Reincarnation

[wandelaar]

@ LiT

 

It isn't necessary for the world to make sense or to have a meaning as a prerequisite to living a spiritually fulfilling life. After all - Tao is spontaneously as it is. Or in other words: there is no underlying reason. And that makes (philosophical) Taoism an appropriate option for modern critical people who have outgrown the old-time faith-based religious systems. In place of unfounded dogma's comes the great wonder at the existence of the ten thousand things and their coming and going. The real miracle isn't to be found in the miraculous exploits of religious supermen, but simply in the existence of our everyday world.

[Lost in Translation]

2 minutes ago, wandelaar said:

After all - Tao is spontaneously as it is. Or in other words: there is no underlying reason.

 

This is where you and I disagree. There absolutely is a reason, but I believe that humans are too limited in our perceptions and understanding to comprehend this reason. The temptation to explain away the unexplainable  is very strong, hence the myriad of religions. My answer is simple: I don't know, but I believe that someone or something does know and leave it at that.

[OldDog]

5 minutes ago, wandelaar said:

... Taoism an appropriate option for modern critical people who have outgrown the old-time faith-based religious systems.

 

Now that's an interesting line of thought. Clearly, the various religious systems that have come into place have fulfilled a purpose, else why exist at all. And a notion that they are a part of an evolutionary chain ... ready to be outgrown and replaced ... poses some interesting questions. Like, what is required for us to be ready for a change? And, what are the implications of such change?

[wandelaar]

@ LiT

 

You are creating your own problem. There is no reason to suppose that the world as a whole has a reason. Reasons only make sense as motivational deliberations in some conscious being. But than as a consequence you have to suppose the existence of a Creator. And there the whole circus begins again: What is the reason behind the existence of the Creator? There is no answer, because the question simply doesn't make sense. The dogmatic answers of old-time religion are just that: unfounded proclamations. 

 

But let us - just for the sake of argument - suppose that there is a reason. Than we have the problem that there is no reason to suppose that humans play any substantial role in that reason. For the earth with everything on it could just as easily be destroyed by some meteorite.

 

[3bob]

22 minutes ago, Lost in Translation said:

 

This is where you and I disagree. There absolutely is a reason, but I believe that humans are too limited in our perceptions and understanding to comprehend this reason. The temptation to explain away the unexplainable  is very strong, hence the myriad of religions. My answer is simple: I don't know, but I believe that someone or something does know and leave it at that.

 

if one stops a song while they are playing it, the song dies. 

[Lost in Translation]

2 minutes ago, wandelaar said:

You are creating your own problem. There is no reason to suppose that the world as a whole has a reason.

 

And you are also creating your own problem. There is likewise no reason to suppose that the world as a whole does not have a reason.

 

As I said before, one is free to choose between hope (reason) and nihilism (no reason). I choose hope by choosing to believe there is a reason, and I reconcile what I perceive against this hope by accepting that my perceptions and capacity to reason are limited and thus I am incapable of knowing the truth. I don't choose to explain away my hope with specific dogma, and I don't choose to kill my hope with faith in my own capacities. To me, this is the middle way, and this comports with what I see of the workings of life. For example, my cat feels emotion and has capacity to reason and I can plainly tell his capacity is inferior to mine. I see no reason why that same relationship does not hold, albeit with me in the role of the cat and some otherworldly/otherdimensional consciousness in the role above me.

[Lost in Translation]

13 minutes ago, 3bob said:

 

if one stops a song while they are playing it, the song dies. 

 

"It's a small world after all.

 It's a small world after all.

 It's a small world after all,

   It's a small, small

[wandelaar]

1 minute ago, Lost in Translation said:

And you are also creating your own problem. There is likewise no reason to suppose that the world as a whole does not have a reason.

 

There sure is a reason for not believe in a reason for the world as a whole, because the very idea of a reason for the world as a whole is nonsensical. Reasons only make sense for conscious beings. So the idea of there being a reason for the world as a whole supposes a Creator who made the world for a reason. But that only pushes the problem back one step further, for now we can ask why a Creator with this particular reason existed in the first place. And that would than necessitate a Super-Creator with a reason for creating the Creator, and so on... But even with an infinite sequence of Creators we would still not have THE REASON.

 

In all probability the nonsensical idea of "the reason for the world as a whole" is the result of applying the original idea of a reason (being the conscious deliberation regarding some action by a human being) far beyond its sphere of applicability. And the reason for doing so clearly lies in the widespread human urge to "explain" to oneself why things are as they are. Or when that doesn't succeed, to at least believe that there is a purpose behind the things that befall us.

 

But as reasoning is powerless against the will to believe, I will not press this matter further.

