489: How to understand Daoism

After briefly reviewing various modern understandings and interpretations of Tao, we find countless divergent theories. This raises many questions: 

Is Tao metaphysical in the traditional sense? 

Is it cosmic or ontic? 

Transcendent or immanent? 

Substance or principle? 

.

Matter or idea? 

Objective or normative? 

Mysterious or natural? 

Entity or symbol? 

.

Reality or vision? 

Humanistic or naturalist? 

Religious or philosophical? 

.

Among all these different and opposing positions, each side has its supporters. This fact suggests that none of our modern Western philosophical concepts is a good match for Lao Zi’s Tao,

.

though each one may be apt or suitable for specific aspects – and that to certain degrees, as Xiaogan Liu, whom I referred to in my previous lecture, writes.

This puts me philosophically is a difficult position, if you only recall my previous projects on the philosophy of mind and the importance of neurobiological phenomena to understand the mind.

Do I lack the language to speak about Chinese thought and in particular Taoism? Maybe, maybe not. To understand our philosophical position here, we can ask the question:

This way of thinking, this way of using language, is this unique for Taoism? The answer is simply NO. It has been with us from the very beginning of mankind. We even can give is a name: Mysticism.

Mystical experience is a major form of religious experience, but hard to define.  Some of the definitions of mysticism advanced by Western writers are:

“Mysticism is the immediate feeling of the unity of the self with God”,  “Mysticism is that attitude of mind in which all relations are swallowed up in the relation of the soul to God”; 

“True mysticism is the consciousness  that everything that we experience is an element and only an element in fact, i.e. that in being what it is, it is symbolic of something else” 

Clearly these definitions ascribe religious and philosophical interpretation to the phenomenon of mysticism,

but they don't cover all mystical theories. Buddhism, for instance, has no god in its metaphysical interpretation of man and reality.

You could recognize two kinds of mystics. On the one hand you have those who claim to make an immediate contact with the Transcendent,

which means  making contact with something that is beyond simple sensory experience. Examples of this are Old Testament prophets or Muhammad.

The other kind of mystics are those who claim to speak based on an inner illumination. Names here are for instance Meister Eckhart and Buddha.

Mystics of the second kind  feel that their experience is somehow timeless, that it involves an apprehension of the transcendent (of some thing, state, or person lying beyond the realm of things), that it gives them bliss or serenity, and that it normally is achieved by self-mastery and contemplation.

Within our philosophical context, which is outlined by a number of my previous projects, we can study Taoism, because it has been a historical phenomenon, that had an influence on Chinese culture and still exists, also in our culture.

but it leaves me with one nagging question. All these theories are based on very old books, Old testament, Koran, Tao-T-Jing, I-Ching and so on.

Why aren't there any mystics today anymore? Why did they only exist in those old days?

Main Sources:

MacMillan The Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2nd edition

Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 1995

Routledge History of World Philosophies, vol 3, History of Chinese Philosophy (2009)

An Introduction to Chinese Philosophy - Karyn L. Lai, Oxford 2008

Chinese Philosophy, P. Carus, 1902

A Brief History of chinese Philosophy. D.T. Suzuki, 1914

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page

http://www.iep.utm.edu/

http://plato.stanford.edu/contents.html

The Discussion

[13:21] herman Bergson: Thank you :-))

[13:22] herman Bergson: You seem mystified :-))

[13:22] Corronach: no. :)

[13:22] Corronach: i'm surprised you think there aren't any mystics today.

[13:22] .: Beertje :.: yes I often wondered that too..why are there no such people these days

[13:22] Corronach: i seem to meet a lot of people who believe they are "mystics"

[13:22] Bejiita Imako: ok

[13:22] Corronach: the difficulty, i think, is the terminology

[13:23] herman Bergson: Oh yes Corronach

[13:23] Corronach: to be a mystic, i think, seems to be a very subjective experience.

[13:23] Corronach: you don't really test people if they tell you they have had a particular spiritual experience, for example

[13:23] Corronach: you can't really know whether they are a mystic or not.

[13:23] Corronach: so anyone can take that title.

[13:23] herman Bergson: There are two issues here related to your remark Corronach...

[13:24] oola Neruda: and if they do... they are often ostracized or considered "incorrect"....

[13:24] oola Neruda: a fanatic

[13:24] herman Bergson: mystic al experiences as pure subject experiences...ok....but if you take the Tao Te Jing, the bible the koran....

[13:24] Corronach: that's true oola, or branded with "mental health issues" and thus the spirituality of their experience is minimized.

[13:24] herman Bergson: they are based on such experiences and have great social impact..also historically

[13:25] oola Neruda: nods

[13:25] herman Bergson: the second thing is....

[13:25] Corronach: true herman, but one can still see "miracles" take place in various churches, if you have the courage to go there.

[13:26] Corronach: the "miracles" i mention are just as significant as ones in the bible, for example, yet they don't get the same notice as those.

[13:26] herman Bergson: all those special non sensory experiences which mystics claim to have can be induced by manipulating the brain magnetically and electronically

[13:26] Corronach: yes, i believe that too

[13:26] oola Neruda: i think the leaders of various ways of thoughts have a stand that this is the correct way... and other ways are not good... so to bring up another idea...is dangerous in a way... and put down

[13:26] oola Neruda: excommunication is an example

[13:27] herman Bergson: Yes oola...but now we call it a political movement I guess

[13:27] herman Bergson: and we call the leader charismatic....

[13:27] oola Neruda: my spiritual experience is the only true one

[13:27] .: Beertje :.: in the old days people didn't know as much as we do about things..so every thing was mystic for them

[13:28] Corronach: that's a good point Beertje

[13:28] Corronach: much can be explained now

[13:28] herman Bergson: Yes Beertje and that is the philosophical problem we are facing now

[13:28] Corronach: in very non mystic terms :)

[13:29] herman Bergson: People said to me...isn't it all about religion? That is no philosophy...

