you ask - how can I say 2000 years of math is wrong? Well Alain Connes got the Fields Medal and he is saying the same thing as me - in terms of music theory. He calls it "2, 3, infinity" - that's how he sums up his math model.

 

2, 3, infinity - that is the same as the Tao Te Ching secret - it is explained by noncommutative geometry.

 

So you want to understand Daoist logic - then I recommend studying Daoist alchemy.

 

It is not the same as Western science at all. I spent 10 years studying Western science - after my master's degree - to "reverse engineer" daoist alchemy back into Western science.

 

http://elixirfield.blogspot.com/2018/04/why-is-23-not-yin-and-why-do-we-need-to.html

 

this has some of the info...

http://elixirfield.blogspot.com/2018/04/is-there-right-and-wrong-in-music.html

 

some more....

 

http://elixirfield.blogspot.com/2018/04/the-active-medium-as-spin-flipper-or.html

 

more here....

 

http://elixirfield.blogspot.com/2018/04/whats-43-got-to-do-with-3-not-going.html

 

Edited May 21, 2018 by voidisyinyang

[vonkrankenhaus]

1 hour ago, wandelaar said:

How does that relate to Gödel's proof?

 

This is discussed in both sources.

 

Worth taking a look, at least.

 

 

 

- VonKrankenhaus

[wandelaar]

@ voidisyinyang

 

The presentation of your posts here is much better now.

 

But I don't understand your links. 

[vonkrankenhaus]

7 hours ago, wandelaar said:

I am looking for forms of Taoist logic, if they exist. It appears that very little has been done in that direction.

 

Have you seen the TaijiTu?

 

8 Trigrams?

 

Wu Xing?

 

What part of these seem to lack logic?

 

 

 

 

-VonKrankenhaus

[wandelaar]

22 minutes ago, vonkrankenhaus said:

This is discussed in both sources.

 

Worth taking a look, at least.

 

 

 

- VonKrankenhaus

 

Took a look at the last book via the internet, but I still don't see how it relates to Taoist logic. I have enough books on logic already to know what Gödel's proofs are about. 

 

 

[wandelaar]

6 minutes ago, vonkrankenhaus said:

Have you seen the TaijiTu?

 

8 Trigrams?

 

Wu Xing?

 

What part of these seem to lack logic?

 

 

 

 

-VonKrankenhaus

 

All of them. The best thing I can think of in that direction are certain logical systems based on the I Ching.

[vonkrankenhaus]

18 minutes ago, wandelaar said:

I still don't see how it relates to Taoist logic. I have enough books on logic already to know what Gödel's proofs are about. 

 

It's about the consciousness that would see Taoist logic.

 

Or, not see it.

 

And a good bit of "why".

 

That's why I suggested it.

 

 

 

 

- VonKrankenhaus

[voidisyinyang]

36 minutes ago, wandelaar said:

@ voidisyinyang

 

The presentation of your posts here is much better now.

 

But I don't understand your links. 

 

O.K. here is a Chinese philosophy professor who points out why Westerners misunderstand Daoist logic.

 

http://ecoechoinvasives.blogspot.com/2017/06/how-professor-jeeloo-liu-solved-mystery.html

 

Quote

The standard translation "the ultimate nonbeing" (Chan, 1963; Neville 1980) or "Ultimate of Nonbeing" (Zhang, 2002) has actually reversed the Chinese word order, and renders it as jiwu - the ultimate wu.

 

Quote

Taiji was initially boundless because its existence was beyond both space and time.

https://jeelooliu.net/

 

So that is what noncommutative phase means.

For each supposed "zero" point in space there is a 5th dimension that is 2, 3 at the same time - or yin-yang undivided at the same time as 3/2 and 2/3 - the Single Yang as yuan qi.

So this philosopher then compares this with Western science....

 

Quote

vacuums have energy and energy is convertible into mass is to deny that vacuums are empty....vacuums are far from empty. Understood in this light, ...taiji is much more intelligble and plausible.

So - this gets into paradoxes of quantum logic. Now we can go into this but we can also realize these paradoxes originate from music theory that is also Daoist logic as noncommutative phase.

So you would have to study music theory to understand - or to reveal the lie at the origin of Western logic.  We can say Western logic "works" - if we ignore the ecological crisis and severe social injustice. And ignoring these things are pretty easy to do as all the "news" ignores them as much as possible. We get lots of fancy techno-fix gadgets with Western logic so we think it "works." But Daoist logic is actually corroborated by the deep paradoxes in Western logic - the stuff that mathematicians discuss but rarely admit in public. haha.

