Transcript Review: Mature Daoism (Zhuangzi)

Welcome back
From Reading Week
Laozi

Abandon knowledge w/o fatalism


Freedom from social control
By language daos


Language opposites: 1 distinction 2 words



Socially engineered ways of distinguishing/desiring
Desires guided by one of the two
Acting on that desire/distinction pair = wei 為
Wu-wei follows from wu-ming-yu-zhi


Forgetting and returning to the child
Complex version of abandon-knowledge paradox
Famous First Line

Constant dao is empty (Great Dao/Natural
Dao)

Any dao that daos(guides) can be changed


Subject to interpretation, context and point of view
Because made of 名 mingnames

Also no fixed relation to things—application can vary


Different contexts, rectify names father/ruler
Politics--a dao of reversal

Reverses value names—dao the total opposites



Value passivity, submissive, lower, female, soft, pliable, etc.
Also not a constant dao—a heuristic to see ????
Reverse ruler who 反 fanopposites convention guide
Re: Mencius

Because similar—morality conventional


Return to natureforget language v intuition
Anti-Language “paradox”


“This sentence is false” a pure paradox
“All sentences are false” is false


All language is bad, all distorts dao etc.
Challenge to Zhuangzi

Probably understands the paradox

Hui shi 惠施 link and evidence of familiarity
Questions
Hand in Mid-terms and quiz now or
before noon to Loletta
Pipes of 天tian nature:sky

Human voices and arguing about philosophy
is natural


Like birds tweeting and frogs croaking
Gives Yangzhu, Mozi and Mencius what they
want


Not worth anything
Want authority over rivals and天tiannature:sky fails


Hint from Shen Dao—no normative content
Pure fact—no ought/value
Zhuangzi’s Daoism

Mencius refutation: Presupposes a 是
shithis:right



Shi the heart over other organs
Shi the sage’s heart (cultivation) to fools
Priority of 道 daoguide over 天 tiannature:sky


Nature, the cosmos not a moral authority
Does not shi-feithis-not this是 非

All shi-fei presuppose a dao—a way of speaking


That guides human behavior
Ways of drawing distinctions 辯
Refutation of Mencius

Should follow our hearts and should
follow 天 tiannature:sky (性 xingnature )

All organs are equally natural (100
joints)


C.f. Mencius' weeds as natural as nature
How do you是shithis:right a favorite?


Rely on the心 xinheart-mind? Begs the
question
Take turns or have no ruler?
Refutation: 2nd step


Should cultivate the 心xinheart-mind by
studying Confucian sages.
Even if we accept making the heart the
ruler


Why是shithis:right cultivating it this way and
not that?
Isn't fools heart a natural heart as much as
the sages?
是非
Refutation: Conclusion


All shi-feithis-not this是非in the心xinheart-mind
are成chengprejudices
You can't get a 是 shithis:right out of the
heart without putting one in


No 'ought' from 'is‘ (no ‘ought’ w/o an ‘ought’)
Intuition cannot be the guide to 道
daoguide


是非
Presupposes a standard
What about Daoist intuition?

No such thing! Only skepticism
Using Priority of Dao over天

Must presuppose a 道 daoguide


For a Daoist,天 tiannature:sky not an authority



Choosing and interpreting have a dao
All guidance from some 道 daoguide
The cosmos doesn't make guiding judgments
So what?

Cannot escape responsibility for our own dao
judgments


Should I follow天 tiannature:sky?
Same question no matter what authority
Must Be Handled Carefully

Not all "equal" or "good"
Normative judgments
 All "natural" (non-normative)


Judgments of "good" "bad" "equal"
etc. made from a point of view


Presupposes 道 daoguide or standard
of shi-feithis-not this是 非
Hui Shi’s mistake: no right or wrong
Indexicals and Relativism

A more formidable foe: The墨辯Later
Mohist realists

Language based on similarities and
differences in the world


Real not conventional
Language is not breath, but about things


However, what it is about is never fixed
Makes the point by using indexicals
Indexicals

Terms whose reference changes




speaker, audience, time
I, you, today, here, now
Tuesday, February 1998, Queen's Rd., etc
Key indexical distinction is this/that是彼

Anything can be a 'this' or a 'that'


Relation to the speaker
Also comparative terms: Large/small,
above/below etc
No Argument: Punning Shift

Slides from是彼 this/that too是 非
right/wrong

Evaluative judgments comparative



Beautiful/ugly, good/bad
Language based on conventional indexicals
shi-feithis-not this是非
If language is not fixed, is it any different
from twittering?

Or not?
this-that
Shi-bi
是彼

Anything can be a 'this' or a 'that'


to 是 非
Relation to the speaker
Also comparative terms:
Large/small, above/below etc.

Learned from惠 施 Hui Shih?
What Conclusion?

All is one?

惠 施 (Hui shi) draws this conclusion
from comparative relativism



天 地一體 "Heaven and earth form one
body (distinctions are unreal)
Zhuangzi rebuts this—can’t know
From where do we conclude that?
All judgment is perspectival
 What perspective makes them all one

Ultimate POV? Axis of daos道樞


From there all different judgments are
possible
But no judgment is actually made


To make it would be to step off the axis and
start down one of the possible paths
Still make judgments— but always on
our way somewhere

In awareness that in other perspectives, I
would make different judgment
All is One?

This is an anti-language judgment


Zhuangzi points out a consequence of the
paradox





No distinctions, no names
If I make the judgment that all is one
Then that one and the judgment makes two
The two and recognition that there are two make a
third
Now no one can stop the progression.
Don't make the judgment!
Can't (Shouldn't?) Escape From
Perspectives

The Handan walk
Even
right
if all humans agree, it doesn't make it
–Deer
and fish
Even if all natural kinds agree, doesn't make it right
–Maybe
valuing life is not a mistake
Dream
Conclusion:
of the skull-pillow
no one knows anything?
–No
–I
don't know if I have the correct distinction between knowing and
not-knowing
So what advice?

Truth relativism too strong


Stop making judgments? No (paradox)
All perspectives are equal? No



Hitler is just like Gandhi? No
Strong skepticism doesn't entail anything
This is mild skepticism

No argument against your perspective


Keep making judgments about others
Just awareness that there are alternatives


Hard to convince them and vice versa
Tolerance, openness, and don’t kill b/c different
So what advice? (2)

Be open to alternative perspectives


Youth and flexibility
Do the usual


Not anti-conventional or anti-language
But only pragmatic conclusion



The usual is communicable and hence useful
End of the matter
Skill transcendence.




Cook Ding庖 丁story
Loss of self in activity
Spontaneity, tranquility, satisfaction
Exercise of acquired skills
Problems

Pull in opposite directions



Skill transcendence and openness
Openness and acceptance of convention
Skill and defect


Knowledge is limited and life is unlimited
Aiming for perfect skill is a mistake
Back to the West
Existentialism: Western Daoism
Or Daoism: Chinese existentialism??