[13:29] herman Bergson: Well we have reached that point  now by focusing on mysticism...

[13:29] Bejiita Imako: ah

[13:30] Bejiita Imako: its complex stuff in a way this mysticism

[13:30] oola Neruda: many of the "old books" were "revelations from God"... and we do not see much of that any more

[13:30] herman Bergson: no oola....and that is a problem to me

[13:30] oola Neruda: dogma

[13:31] herman Bergson: besides that I am a philosopher from the Anglo - American school...

[13:31] herman Bergson: Several authors say that our concepts dont fit those of the Chinese philosophy

[13:31] oola Neruda: but people who would have "revelations" would be considered mentally unsound now

[13:32] herman Bergson: I didn't want to say it aloud oola....but all those people who hear voices and get commands....

[13:32] oola Neruda: nods

[13:32] herman Bergson: So here are we in 2013 and we look at thinking of 2000 years ago.....

[13:33] herman Bergson: this has two aspects.....

[13:33] herman Bergson: most of Chinese thought id focused on ethics....

[13:33] herman Bergson: That we can understand....

[13:33] oola Neruda: where/when they had a vital need for laws and a way to have social interactions for safety

[13:33] herman Bergson: yes...

[13:34] herman Bergson: But Taoism has also a metaphysical component...

[13:34] herman Bergson: And what am I going to do with that, that is the challenge for me

[13:35] herman Bergson: Well, you can be witness of my philosophical struggle ^_^

[13:36] oola Neruda: what kind of God might Einstein have

[13:36] oola Neruda: and would people nowadays accept that

[13:36] herman Bergson: Let's answer "Good question, oola" :-))

[13:36] Bejiita Imako: ㋡

[13:36] herman Bergson: But you are right...

[13:36] herman Bergson: oola

[13:37] herman Bergson: and what about the mystics Corronach refers to?

[13:37] herman Bergson: the prophets, Muhammed Buddha had authority....

[13:37] oola Neruda: direct revelation

[13:37] herman Bergson: their ideas prevailed in several cultures...

[13:37] oola Neruda: who will argue with God

[13:38] herman Bergson: As you see....the old ideas now lead to interesting and challenging questions

[13:39] herman Bergson: I hear you all thinking :-)

[13:40] Bejiita Imako: hehe'

[13:40] herman Bergson: Does anyone has a remark or question at this moment?

[13:40] Bejiita Imako: indeed

[13:40] oola Neruda: perhaps empiricism has displaced faith completely

[13:40] herman Bergson: hmmm...

[13:41] herman Bergson: a standard subject during my study at the university was the analytical debate on the difference and relation between knowledge and belief

[13:42] herman Bergson: when is something called knowledge and when belief....

[13:42] herman Bergson: Now we say that science is our knowledge of the world....

[13:42] herman Bergson: but what about our beliefs?

[13:43] herman Bergson: In the old days a lot of beliefs were written down and regarded as knowledge...

[13:43] herman Bergson: It doesn't work this way anymore...

[13:43] herman Bergson: unless you look at sects like scientology and the like

[13:44] herman Bergson: Well...

[13:44] herman Bergson: maybe the study of Taoism can shed some light on the question "What to do with our beliefs?"

[13:45] herman Bergson: I guess I have fried your brains enough now ^_^

[13:45] Corronach: hehe

[13:45] .: Beertje :.: you did..yes

[13:45] Bejiita Imako: haha yes

[13:46] .: Beertje :.: i need time to think it over

[13:46] Bejiita Imako: does someone have some liquid nitrogen?

[13:46] Bejiita Imako: lol

[13:46] oola Neruda: whomever said that definitions of words was important... i agree with

[13:46] herman Bergson: Oh me too Beertje....a lot of time :-)

[13:46] .: Beertje :..: Beertje :. smiles

[13:46] Bejiita Imako: a lot to think about, interesting, need to check up mysticism in general to get the concept a bit more

[13:46] Bejiita Imako: how it works

[13:47] herman Bergson: Good Bejiita....

[13:47] Bejiita Imako: ㋡

[13:47] Corronach: thanks for the discussion

[13:47] herman Bergson: May I then thank you all for your participation.

[13:47] herman Bergson: Class dismissed ^_^

[13:47] Bejiita Imako: ㋡

[13:47] Bejiita Imako: ok cu soon all

[13:47] Corronach: Nectanebus and i will try to be here on Tuesday

[13:47] oola Neruda: one can look at the belief that all things are an aspect of God... we are all part of each other

[13:47] .: Beertje :.: thank you Herman ㋡

[13:47] oola Neruda: and call it mystical

[13:47] Bejiita Imako: ㋡

[13:47] Corronach whispers: thank you :)

[13:48] oola Neruda: then particle physics proves it...

[13:48] oola Neruda: fact

[13:48] oola Neruda: all in the definitions

488: First steps in Daoism

The Lao-Zi, also known as the Tao-Te-Jing, is a short Chinese classic of about 5,000 characters traditionally considered Taoism’s (Daoism's) earliest scripture. 

.

It is one of the most important books of its genre, with numerous translations in the past 100 years and hundreds of commentaries over two millennia.

In Routledge History of World Philosophies, vol 3, History of Chinese Philosophy (2009), the scholar Xiaogan Liu, confronts us with an interesting problem.

.

Many people, he writes, accept the Lao-Zi (Lao-Tze)  or Tao-Te-Jing as a philosophical text – or at least concede that it contains philosophical ideas – while others remain skeptical. 

.