Quote

They are the same [frequency] spectrum but they are not the same chord. There are three types of notes.... The point [zero in space] makes a chord between two notes. When the value of the two eigenfunctions [2, 3, infinity] will be non-zero. ... Musical shape has geometric dimension zero....There is a fine structure in spacetime, exactly as there is a fine structure in spectrals [frequencies]...Our brain is an incredible .... receives moments of space... of the photons we receive and manufactures a mental picture. Which is geometric. But what I am telling you is that I think ...that the fundamental thing is spectral [frequency]....And somehow in order to think we have to do an enormous Fourier Transform...on geometry. By talking about the "music of shapes" is really a fourier transform of shape and the fact that we have to do it in reverse....It is precisely the irrationality of log(3)/ log(2) which is responsible for the noncommutative [complementary opposites as yin/yang] nature of the quotient corresponding to the three places {2, 3,∞}.  .it's related to mathematics and related to the fact that there is behind the scene, when I talk about the Dirac Operator, there is a square root, and this square root, when you take a square root there is an ambiguity. And the ambiguity that is there is coming from the spin structure.

Alain Connes, 2012

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[wandelaar]

@ voidisyinyang

 

Back on the old track again? Maybe someone on the World Wide Web will understand all this, but not me. Success!

[voidisyinyang]

19 minutes ago, wandelaar said:

@ voidisyinyang

 

Back on the old track again? Maybe someone on the World Wide Web will understand all this, but not me. Success!

 

So logical inference is pretty easy to understand. When you are in deep dreamless sleep then where do you go? Are you a biological machine or do you still exist as your self? If you still are you then who you are can not be defined by the thoughts in your mind or your ability to experience space or time - there is something else.

 

So we are told that the Dao can not be said in words - but this does not rule out LISTENING as logical inference. So we are told the Dao is a harmony and this is also what music is - a harmony. We are told the Dao is 1, 2, 3 and then infinity - but that even mathematicians can not understand infinity so how could the common person?

 

This last comment is actually a secret - because math is actually from music theory based on harmonics. So when you meditate - do you use music to guide the meditation? You can use the "small universe" meditation from http://springforestqigong.com - there are 12 points along the body. These 12 points are actually from music theory.

 

So each note is actually from the opposite direction of time and frequency - so it is yin and yang that reverses as complementary opposites and so just as there are 12 notes in the music scale - in fact the empirical truth is an infinite process of energy creation since the first note and the 2nd note do not line up with each other inside the same octave. In other words if you build the note from the 3 which is the first Pitch that is different than the 1 and the 2 - then the 3 does not line up with the 2 and so the process creates all of infinity.

 

Now in the West we think of this as normal counting or at best "set theory" and it assumes an equal value of numbers. So we see this philosophy as some kind of primitive simplicity - but in actuality there is a secret that music theory contains - and has been rediscovered in noncommutative geometry as noncommutative phase.

 

So if you do music training from a young age - this actually causes the corpus callosum to get much bigger - and so with deep listening - you can hear that the Perfect Fifth as the 3 is pulled towards the 1 but that the 1 then changes. This is not acknowledged in Western music theory because the subharmonic was not allowed.

 

So for example in Indian music theory it states - the Perfect Fifth as the subharmonic will emphasize the root tonic of the 1 due to the overtones of the Perfect Fourth. So in other words if the 1 is C as the root tonic then the "yin" note as the Perfect Fourth is F as 4/3 but it's first overtone harmonic is also C as the root tonic and the octave of the F is then actually the Perfect Fifth as "yang" as 2/3 subharmonic. So this is covered up in the West since the 2/3 as C to F subharmonic does not line up into the same octave and so only the 4/3 as C to F is allowed. This means C to G is 3/2 but C to F as the subharmonic 2/3 is also the Perfect Fifth and so it is empirically valid and yet if you use C to G then the first overtone harmonic of G is not C (unlike for F where the first overtone IS C) rather for G the first overtone harmonic is D and so it does not resonate as well with the root tonic of C.

 

So what is going on here is that the value of the 1 gets changed based on which "3" is used - in either case the 1 is changed - geometrically - and so this process of transformation continues eternally as the undivided yin-yang resonance with the Perfect Fifth as being in two different places of G and F at the same time.

 

So that is the music theory example - it is completely covered up in Western math and yet music theory is also the foundation of Western math. And so Alain Connes rediscovered this secret of music theory by stating (2, 3, infinity).

 

So for us normal people we see 2, 3, infinity and think it has no secret meaning - but Alain Connes calls music theory a "universal scaling system" as a unified field theory.

 

So math is still an external measurement and so the logic is limited - but since he derives it from music - then we can take this music theory seriously and realize it is the secret truth of Daoist alchemy philosophy as logic and also the secret of the "three gunas" of India - as their yoga meditation. OM also means the infinite complementary opposites of the "three in one" unity of the octave (Emptiness) and Perfect Fifth (yang as rajas) and Perfect Fourth (Yin as tamas).