 

[wandelaar]

1 hour ago, OldDog said:

Now that's an interesting line of thought. Clearly, the various religious systems that have come into place have fulfilled a purpose, else why exist at all. And a notion that they are a part of an evolutionary chain ... ready to be outgrown and replaced ... poses some interesting questions. Like, what is required for us to be ready for a change? And, what are the implications of such change?

 

A big obstacle to the popularity of philosophical Taoism as I see it is the widespread (but nonsensical) lingering belief that ultimately everything happens for the best, and that we are being cared for by some transcendental power. Philosophical Taoism is a hard form of spirituality that doesn't depend on make-believe. I don't think it will ever become as popular as the more cozy types of religion that promise some form of shelter against the bad outside world.

[Lost in Translation]

16 minutes ago, wandelaar said:

But as reasoning is powerless against the will to believe, I will not press this matter further.

 

My point is simply that one cannot know whether there is a reason or not. Faced with such a situation one must make a basic choice: to believe that there is a reason or to believe that there is not a reason. Neither choice can be proved or disproved. I have made my choice and you have made your choice. Our choices are not the same. That is all.

[OldDog]

8 hours ago, wandelaar said:

There is no reason to suppose that the world as a whole has a reason.

 

8 hours ago, Lost in Translation said:

There is likewise no reason to suppose that the world as a whole does not have a reason.

 

Doesn't the notion of ziran preclude either argument. 

[OldDog]

7 hours ago, wandelaar said:

... lingering belief that ultimately everything happens for the best, and that we are being cared for by some transcendental power.

 

Best and being cared for seem to me to be value judgements which have no meaning from the point of view of Dao. They would be beliefs that only have subjective meaning. I would not call them delusional because that presume the normal point of view to be that existence is otherwise, which I think we can agree is not the case. The point of view of Dao, as presented in the DDJ, is one of impartiality and self-so-ness. Only in the sense that Dao works as it should can we confer any sense of value.

 

As for make-believe, we have to at some point accept a belief in Dao since there is not any hard and fast evidence that we can agree on to support a mutual acceptance. In this sense it is likely no different from other relgious beliefs. Daoisms arguments do appear to be more rigorous than other religious belief because it is difficult to find any contradiction in existence as we know it and it does not require us to make any unreasonable assumptions.

 

Daoism in its classical form may never achieve great popularity again but no doubt it will have some influence on the beliefs we evolve towards. As already pointed out, if Christianity in its classical sense is losing its grip on the west, what is it to be replaced with and are we ready for it?

 

 

[3bob]

8 hours ago, Lost in Translation said:

 

My point is simply that one cannot know whether there is a reason or not. Faced with such a situation one must make a basic choice: to believe that there is a reason or to believe that there is not a reason. Neither choice can be proved or disproved. I have made my choice and you have made your choice. Our choices are not the same. That is all.

 

the Tao can make no choice against its own nature, it would be unreasonable to deny that observation.

[Lost in Translation]

1 hour ago, 3bob said:

the Tao can make no choice against its own nature, it would be unreasonable to deny that observation.

 

The Tao is not making the choice.

[wandelaar]

4 hours ago, OldDog said:

Doesn't the notion of ziran preclude either argument. 

 

The notion of ziran is exactly what I am arguing for. Philosophical Taoism agrees with the result of rationally thinking this matter trough to the very end.

[wandelaar]

3 hours ago, OldDog said:

As already pointed out, if Christianity in its classical sense is losing its grip on the west, what is it to be replaced with and are we ready for it?

 

There may not be one single religion to replace it, but many religions and forms of spirituality and even some extreme political ideologies (that serve the same purpose for their true believers).

[wandelaar]

As to the existence of the Tao, that is obvious. There certainly is a structure to the world, and there are patterns and laws of nature. But Tao isn't a thing itself, because in that case it would just be one of the ten thousand things, and not the way the world functions.

 

Nobody can honestly deny the existence of the Tao because by living in the world one continuously uses the way the world functions to get things done. Even the very act of denying the Tao would involve the use of Tao.

[3bob]

4 hours ago, wandelaar said:

 

There may not be one single religion to replace it, but many religions and forms of spirituality and even some extreme political ideologies (that serve the same purpose for their true believers).

 

 seems that has been going on since the 60's and Vietnam.  (from my perspective here in the US)  

[wandelaar]

4 minutes ago, 3bob said:

 seems that has been going on since the 60's and Vietnam.  (from my perspective here in the US)  

 

I guess that's the most probable development all over the western world.

[3bob]

1 hour ago, wandelaar said:

 

I guess that's the most probable development all over the western world.

 

another is that billions of us are plugged into our almighty cell phones, social networks, on-line retail, media, etc. which does not leave much time to reflect on or work on spiritual endeavors or needs,  along with the fact that we have to make a living in a world that can slowly eat away at us.  (better smell the roses and the coffee while we can)

Edited November 25, 2018 by 3bob