Some argue that there is no such thing as ‘Chinese philosophy’, since the term ‘philosophy’ is derived entirely from the Western tradition. 

.

We do not find in Chinese tradition arguments or systems similar to the Kantian, Quinian, or Wittgensteinian versions of Western philosophy.

.

It is nevertheless relevant to the question of how we should conduct research on and interpret the Lao-Zi and Taoism. 

.

Should we apply a Western philosophical framework and its concepts to reconstruct and reinterpret the Lao-Zi? 

.

Or should we try not to ‘pollute’ the Lao-Zi’s special perspective on human experience and ideas about the universe with our Anglo-American expectations?

.

Certainly, the answer from scholars of Chinese history and culture will be dramatically different from that of scholars trained in Anglo-American philosophy. 

.

Some scholars argue that study of the Lao-Zi can have no actual philosophical significance unless it is conducted from a philosophical perspective. 

.

Others have criticized this claim, arguing that such an approach would yield not a fair consideration of Taoist philosophy but another expression of Western thought camouflaged by the terms and themes of the Tao-Te-Jing.

.

This was also one of the first reactions I got, when I suggested to do a project on Non Western Philosophy and it also was my personal concern.

.

The reaction was something like…Well, Eastern Philosophy isn't that rather about religion? Based on the general knowledge I already had of the subject,

.

I could have concluded that it was all metaphysics and religious ideas indeed and from my materialist and Anglo-American point of  view I could have discarded the subject as not really philosophical.

.

But it all is a product of the human mind. It created great cultures. You can not ignore that, motivated by a pretty narrow minded view on what philosophy is or should be.

.

Besides that it can be very inspiring to put these two worlds side by side, like I was able to compare Western thinking with Confucian ideas in the previous lecture.

.

And with Tao-Ta-Jing and Taoism it even can be more important. In Europe or the US you'll hardly find someone, except of some Chinese person of course, who calls himself a convinced Confucianist.

.

But in the US and Europe there are books with titles like "The Tao of Physics", "The Tao of Science", "The Tao of Love".

.

Try a Google search on "Taoism" and you get 3.110.000 hits in 0.31 seconds. And here is such a typical quote from some site:

.

"Eastern Philosophy is becoming more and more a part of the mainstream in the United States.   

.

Like most Americans I  have  come across various significant aspects of the Chinese philosophy; Taoism. Among these are Yin and Yang, Tai-Chi and Feng-Shui."

.

All the more reason to discover the meaning of this part of Chinese thought for us.

Thank you…^_^

Main Sources:

MacMillan The Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2nd edition

Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 1995

Routledge History of World Philosophies, vol 3, History of Chinese Philosophy (2009)

An Introduction to Chinese Philosophy - Karyn L. Lai, Oxford 2008

Chinese Philosophy, P. Carus, 1902

A Brief History of chinese Philosophy. D.T. Suzuki, 1914

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page

http://www.iep.utm.edu/

http://plato.stanford.edu/contents.html

The Discussion

[13:26] Bejiita Imako: ah

[13:26] herman Bergson smiles at his dedicated audience

[13:26] Oceane: smiles to the charismatic teacher

[13:26] Bejiita Imako: does same

[13:26] Bejiita Imako: ㋡

[13:26] herman Bergson: there are two  issues here...

[13:26] herman Bergson: one is...and that is the big one....

[13:27] herman Bergson: how can we understand Chinese philosophy? Can we apply our western concepts to it for instance?

[13:27] Bejiita Imako: it is so special

[13:28] herman Bergson: The second issue , more trivial, is that final quote....

[13:28] herman Bergson: Eastern Philosophy is becoming more and more a part of the mainstream in the United States.

[13:28] herman Bergson: and as he continues......."Like most Americans I  have  come across...."

[13:29] herman Bergson: I doubt that "Most Americans" thing :-)

[13:29] Bejiita Imako: ok

[13:29] herman Bergson: But yet...there is a book with the title "The Tao of physics"

[13:29] Bejiita Imako: but most people know basically at least what yin and yang and feng shui is however i bet there are many more things

[13:30] ἀρετή: Is it a natural attraction for the west to be attracted to eastern thoughts, studies and cultures and for the east to be drawn to the western cultures...?

[13:30] Bejiita Imako: sorto of like japanese food is more then just sushi

[13:30] herman Bergson: Well Aryen..that is an interesting point.....

[13:30] Bejiita Imako: indeed

[13:30] Bejiita Imako: cause they are so different from each other

[13:31] Bejiita Imako: curiosity

[13:31] herman Bergson: The Chinese HAD their own science.....physics, astronomy, astrology......

[13:31] herman Bergson: they never adopted Western science in the period it was developing....1600 to 1790...

[13:32] herman Bergson: Like they didn't adopt christianity

[13:32] herman Bergson: But in the 40s-50s there was an increased interest in Western philosophy

[13:33] herman Bergson: only then....

[13:33] herman Bergson: John Dewey and Bertrand Russell visited Chinese universities in those days..

[13:34] herman Bergson: And nowadays China is adopting Western consumerism....

[13:34] ἀρετή: very much so :)

[13:34] herman Bergson: All amazing events to me...

[13:34] Bejiita Imako: indeed

[13:35] ἀρετή: is this already the yin and yang at play?

[13:35] herman Bergson: I have no idea if the world is created of yin and yang....

[13:36] herman Bergson: but something is happening here indeed :-)

[13:36] herman Bergson: Everything on this world is focused on economy....

[13:37] herman Bergson: and economy is related to power...

[13:37] Bejiita Imako: seems so very much

[13:37] herman Bergson: what when China is the strongest economy of the world?

[13:37] herman Bergson: Is just a matter of  time...

