Welcome back From Reading Week

Laozi Abandon knowledge w/o fatalism  Freedom from social control  By language daos Socially engineered ways of distinguishing/desiring Language opposites: 1 distinction 2 words  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 ming names 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 fan opposites 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 tian nature:sky fails Hint from Shen Dao — no normative content Pure fact — no ought/value

Zhuangzi’s Daoism Mencius refutation: Presupposes a 是 shi this:right  Shi the heart over other organs  Shi the sage’s heart (cultivation) to fools Priority of 道 dao guide over 天 tian nature:sky  Nature, the cosmos not a moral authority  Does not shi-fei this-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 tian nature:sky ( 性 xing nature )  All organs are equally natural (100 joints) C.f. Mencius' weeds as natural as nature  How do you 是 shi this:right a favorite? Rely on the 心 xin heart-mind ? Begs the question Take turns or have no ruler?

Refutation: 2 nd step Should cultivate the 心 xin heart-mind by studying Confucian sages. Even if we accept making the heart the ruler  Why 是 shi this: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-fei this-not this 是非 in the 心 xin heart-mind are 成 cheng prejudices You can't get a 是 shi this: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 dao guide  Presupposes a standard What about Daoist intuition?  No such thing! Only skepticism

Using Priority of Dao over 天 Must presuppose a 道 dao guide  Choosing and interpreting have a dao For a Daoist, 天 tian nature:sky not an authority  All guidance from some 道 dao guide  The cosmos doesn't make guiding judgments So what?  Cannot escape responsibility for our own dao judgments Should I follow 天 tian nature: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 dao guide or standard of shi-fei this-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-fei this-not this 是非 If language is not fixed, is it any different from twittering?  Or not?

Shi-bi this-that 是彼 to 是 非 Anything can be a 'this' or a 'that'  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  No distinctions, no names Zhuangzi points out a consequence of the paradox  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 The Handan walk n Even if all humans agree, it doesn't make it right – Deer and fish n Even if all natural kinds agree, doesn't make it right – Maybe valuing life is not a mistake n Dream of the skull-pillow n Conclusion: 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??