For example, what are your thoughts on the recent debate regarding which metaphor is more useful or helpful - the ladder or the cascade ? — Amity
Is that why you picked out the final verse ? — Amity
Here is when Lao explained that TTC, as water, flows over us during our lives. I guess this is why cascade metaphor is more accurate. — javi2541997
The phrase literally says: I have finished. Perhaps, you will find my discourse so rough, not subtle neither wisely.
This phrase randomly appears in my version but surprisingly I do not see it along internet so I don’t know if it is true at all... — javi2541997
Ladder could be more difficult because steps could mean one phrase or verse are above or higher to another but I do not see it as that way. — javi2541997
I was thinking not only of the material rungs but also the spaces between the rungs.
The rungs need the flow of space as well as the strength of the joints.
If the rungs are wide enough, they can hold more than one aspect of a type.
We are multifaceted beings - connected in space - — Amity
He presents the separate sayings as separate. He prefers real incongruity to contrived cohesiveness. — Amity
How interesting is that !
Can you copy the whole verse out to show where it appears in context ? — Amity
For example, what are your thoughts on the recent debate regarding which metaphor is more useful or helpful - the ladder or the cascade ?
— Amity
To be honest, I choose the cascade method because for me it is more useful. Probably because I saw explained it in the video you shared with me so I literally see TTC as cascade since that day. Ladder could be more difficult because steps could mean one phrase or verse are above or higher to another but I do not see it as that way. Also, I remember the conversation of Lao-Tzu with Tu-Fu. Here is when Lao explained that TTC, as water, flows over us during our lives. I guess this is why cascade metaphor is more accurate. — javi2541997
Thanks :up:I refer the first paragraph, when the parentheses ends. — javi2541997
Personally, I understand the structure as more of a dimensional relation - like rendering a tessaract, but the metaphor is maybe not so pretty. — Possibility
Thanks :up:
I will try to resist the temptation to go on an Easter egg hunt. That's over — Amity
This one sounds so interesting but I don’t get it because I don’t understand what is a tessaract. — javi2541997
I googled. First thing that came up was from wiki:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesseract — Amity
Basically, the tesseract (4D) is to a cube (3D) as the cube is to a square (2D), as the square is to a line (1D), and as the line is to a point. — Possibility
Mandarin:
Tao Te Ching - Full Edition with Cartoon 中国国学-老子Laozi 道德经-动漫版全 dào dé jīnɡ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mSk8yZaZRaA — Amity
Tao Te Ching - Read by Wayne Dyer with Music & Nature Sounds (Binaural Beats) 1hr 5 mins
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=73_Voet2fnc
I like it. Gentle sounds.
From Comment below the video:
You don't need to start with the beginning. You can literally play this from any point in the video and still gain something. I have a special liking for the second half which covers leadership and governance. — Amity
Well, inside TTC we can use as many as metaphors we could imagine because it is a really free interpretation poem. — javi2541997
I find it’s like a written piece of music. The notes are presented in a formal structure, and each note, bar, melody and movement has a certain quality that is laid out for the musician in the text. But each musician interprets it in their own way, and is under no obligation to even follow the formal structure precisely.
It does have a ‘cherry-picking’ feel to it sometimes, but then I’m reminded that your approach was always going to be personal, and that my criticisms come across as quite uncharitable in this context, so I do apologise. — Possibility
I think you misunderstand where I was going with this, but I have to say that I disagree with your first sentence here. The Tao does not need to relate to anything, sure - but WE do. The point of the TTC is that we CAN relate to the Tao, and in fact that is ALL we can do with it - we can’t fully understand it or define it or describe it. All we can do is build relational structures as scaffolding, enabling us to relate to the Tao, in a qualitative sense, with all that we are. — Possibility
I’m not suggesting that ‘sincerity’ as a word cannot fit - only that the way we understand the concept of sincerity consolidates the relational quality so that it stands in isolation, as one of the ‘10,000 things’. There is some ‘unpacking’ that needs to occur to allow its quality to flow freely. For me, there is a noticeable energy flow difference between sincerity in or of the Tao (which is not the Tao), and faithfulness as qualitative relation to the Tao. — Possibility
I recognise that it’s a metaphor, but that’s not really an excuse - what we refer to as ‘metaphor’ in an English translation of ancient Chinese is a recognition of the qualitative uncertainty and subjectivity in relational structure, which the English language (and even modern Chinese) attempts to conceal by consolidating concepts - this is why our language doesn’t work that well when it comes to the Tao. — Possibility
I find it’s like a written piece of music. The notes are presented in a formal structure, and each note, bar, melody and movement has a certain quality that is laid out for the musician in the text.
I guess this happens with the most of the art that are so complex and abstract. When a piece of work can be interpreted furthermore than the original structure tend to pass a lot of generations or centuries because it can be interpreted depending in the era and social circumstances.
Nevertheless, we also have to keep in mind the original one. — javi2541997
I think with some of our fixation on the meaning of words we are taken away from this element.
We might be in danger of losing our way, if we cannot also take time to appreciate the sounds.
— Amity
I don't disagree with you, but I just don't know what to do about it. — T Clark
I guess the question becomes: why are we exploring an interpretation of this piece of music? Is it to forge our own personal performance of it, our own interpretation among the many, or is it to help others connect with the truth of the composition, with what the score was reaching towards? — Possibility
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.