[13:38] herman Bergson: and then we have two opposing cultural systems....

[13:38] herman Bergson: Western individualism against Chinese Confucianism.....the subjugation of the individual to the welfare of the state...

[13:39] herman Bergson: Ho Rodney :-)

[13:39] Bejiita Imako: hi Rodney

[13:39] Rodney Handrick: Hi Herman

[13:39] ἀρετή: hi Rodney

[13:39] Rodney Handrick: Hi Bejiita

[13:39] Rodney Handrick: Hi Areyn

[13:39] Oceane: hi Rodney

[13:40] Rodney Handrick: Hi Oceane

[13:41] herman Bergson: I think we are heading for So I guess it might be interested to be informed at least about Taoism:-)

[13:41] ἀρετή: Have you heard of Hans Rosling?

[13:41] herman Bergson: Not sure

[13:42] ἀρετή: http://www.ted.com/talks/hans_rosling_asia_s_rise_how_and_when.html

[13:42] ἀρετή: he predicted asia will overtake the west in 2048

[13:42] herman Bergson: I think I saw his TED talk....

[13:42] Bejiita Imako: hmm ok

[13:42] herman Bergson: the moving statistics...

[13:43] ἀρετή: yes, that was the talk

[13:43] herman Bergson: That was impressive...

[13:44] herman Bergson: So I would say that there should be more students here in clase to prepare themselves for the (chinese) future :-)

[13:45] Bejiita Imako: yes

[13:45] Bejiita Imako: this can be some good stuff indeed

[13:46] herman Bergson: Well..thank you  fro coming and your participation....

[13:46] Bejiita Imako: ㋡

[13:46] herman Bergson: Class dismissed

[13:46] ἀρετή: Thanks for raising the issues.

[13:46] Bejiita Imako: ok cu soon again

[13:46] Bejiita Imako: ㋡

[13:46] Bejiita Imako: yes

[13:46] Oceane: ok see you again soon, herman and thanks for the class ㋡

[13:47] ἀρετή: Is the eastern philosophy known by the west really eastern philosophy?

[13:47] herman Bergson: That is the big question Areyn....

[13:48] herman Bergson: as I said....

[13:48] herman Bergson: what is left of Eastern philosophy if we describe it in our Western philosophical concepts

[13:48] Bejiita Imako: ah

[13:49] herman Bergson: We'll discuss this in coming lectures

[13:49] ἀρετή: Thank you

[13:49] Oceane: waves good bye

[13:50] herman Bergson: Bye Oceane :-)

[13:50] ἀρετή: Have a good day/evening everyone :)

[13:50] Bejiita Imako: bye all

[13:50] herman Bergson: Bye Bejiita

[13:50] ἀρετή: Time for me to go too and chew on the dummy book for philosophy :)

487: Confucius and the concept of Li

Besides the concept of Ren, humaneness, there is a second fundamental concept in Confucianism: Li, behavioral propriety.

.

In the Analects Li refers to several meanings, from religious rituals to the comportment of the cultivated person or behavioral propriety in the ordinary interactions of the common people.

.

Li mapped out different standards for appropriate behavior according to one’s place in a particular relationship. In this way, individuals got acquainted with the obligations and emotions that are appropriate in specific relationships.

.

As you see, Li did not only refer to rituals or ways of behavior as such, but also to accompanying emotions, like there is an emphasis in the Analects that Li should be practiced with reverence.

.

You could say that Li, behavioral propriety, is the lived Ren, humaneness. An interesting question in this context is: does this emphasis on fixed rituals and ceremonies stifle individuality?

.

This question could be answered by analyzing which concept, humaneness (Ren) or behavioral propriety (Li) has relative priority.

.

This issue is already debated in the Analects more than a thousand years ago. This disagreement was later characterized as the ‘Nei-Wai’ (inner-outer) debate.

.

Nei captures the essence of the concept Ren; it refers to the internal, perhaps innate, moral sense of humanity. By contrast, Wai captures the spirit of Li, the externally imposed, socially constructed norms which guide and in some ways limit the inner self.

.

What makes our world, what it is? Our inner moral inclinations or its outer cultivation, solidified in rituals and behavioral propriety?

.

There is a clear resemblance here with a debate, which we know as the Nature - Nurture controversy. Are we who and what we are primarily because of our inner human nature or because of our cultural and social organization?

.

If you take into account that Confucianism was the dominant philosophy in China from 960 to 1949, it might be interesting 

.

to compare this with the dominant position of christianity in our world from The First Council of Nicaea in 325 till, let's say the late 50s.

.

It is peculiar to observe, that both cultures attribute so much normative force to such old texts during such a long period. 

.

This normative force is then created by relating the content to a source outside ourselves, while there is some mediator who tells us how we should interpret these texts.

.

Why we behave like that, I don't know, but it looks like we are inclined to delegate the responsibility for our norms and human values to someone/something outside us.

.

That this attitude has shaped our Western culture may be evident, like the phrase "Allahu Akbar" and what comes with it has shaped the Arabic culture.

.

There is no unqualified support in the Analects either for an ‘inner’ or ‘outer’ morality. Confucius himself didn't overemphasize on either.

.

Yet some scholars believe that Li, behavioral propriety, was the primal concept for Confucius, or at least in later Confucianism.

.

It is in fact about socialization and it advocates the subjugation of individuals to society and conditioning of people’s minds in order to establish an orderly, submissive society.

.

The view that Li is primal would give force to the portrayal of Confucianism as conservative traditionalism. This might explain why christianity never got hold on Chinese culture, but subjugation to the Communist Party was more in line with Chinese tradition.

.