 

So this is why the logic is not understood - it can not be expressed in words. When Alain Connes uses music theory to model the math - then now he has to try to find undiscovered particles to "prove" his math as the external truth. Meanwhile he neglected the secret of the music theory! He practices Chopin at home - but that is not based on the noncommutative phase secret. Western music theory is symmetric logarithmic math - and the foundation of all Western math.

 

So in Daoism and Pythagorean philosophy - it takes the music theory as the empirical truth of reality that is accessed by practicing the music as mind-body meditation transformation. This is very different - for example for males the right hand is yin while the left foot is yang and so that means there is a secret non-dual 5th dimension energy that connects those two different places in space - nonlocally. And so this is also true for the right hand and the upper body as yang and the left hand as yang and the lower body as yin and then the left foot as yang and the lower body as yin.

 

So now we have not just a philosophy but a specific mind-body transformation practice - the small universe meditation - the standing active exercises - the full lotus - are all based on this secret. Finally the two eyes - the left eye, for males, is yin qi of the liver and the right eye is yang qi of the lungs - and by rotating them with the eyes closed then you connect with the yuan qi that emanates out of the pineal gland via the heart and lower tan t'ien (the small intestines) - the three brains of the central channel.

 

And so it is the qi energy itself that is the Logos - called then Harmonia or Aion or the Muses - or Nada in Indian metaphysics - or "Sound-current" as Quan Yin in Chinese Buddhism as the "inner ear method."

 

The logic is a method - just as you can only talk about music so much but only if you practice music on an instrument - before the age of 7 - is the brain transformed to increase the corpus callosum. this is because the right side vagus nerve connects to the left side of the brain but the left side vagus nerve does not connect to the right side of the brain.

 

So logic is left brain dominant in the West and so the left side vagus nerve will not be able to transform the right side of the brain. It is listening with the eyes closed, as visualization of sound as a 3D location in the body - this is what creates the quantum nonlocal phase coherence that is faster than the speed of light, as the Yuan Qi energy.

 

 

[Marblehead]

5 hours ago, voidisyinyang said:

 

He just did a talk on Nietzsche that you might find interesting - as it relates to the Lower Tan T'ien of Daoism.

 

 

I got to eight minutes in and stopped.  I like what he said and agree with the theme he was presenting.  Maybe I'll watch the rest of it later.  Thanks.

[voidisyinyang]

7 hours ago, wandelaar said:

@ voidisyinyang

 

Back on the old track again? Maybe someone on the World Wide Web will understand all this, but not me. Success!

You like this dude: Raymond M. Smullyan, The Tao Is Silent:

 

 

So this is precisely what I am saying. All human cultures use the Octave, Perfect Fifth and Perfect Fourth and this is what creates melodies - the "group of notes" is this secret with the Octave as the Emptiness, Yang as the Perfect Fifth and Yin as the PErfect Fourth. In alchemy we transform the yin into the yang but this process is eternal as undivided yin-yang - the Yuan Qi - so it is eternal listening to the source of the group of notes.

 

This is not a metaphor - but the literal logic of Daoism.

 

And so since Raymond M. Smullyan was a Western trained musician, he was relying on the wrong symmetric mathematics that was created from the wrong music theory. But since he trained as a musician - he realized there is a deeper secret to listening to a group of notes as a melody. That secret is the harmony of the Dao. He says it's the secret of hearing a melody instead of hearing the sounds.

 

 

[wandelaar]

29 minutes ago, voidisyinyang said:

You like this dude: Raymond M. Smullyan, The Tao Is Silent:

 

 

So this is precisely what I am saying.

 

In that case I prefer the simple explanations of Smullyan. 

[Wu Ming Jen]

Life is not always logical, there are no absolutes, to confine oneself with the chains of logic we would miss out on a lot of amazing things

. 

Logic is a tool of the mind it is necessary to use the right tool for the job and then put the tool down.

 

If we apply philosophy in daily life then it is not just a bunch of mind chatter needing pages and pages and pages of explanations. IMO

[wandelaar]

Thanks for all the commends about the badness of logic. I always wonder how many people expressing this feeling actually know something about it? Modern logic doesn't claim to be anything else than a tool, so the criticism that there is more to life than logic is grossly beside the point. But never mind - it's the usual thing one gets to hear. So be it. 

 

All considered I have to conclude that there is not much to explore in the way of Taoist logic. To bad: but finding nothing also saves me a lot of time and energy.

[Marblehead]

1 hour ago, wandelaar said:

 

All considered I have to conclude that there is not much to explore in the way of Taoist logic. To bad: but finding nothing also saves me a lot of time and energy.

And besides, there will be more room in your (and mine, and all others) mind for wisdom of value.

 

Consider:  Wisdom isn't necessarily logical.