I actually agree with much of this, although I suspect I mean something different by it than you do. — T Clark

I think you and i agree more than we know. Sometimes words just get in the way as the old ones noted and wrote "The Tao that can be named is not the eternal Tao". :smile:

Yes, but what is a thing really in relation to the Tao, such that things should come from it? Are things made of the Tao, or are they made of something else that did not originate in the Tao? I'm a monist, and thus i believe that whatever things are, they are made of one "thing" or, more precisely, one "non-thing". — punos

Sorry, I did it again. I push "post comment before I'd fully responded.

I've thought a lot about the process of the 10,000 things growing out of the Tao. I still don't have a definitive understanding. The Tao is not part of anything and nothing is part of the Tao. I'll take the easy way out. This is from Mitchell's translation of Verse 42.

The Tao gives birth to One.
One gives birth to Two.
Two gives birth to Three.
Three gives birth to all things. — Verse 42 of the Tao Te Ching

I've heard it said that the Two is Yin and Yang or Heaven and Earth and the Three is the Tao and Two together. I'm not sure what that means.

The Tao can, in part, be conceived as the mathematical value (or non-value/non-thing/nothing) of 0 (zero)... This is also the kind of thing that happens with the quantum, or false vacuum at the very foundation of our universe. — punos

I don't know what the first sentence means and in the second sentence are you mixing up metaphysics and physics again.

Energy is the source of causality, which you characterized as metaphysical, but it doesn't matter. If it doesn't make sense to you then do not accept it, until it does. — punos

Admirably condescending.

I'm just saying that some things can't be measured, and yet are true, because they must be in order to observe other higher-level phenomena that are dependent on unmeasurables. — punos

This is what I was talking about when I discussed dark matter.

What is measurable is always connected fundamentally to what is not measurable. — punos

I don't know what this means.

Whatever scientists did to hypothesize dark matter is, in my view, the same as what the old Taoist sages did to hypothesize the Tao. — punos

You and I understand this very differently.

I think you and i agree more than we know. Sometimes words just get in the way as the old ones noted and wrote "The Tao that can be said is not the eternal Tao". :smile: — punos

No, I think you and I have diametrically opposed understandings of what Lao Tzu was trying to say. There are certainly places where we agree, but the places where we disagree are the truly fundamental ones.

You and I are just repeating our arguments without adding anything new. I suggest we leave it here. Also, I'm going to bed.

The Tao can, in part, be conceived as the mathematical value (or non-value/non-thing/nothing) of 0 (zero)... This is also the kind of thing that happens with the quantum, or false vacuum at the very foundation of our universe. — punos


I don't know what the first sentence means and in the second sentence are you mixing up metaphysics and physics again. — T Clark

The first sentence suggests that, as a mental or cognitive device, we can consider the Tao as the value zero, representing the silent void that is the Tao. The second sentence explains that what occurs in the quantum vacuum is similar to how a zero (the vacuum) can spontaneously transition from a true vacuum to a false one. The same procedure i used to derive the -1 and +1 values from zero is analogous to how the vacuum spontaneously produces particle-antiparticle pairs. It follows the same pattern.

Admirably condescending. — T Clark

It was not my intention to sound condescending. Please forgive.

What is measurable is always connected fundamentally to what is not measurable. — punos

I don't know what this means. — T Clark

I don't have a better way of explaining this here right now. I'll come back to it after i get some rest. It's a bit late here, and i'm i bit tired. probably going to bed soon.

Whatever scientists did to hypothesize dark matter is, in my view, the same as what the old Taoist sages did to hypothesize the Tao. — punos


You and I understand this very differently. — T Clark

This is probably a good thing. I believe i have a different way of relating to the same concepts. I use physics terms to describe ideas that were expressed in a time without physics or even science. I understand that many people prefer to keep things traditional and compartmentalized, but i believe there is more to the Tao than what was written a thousand years ago. The principles of the Tao are applicable to everything in existence. The Tao holds no meaning for me if it cannot be universally applied to all that exists. The Tao is generally equated with nature and its workings; therefore, why would it not be applicable to the sciences, which aim to understand the workings of nature? In other words, the way nature works (the Tao) should be relevant to scientific inquiry.

No, I think you and I have diametrically opposed understandings of what Lao Tzu was trying to say. — T Clark

Can anyone truly claim to know exactly what Lao Tzu meant? Was Lao Tzu the only person in the history of the universe capable of understanding the Tao as he did? When two people observe the same event, will their accounts match up perfectly? No, not really. Does this mean that both are wrong, or could it indicate that they saw different aspects of the same phenomenon? For me, Lao Tzu is merely supplemental; he is not the last or only word on the matter.