Thank you…:-)

Main Sources:

MacMillan The Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2nd edition

Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 1995

An Introduction to Chinese Philosophy - Karyn L. Lai, Oxford 2008

Chinese Philosophy, P. Carus, 1902

A Brief History of chinese Philosophy. D.T. Suzuki, 1914

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page

http://www.iep.utm.edu/

http://plato.stanford.edu/contents.html

The Discussion

[13:19] herman Bergson: Just digest it :-)

[13:19] Loo Zeta-Ah: One is trying Herman

[13:19] herman Bergson: And come with your remarks and questions as you please :-)

[13:19] Bejiita Imako: same here

[13:19] Corronach: i see a parallel here to individualistic versus collectivist societies

[13:20] herman Bergson: Yes Corronach

[13:20] Corronach: it's understandable in considering how you've described this, that the view of seeing the good of society as more important than the good of the self as an individual...

[13:20] Corronach: is both influenced by confucianism and is promoted by it, if that makes sense

[13:20] herman Bergson: Yes..that is Confucianism

[13:21] Mikki Louise: and Vulcan ;)

[13:21] Corronach: it might be obvious but i had never made that link to such a longstanding belief system

[13:21] Loo Zeta-Ah: For society to function it requires suppression of individualism

[13:22] herman Bergson: Yes Loo but you cant say that about Western society

[13:22] Loo Zeta-Ah: But it usually means that one functions at a higher level than others, in a communist society it will be more equal?

[13:22] Corronach: where it might be hard for an individualistic society, like america for example, to understand why people could make decisions en masse that might not benefit them as individuals, this explanation makes it a little clearer.

[13:22] Bejiita Imako: ah'

[13:22] herman Bergson: where individualism even is pointed out as a problem now and then

[13:22] Gemma Allen: interesting

[13:22] Corronach: i would certainly view individualism as a problem

[13:22] Bejiita Imako: yes

[13:22] Corronach: individualism equals competition, a winner and a loser

[13:23] Corronach: collectivism strives for everyone to be more equal.

[13:23] herman Bergson: The American dream.....

[13:23] Loo Zeta-Ah nods

[13:23] Corronach: however, both are problematic in their idealistic sense. there must be a balance.

[13:23] herman Bergson: well...for the winner :-)

[13:23] Bejiita Imako: yes

[13:23] herman Bergson: Yes Corronach.....

[13:24] Gemma Allen: hah i did not relate it to a competition

[13:24] Bejiita Imako: cause we all are different in some way so you cant force all to think the same however thats what many cultures unfortunately do

[13:24] herman Bergson: MAybe the fact that we vote and delegate authority to representatives is an example of finding such a balance

[13:24] Corronach: Gemma, i see it as competitive because there are limited resources. if everyone is out for themselves, someone will lose.

[13:24] Bejiita Imako: cause we after all have the right to be who we are

[13:25] herman Bergson: But only to some extend Bejiita....also in a democracy...

[13:25] Bejiita Imako: yes

[13:25] herman Bergson: You HAVE RO obey the traffic rules and regulations for instance

[13:25] Bejiita Imako: thats a more balanced system

[13:25] Corronach: Herman, the delegates are only as good as their own morals. authority can be corrupt, or can be helpful. usually a mix of both.

[13:25] herman Bergson: oh don't start about that Corronach...:-)

[13:26] Bejiita Imako: aaa yes thats logical things as also not commit crimes et.

[13:26] Corronach: ok! hehe

[13:26] herman Bergson: We can write volumes about that...

[13:26] Corronach: true

[13:26] herman Bergson: to begin with the commandment: Greed is good!

[13:26] Loo Zeta-Ah: If society functions for the good of all within it then one can submit to that ideology

[13:26] Corronach: it's good for those who benefit from it. not so for the others.

[13:27] herman Bergson: problem with communism was that it claimed to be for the good of all , Loo

[13:27] Gemma Allen: Yes-ah!

[13:27] Gemma Allen: and was not

[13:27] Corronach: yes indeed. a lovely idea that went horribly wrong.

[13:27] Loo Zeta-Ah: mmm

[13:27] Corronach: deeply flawed

[13:27] herman Bergson: It did indeed....

[13:27] Bejiita Imako: indeee

[13:27] Bejiita Imako: d

[13:27] Bejiita Imako: no good thing

[13:28] Loo Zeta-Ah: because of the individuals within it?

[13:28] Bejiita Imako: went really bad

[13:28] Corronach: it's an ideology that is vulnerable to the misuse of power, ironically

[13:29] herman Bergson: I think we have lost a few basic feelings nowadays....

[13:29] Mikki Louise: by subjugating the masses to the point where they do not question those in power... or it is impossible for them to change the nature of those in power

[13:29] herman Bergson: The most important seems to me the feeling of solidarity with each other

[13:29] Bejiita Imako: aaa

[13:29] Bejiita Imako: like in north korea

[13:29] Loo Zeta-Ah: yes

[13:29] Corronach: i agree with that herman

[13:30] Bejiita Imako: yes

[13:30] Corronach: it's the piece of collectivism that i wish we still had. to be able to sacrifice a bit of yourself sometimes to help someone else.

[13:30] Bejiita Imako: thats important

[13:30] herman Bergson: We are forced to be consumers....everyone for himself....

[13:30] Corronach: yes

[13:30] Bejiita Imako: ah

[13:31] herman Bergson: we are imprisoned in this attitude by the bizzar belief that economy means GROWTH

[13:31] Corronach: oh no don't get me started

[13:31] herman Bergson: or actually.....more dividend for shareholders...

