Seeker196

We spend so much time yakking about the goat-herders and their 2000 year old blood-god from Beyond all Time and Space, that we tend to neglect other religious, philosophical, and 'grey area' beliefs.

I've read a lot about Taoism, and I still don't know what exactly it's about.

Is it just a another variation on the 'confuse the peasants into giving us money' religion?

It seems to have no real dogma. A bunch of poems and sayings.

It can be interpreted atheistically, perhaps, in the sense of 'no gods' (in the most lucid forms).

However, I might still consider it 'religion'. Here are what I consider it's beliefs:

1. Impermanence/transience of things, and thus the silliness of many human activities.
2. Open-mindedness/flexibility (the concept of being 'unshaped' like a block of wood). This is often interpreted as being anti-intellectual, which is true in that it mocks the 'ism' of intellectualism, like it mocks everything.
3. The irony of being
4. Reverence for nature/the universe. I have thought long and hard about this weak point, because the universe is not 'good' or 'bad' it is merely a very impressive canvass. However, I do not believe that 'correct' Taoists 'worship' nature.
5. Belief in an unknowable, indescribable Way, or Tao. This seems to be something like destiny, fate (non-god created variety), or perhaps mystery or wonder. Spinoza like Providence? It is only ever described poetically, so I don't know what it really means. Some of the Taoist stories seem to imply that is the point.
6. The 'poetry', humour, or erotism intrinsic in existence.

Now, because it's a belief which refuses to define itself in concrete terms, it is hard to talk about, but I think that it is a type of 'atheist' (stricty meaning no god/gods) belief system, but I do not think it is a truly Materialist belief system.

So, our questions for the day:
1. Can Taoism be atheist?
2. Can Taoism reconile with materialism?
3 Is Taoism a religion?
4. If not, it cannot be true philosophy, because it seems to presuppose certain premises (BTW, I do not believe there is yet a true and full philosophy), so is it therefore merely an aesthetic belief or style, a kind of mental version of Romanticism or Gothicism?

never been there

Most Westerners (such as my ignorant self) grasp Taoism through the Tao Te Ching of Lao-Tze. It is important to remember that Taoism was around for a long time before that. The early Taoists observed nature to gain wisdom in human affairs, and to further whatever mumbo-jumbo they were working on.

Taoism, like Confucianism, doesn't get dogmatic about gods but treats them (or their existence) as being beyond human ken, with a big dose of Pascal's Wager thrown in for good measure.

One 'philosophical Taoist' (Chinese, not some New Ager) I met simply defined a Taoist as someone who understands the world in Taoist terms, as expressed in the Tao Te Ching and abstains from eating meat. I'm sure there are other definitions.

So if you go to a Taoist temple, you will find a temple. And there are Taoists you won't find in a temple. The core of Chinese agnosticism makes it hard for Westerners to nail down in our understanding of what constitutes a religion.

As for being compatible with philosophical materialism, Taoism is probably #1 among religions: "When there is peace in the kingdom, the horses haul manure".

Seeker196

"The core of Chinese agnosticism makes it hard for Westerners to nail down in our understanding of what constitutes a religion."


Fascinating culture really...so many achievements, and yet so short-sighted in many ways.

Eudaimonist

Yup. Of course, the same is true for Western culture.

[ April 06, 2002: Message edited by: Eudaimonist ]</p>

LianaLi

Bold questions from Seeker196:

1. Can Taoism be atheist?

I'd say that's debatable. The Way is such a central belief to Taoism, that it almost becomes "godlike" since following the way is of utmost importance to taoism. Of course, interpretation of what the way IS is highly interprative, and taoism could be considered atheistic in nautre is interpreted as following a naturalistic principle. But, if one believes in the Way, as described by those absurd old accounts of what the old daoist monks could do, then I don't think it could be considered atheistic. An arguement for either side could be made, really, due to how much the practice relies on personal interpretation.

2. Can Taoism reconile with materialism?

No. Following the way supercedes everything else in taoism, and if they way happens to dictate that you don't get possesions, you've got to sit down and suck it up. So, in that sense, taoism and materialism are opposed. To borrow from xian old hat "you can't serve two masters." In persepctive, I guess it would be new hat.

3 Is Taoism a religion?

It always struck me as more of a personal practice. In that sense, you could call it a religion.

4. If not, it cannot be true philosophy, because it seems to presuppose certain premises (BTW, I do not believe there is yet a true and full philosophy), so is it therefore merely an aesthetic belief or style, a kind of mental version of Romanticism or Gothicism?

I'm not familiar with either romaticism or gothicism, so I'll just leave q4 blank.

BTW, have you yet noticed my overweening disgust for taoism? Don't worry, I dislike most chinese philosophy to begin with. About the only one I could ever see as being practical was legalism (just as Gurdur), but that's another debate entirely.

And btw, I have Laotzu's "Dao de jing," and I STILL don't get it. And yes, I read, wrote about, and discussed the dao intensively.

All old hat for people who've listened to me rant about chinese philosophy. I'll be quiet now.


-Liana

&lt;idly begins to wonder what the hell she was thinking, when she started typing in some of her more creative and now eliminated typos&gt;

[ April 06, 2002: Message edited by: LianaLi ]</p>

Seeker196

For 2, you have misunderstood Materialism.

You are using the popular, pejorative meaning.

I meant the philosophical concept or school that only physical things exist (to a materialist, 'only physical things exist' is, of course, redundant).

4. Romanticism was an Idealist aesthetic belief. In painting, it was expressed in idealized portraiture, i.e. with all 'blemishes' removed. Romanticism is an aesthetic belief opposed to Realism.

Gothicism (with has little or nothing to do with the silly modern fashion called 'Goth') was another nineteenth century aesthetic belief, this time mostly expressed in literature, that dealt with themes considered shocking, vulgar, or morbid by the standards of the time. Mary Shelly, Lord Byron, etc where part of the Gothic movement. It was so called because of the Goths, culture-destroying barbarians, well these writers were considered 'aesthetic barbarians'.

I put Taoism in this aesthetic category because it seems to be expressed artistically so often.


You don't like Chinese philosophy? Yes it is vague, and frustrating...I love it. You must be very attached to meaning.

Of course it has a lot of nonsense, especially Confucianism.

Boshko

Actually there's no real evidence that Taoism predates the Tao Te Ching by all that much. You see warring state philosophers were VERY fond of bashing people who disagreed with them and although there's plenty of bashing of this sort in the earlier bits of the Analects and the Mo-tzu you don't find anything resembling Taoism mentioned. I think there's a philosopher that's thought to be a proto-Taoist (forget his name) in Mencius and then, pretty much out of nowhere, you find bits in the later Analects that I think are criticisms of the Tao Te Ching. This also means, of course, that the mythical figure of Lao-tzu had pretty much nothing to do with Taoism since he was supposedly a contemporary of Confucius.

Personally I'm a bit of a pyschological Taoist since I think that good old Humean Empiricism makes a lot more sense philosophically but there so much pyschologically insightful stuff in the Tao Te Ching and the Chuang-tzu about how to live a good life that its hard for these texts not to influence you if you put some effort into studying them.

Seeker196

"the mythical figure of Lao-tzu had pretty much nothing to do with Taoism since he was supposedly a contemporary of Confucius"

I think Lao-Tzu was an image created like this...if there WAS a single 'founder' of Taoism, what would he be like?

I believe that Taoism is both very old, and very young.

Old in the sense that is was a gradual collation of many strains of Chinese philosophy and folk beliefs as old as China, young in the sense that it was a response to a dogmatic, state-centered philospohy by the 'younger generation'