[13:31] Loo Zeta-Ah: Interesting that Equity theory is now emerging as we are suffering oppression in the WEst due to economics

[13:31] Mikki Louise: it was funny and also sad, to see in the news... a story of a group of men who had a night out, a few drinks.. and when they stopped for something to eat, the noticed and fixed a broken bicycle rack... sad that acts of kindness are too rare they make big news

[13:32] Gemma Allen: hmmm

[13:32] herman Bergson: Can you elaborate a bit in "Equity theory " Loo

[13:33] Loo Zeta-Ah: Ye let me get the references

[13:33] Bejiita Imako: yes

[13:33] herman Bergson: What is so stricking.....

[13:34] herman Bergson: the people who caused the economic crisis are still on their jobs and not in jail for instance

[13:34] Corronach: power and influence.

[13:34] Corronach: inequality, in the end.

[13:34] herman Bergson: The banks are dealing like they did before...

[13:34] Bejiita Imako: indeed, those guys ruined many peoples lives

[13:34] Corronach: it's the capitalist machine.

[13:35] herman Bergson: The absurdity of Flash trade still exists though it has no economic value at all except of making money at great risk for some individuals

[13:35] Loo Zeta-Ah: 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cZ7LzE3u7Bw

and 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l1BChqLJj1I

[13:35] Mikki Louise: politicians and bankers.. same schools, same clubs.. same social standing... they all play their game with the masses as the pawns

[13:35] herman Bergson: Thank you Loo...I'll have a look at it later

[13:36] herman Bergson: Yes ..is happening here too.....

[13:36] .: Beertje :.: what has this conversation to do with the Chinese philosophy..i miss something i believe

[13:36] herman Bergson: it is about the consequences of individualism and collectivism Beertje

[13:37] herman Bergson: Confucius emphasized the subjugation of the individual to society...

[13:37] herman Bergson: this is contrary to our culture where individualism prevails

[13:38] Mikki Louise: but also, of one individual to another, depending on their place in society?

[13:38] herman Bergson: and yes...we were a bit taken away by that observation so it all sounded like chinese to you perhaps Beertje :-)

[13:38] .: Beertje :.: yes it sounded Chinese indeed to me:)

[13:38] Bejiita Imako: hehe

[13:38] herman Bergson: yes Mikki

[13:39] .: Beertje :.: thank you for your explanation?

[13:39] Gemma Allen: i will be away on vacation next week

[13:40] herman Bergson: Ok Gemma :-)

[13:40] Bejiita Imako: ok

[13:40] Gemma Allen: so may not be around for this time

[13:42] herman Bergson: Then I better dismiss class now sothat everybody yet has some time off :-))

[13:42] herman Bergson: Thank you all for your participation :-)

[13:42] Loo Zeta-Ah: I am up for work in 8 hours... so goodnight all

[13:42] Gemma Allen: ♥ Thank Youuuuuuuuuu!! ♥

[13:42] Gemma Allen: nite loo

[13:43] Bejiita Imako: ok cu soon all ㋡

[13:43] Mikki Louise: Herman can you explain more about how Li refers to emotions? Does this mean emotional response affects ones relationship with another... or is the emotion defined by the relationship?

[13:43] herman Bergson: yes Mikki....

[[13:44] herman Bergson: As Confucius says Mikki, a ritual is not just a series of actions.....

[13:44] herman Bergson: it has to be accompanied with the proper emotions

[13:45] herman Bergson: Like a collection of colors isnt a painting....

[13:45] herman Bergson: or the sound of drums and flutes is not yet music....

[13:46] Mikki Louise: ok

[13:46] .: Beertje :.: is it about harmony?

[13:46] Bejiita Imako: aha

[13:46] Mikki Louise: you must feel, not just do

[13:46] Bejiita Imako: I see

[13:46] herman Bergson: yes..like the subject not just should bow for his ruler as a bodily gesture but should do it while feeling the respect for his ruler

[13:46] Mikki LouiseMikki Louise nods

[13:47] Mikki Louise: smile and say thank you, but *mean* it

[13:47] herman Bergsonherman Bergson smiles

[13:47] .: Beertje :.: a mean smile...

[13:47] Mikki Louise: lol

[13:47] herman Bergson: Beertje !!! :-))

[13:47] Gemma Allen: Bye, Bye  ㋡ 

[13:47] Gemma Allen: for now

[13:48] .: Beertje :.: sorry..grins

[13:48] Bejiita Imako: bye all

[13:48] Mikki Louise: bye Gemma

[13:48] Mikki Louise always smiles sweetly ;)

[13:48] herman Bergson: Bye Gemma and happy vacation

[13:48] Mikki Louise: thank you Herman, it was an interesting topic

[13:48] .: Beertje :.: i will try to be in your class as much as I can Herman

[13:49] herman Bergson: You are welcome Mikki

[13:49] herman Bergson: ok Beertje :-)

[13:49] Mikki Louise: see you again soon, professor

[13:49] herman Bergson: You will ^_*

486: Confucius and the concept Ren continued

" And they come to Jerusalem: and Jesus went into the temple, and began to cast out them that sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the moneychangers, and the seats of them that sold doves;…" (Mark 11:15)

.

You may be surprised by this quote, which is not about Confucius but about Jesus. Yet they have something in common. 

Both preached a universal love for man and yet both also didn't like certain people at all, were even judgmental about them.

.

-quote-

Someone said, “What do you say concerning the principle that injury should be recompensed with kindness?” The master said, “With what then will you recompense kindness? 

.

Recompense injury with justice, and recompense kindness with kindness.” (Analects 14:34)

-end quote-

.

This view was already a difference of opinion between Confucius and Lao-tze, as we have seen in a previous lecture.

.

What interests me here, is, that it seems inevitable that spiritual leaders who preach some kind of universal love for man, also seem to have an "…. except for……"

.

In the previous lecture I presented the fundamental concept of REN, humaneness. For Confucius the cultivation of REN begins with the development of family relationships with their correlative emotions and special obligations.

.

You could say, that the family provides in Confucius' opinion the first environment for moral development. Filial piety and brotherly respect are fundamental values.

.

The skills learnt in the family environment are vital for a person’s interactions with others in later life. They shape the person.

.

Here too it is interesting to note, that especially christian political parties (at least in my country) often emphasize that the Family is the cornerstone of society. There you get you primary moral  education.

.

Don't get me wrong. There may be some resemblance of ideas between our Western thought and Confucianism. 

.

However, Confucius kept himself far from any theological metaphysical overhead, which he rather regarded as counterproductive.

.

His ideas were practical. REN, humaneness shows itself in word and deed and manifests itself domestic, public and social.

.

It is associated with attitudes like deference, tolerance, making good on one's word, diligence, generosity, and to personal characteristics like wisdom, uprightness, courage and resoluteness.

.

Realizing REN in one’s life is an overwhelmingly difficult task. In taking up the challenge, one must have an ability to learn from others in order to reflect on one’s own situation, and to apply these insights to one’s actions.

.

I think, that this view on man doesn't differ much from the Aristotelian idea of the virtuous man. 

.

For Aristoteles (334 BC) the good life was achieved by mastering virtues, like Confucius mentions too.

.

Next lecture we'll pay attention the the other fundamental Confucian concept of Li: behavioral propriety.

.

Thank you….. ^_^

Main Sources:

MacMillan The Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2nd edition

Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 1995

An Introduction to Chinese Philosophy - Karyn L. Lai, Oxford 2008

Chinese Philosophy, P. Carus, 1902

A Brief History of chinese Philosophy. D.T. Suzuki, 1914

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page

http://www.iep.utm.edu/

http://plato.stanford.edu/contents.html

The Discussion

[13:14] herman Bergson: If you have any remarks or questions..feel free

[13:14] herman Bergson: The floor is yours

[13:15] Nectanebus: uhhh...it seemed rather concise.

[13:15] herman Bergson: It always is Nectanebus:-)

[13:15] Mathilde Vhargon: Does the class session mostly consist of discussion?

[13:16] herman Bergson: To elaborate on it is up to everyone himself by further study of literature etc.

[13:16] herman Bergson: This is primarily a class where you can learn about a specific subject

[13:16] Nectanebus: I've read the literature mentioned, actually, it's just that it's more of a statement made than a question asked, if that makes sense. THere's naught to debate with a statement.

[13:17] herman Bergson: In this case we are dealing with NOn Western Philosophy...

[13:17] herman Bergson: Indeed Nectanebus....

[13:18] Teleo Aeon: i missed it

[13:18] herman Bergson: It is not my main goal to start a discussion on whether Confucius was right or mistaken c

[13:18] herman Bergson: Primary goal is to let you know there existed a person named Confucius who had certain interesting ideas

[13:19] herman Bergson: And of course you can question his ideas here

[13:19] Nectanebus: Oh, ok, so it's for resources. That makes sense as to the concise nature of the thing

[13:20] Nectanebus: I still think he ripped it from earlier HIndu teachings. The statement about "The elephant in the forest" is pretty much the same argument.

[13:20] herman Bergson: One thing that is characteristic for Confucius for instance is that he used the family as a metaphor for social organization....

[13:20] herman Bergson: The wheel has been invented several times Nectanebus :-)

[13:21] Mathilde Vhargon: I hoped for insight from a person who has studied all of these philosophers... perhaps some connections or things that others might not gather from the reading

[13:21] herman Bergson: What interesting in that is, is that independently of each other the human brain came to the same conclusions and ideas

[13:21] herman Bergson: Well I pointed at some connections with christian and  ancient greek thinking...

[13:22] Mathilde Vhargon: Yes. That is useful

[13:22] herman Bergson: Again....what you do with what you learn here is up to you....

[13:23] Nectanebus: I'm not sure if it *was* independently in the Confucius case, but I understand the awe at the phenomenon in general, and the similarities between Jesus' and Buddha's teachings as a whole can be very interesting.

[13:23] herman Bergson: INdeed Nectanebus

[13:23] Nectanebus: I find it interesting how people often ascribe words to Buddha and Jesus that neither of them said, but was instead written by John or such-and-such terms

[13:24] Nectanebus: (terma="revealed treasure", which is kind of like a vision in Christian literature)

[13:24] Nectanebus: kind*

[13:24] herman Bergson: What I mentioned in a previous lecture......

[13:25] herman Bergson: it is interesting to realize how cultures rely on ancient books, thousands of years old do derive from them anno 2013 moral ideas and values and rules of life

[13:26] herman Bergson: In the light of previous lectures on evolution of the brain this is in fact a bit weird situation

[13:26] Teleo Aeon: how so

[13:26] Corronach: cultures rely on them, but i wonder sometimes if they are as applicable now as they were then.

[13:27] herman Bergson: because all those texts were written in times that you even hardly had a candle or print or the scientific knowledge we now have

[13:27] Corronach: i don't know much about Confucius, admittedly, but to look to the family as a metaphor for social organisation can be problematic.

[13:28] herman Bergson: Take the rule that one should not eat pork....

[13:28] herman Bergson: today complete nonsense....

[13:29] herman Bergson: But 2500 years ago a good idea for pork deteriorates very vast in a tropical environment

[13:29] herman Bergson: The position of the woman  in certain cultures....

[13:30] herman Bergson: motivated by such ancient books

[13:30] Mathilde Vhargon: It

[13:30] herman Bergson: YEs it can indeed Corronach....

[13:31] Teleo Aeon: a recopying of a book is not a flexible system

[13:31] Mathilde Vhargon: seems that the problem with applying ancient texts' rules for living is that people often ascribe meaning and significance to the teaching s that are inaccurate and serve the purpose of the individual teaching it in the present day

[13:31] herman Bergson: Like I addressed the  problem in my previous lecture of members of a family covering up for a criminal act of one of them

[13:33] Mathilde Vhargon: when family ties are considered sacred then any family in which there is improper behaviour becomes a hideously twisted conflict for the impressionable child

[13:33] Mathilde Vhargon: trying to follow the teachings and being told to honor the family

[13:33] herman Bergson: yes that is a problem.....

[13:34] herman Bergson: But I guess Confucius looks mainly at the good aspects of interaction with the family...

[13:34] Mathilde Vhargon: It seems to me that out of this grows more distortion of ideas and belief systems

[13:34] herman Bergson: mutual care, reciprocity, filial piety, mutual respect....

[13:35] Mathilde Vhargon: Another example is when a belief system honors suffering and pain as contributing to growth and holiness

[13:35] herman Bergson: oh my.....

[13:35] Mathilde Vhargon: It is not a large step from there to very gross mistreatment of weaker members of the society

[13:35] NectanebusNectanebus winces at the sound of the axe grinding swelling within the room

[13:36] herman Bergson: The problem you refer to Mathilde, is the justification of suffering and evil....

[13:37] Mathilde Vhargon: yes

[13:37] Nectanebus: There's also the idea of morality being the duty of a family unit, and the lack of responsibility given making an immature person, and how these two might link to break apart a "decent" family to a "post0nuclear" mess of empty shells and neuroses.

[13:37] herman Bergson: When there is such an all mighty and loving god, how can there be evil in the world...

[13:37] Nectanebus: post-nuclear*

[13:37] Mathilde Vhargon: much of philosophy as I have understood it is trying to make sense of why there is evil and suffering in life

[13:37] Nectanebus: like if a government babysits its populace into docility.

[13:37] Teleo Aeon: more axe grinding ?

[13:37] Mathilde Vhargon: some seek to eradicate it

[13:37] Mathilde Vhargon: others try to justify it by giving it a purpose that is redeeming

[13:38] Mathilde Vhargon: Is that an accurate statement I have made?

[13:38] Nectanebus: Buddhists seek to integrate suffering to an extent.

[13:38] Mathilde Vhargon: and some try to say that it is a figment of the mind and does not exist... that only goodness is real or something like that

[13:38] Mathilde Vhargon: I believe

[13:39] herman Bergson: There are several kinds of evil.....

[13:39] herman Bergson: in the first place evil caused by nature....tsunamis, earthquakes , fires etc.

[13:39] Teleo Aeon: do you have a transcript of what you said herman ? I missed it sorry to say

[13:40] herman Bergson: Some call then a punishment by some god(s)

[13:40] Mathilde Vhargon: yes

[13:40] Teleo Aeon: good show.. thanks

[13:40] herman Bergson: Then there is evil, caused by illness....the death of a child....for instance

[13:41] herman Bergson: Then there is evil inflicted by individual action....

[13:41] Mathilde Vhargon: I assume that is also divided into unintentional and intentional

[13:42] herman Bergson: On my list I have the plan to do a project on ( the philosophy of ) Evil

[13:42] Nectanebus: I@d recommend "Political Ponerology" if you want to read up on the nature of evil

[13:42] Nectanebus: amazing work

[13:42] herman Bergson: Yes Mathilde but here we are far away from the present subject :-)

[13:43] herman Bergson: thnx Nectanebus

[13:43] herman Bergson: Well...tho a concise lecture.....

[13:43] herman Bergson: at least this discussion shows that is can leave you with a lot of things to think about...:-)

[13:44] herman Bergson: And that is the main goal if this class...

[13:44] herman Bergson: to leave the thinking to you :-)

[13:45] Mathilde Vhargon: Although things tend to get far from the subject at hand, for me almost everything seems to be linked to a chain of other things

[13:45] Mathilde Vhargon: I will try not to wander off the topic

[13:45] Nectanebus: tangents tied in, haha

[13:45] herman Bergson: It is often inevitable to wonder off the subject Mathilde...no problem...

[13:46] Mathilde Vhargon: thank you

[13:46] herman Bergson: every answer brings up a new question...

[13:46] Mathilde Vhargon: yes

[13:46] Mathilde Vhargon: that is true

[13:46] Nectanebus: The only knowledge lies in knowing we know nothing

[13:46] Oceane: I would call this a classical understatement

[13:46] herman Bergson: Which is a socratic paradox in fact :-)

[13:46] Oceane: grins

[13:46] Mathilde Vhargon: There is always far more to learn than we have time to learn it or intelligence to comprehend it

[13:46] Nectanebus: yup

[13:47] herman Bergson: for refers this statement to something we know?

[13:47] Nectanebus: emptiness, perhaps

[13:47] Nectanebus: haha

[13:47] herman Bergson smiles

[13:48] herman Bergson: Well..then I thank you all for your participation

[13:48] Oceane: thank you for a nice discussion, herman

[13:48] herman Bergson: Maybe you leave with some thoughts to ponder about :-)

[13:48] Oceane: :-)

[13:48] Nectanebus: Yeah, cheers for the invite

[13:49] herman Bergson: See you all on Thursday again :-)

[13:49] Teleo Aeon: waves

[13:49] Mathilde Vhargon: Thank you, Professor Bergson

[13:49] Oceane waves and vanishes ㋡

[13:49] herman Bergson: Bye Oceane

[13:49] Mathilde Vhargon: Goodbye

[13:49] Corronach: Thank you

[13:49] .: Beertje :.: thank you Herman

[13:49] Nectanebus: fare thee well

[13:49] herman Bergson: My pleasure Beertje