You and I are just repeating our arguments without adding anything new. I suggest we leave it here. — T Clark

I would just like to ascertain the fundamental difference between our notions of the Tao. Perhaps if you state it more precisely i can make more appropriate clarifications. Personally, i have not detected a significant difference, but of course, i might be wrong about that. Either way, good night good Sir. :up:

Those who want to relate the Tao to either physics or information or logos, might do well to look for those connections in the much older book, the I Ching. And for anyone interested it provides a cultural background that can help understanding.

It is however, difficult and in some ways more like a pack of tarot cards than a work of science or philosophy. But without having to accept the woo, there is still a background of the attempt to make fundamental binary distinctions that in combination can form a way of understanding the universe and man's place in it, beginning with Yin and Yang. And that distinction is even echoed in Mao Tse Tung's comment that 'women hold up half the sky'.

Jung's Introduction to the English translation to Wilhelm's German translation is as gentle an introduction as I can think of.

Or jump head first into the complexity.

Still reckon The Tao of Physics is alright. Capra interviewed Heisenberg extensively while preparing the draft. @Arcane Sandwich - you know that book?

I prefer The Tao of Pooh.

Oh, I read that a lifetime ago! Thanks for the pdf link, I might just read it again to see what I think now.

Benjamin Hoff has also translated the TTC (2021), downloadable with photographs. From: https://terebess.hu/english/tao/_index.html

This is simply beautiful. The Symphony of Science: Children of Africa. What a wonderful creation, this mix of music, audio and visuals. More about it here:

The Symphony of Science is a music project created by Washington-based electronic musician John D. Boswell. The project seeks to "spread scientific knowledge and philosophy through musical remixes." Boswell uses pitch-corrected audio and video samples from television programs featuring popular educators and scientists.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symphony_of_Science

I will listen to more of the Symphony later. Now to read the lyrics of Children of Africa. They came in a wall of text, so I've split them up and placed emphasis on parts, meaningful to me. This is brilliant as a whole experience:

Man is a singular creature;
He has a set of gifts which make him unique among the animals
So that unlike them, he is not a figure in the landscape
He is the shaper of the landscape

We are all children of Africa
They say this is where it all began
In a parched African landscape
Man first put his foot to the ground

Africa was our only home
for tens of thousands of years
until a small handful of people made their way
out of Africa

These beings with soaring imagination
Eventually flung themselves and their machines
Into interplanetary space

We are all children of africa
This landscape has been home to humans
Two hundred thousand years

We have come so far
All of this is cause for great celebration
We have come so far
This is a story about us
Those early Europeans
Were people like you and me

But it is humbling
When you see the challenges they faced

People like you and me
Overcame the Neanderthals
People like you and me
Made it through the ice age

We are not the only beings
With personalities, minds, and feelings
Chimpanzees have very clear personalities
Take a chimp brain foetally
And let it go two or three more rounds of division
And out comes symphonies and ideology

Everything that we are
That distinguishes us from chimps
Emerges from that one percent
Difference in DNA

People like you and me
Overcame the Neaderthals
People like you and me
Made it through the ice age

Using his burgeoning intelligence,
This most successful of all mammals
Has exploited the environment to produce food
For an ever increasing population.

Instead of controlling the environment
For the benefit of the population
Perhaps it's time we controlled the population
To allow the survival of the environment

With our 'soaring imagination', we've launched into interplanetary space. Small creatures of the universe that we are. We have used and abused our position as shapers of the world. We will reap the rewards.
Some more than others. Is this the harmony of physical and spiritual wellbeing? We have come so far, and now what...will we follow nature and our imagination...to help or harm?

***

I'd like to see and hear more. Five tracks and lyrics from:
https://genius.com/albums/Melodysheep/Best-of-symphony-of-science

I wonder if I understand you correctly. Are you saying that process of carving the ox is analogous to the process of the Tao bringing the 10,000 things into existence. — T Clark

One who has "learned how to nourish life" does not bring things into existence but rather sees and acts in accordance with how things are.

A name that can be named is not a constant name.
Nameless, it is the beginning of Heaven and earth;
Named, it is the mother of the myriad creatures.

(Dao Chapter 1)

We name things. We carve them up. By dividing we multiply. We take what is one and regard it as many. This is the way of man. This does not mean we bring the myriad creatures into existence any more than we bring the part of the ox into existence. We can either act in accord with the Way or try to hack our way through life.

Symphony of Science - 'We Are All Connected' (ft. Sagan, Feynman, deGrasse Tyson & Bill Nye)



We Are All Connected

[deGrasse Tyson]
We are all connected;
To each other, biologically
To the earth, chemically
To the rest of the universe atomically

[Feynman]
I think nature's imagination
Is so much greater than man's
She's never going to let us relax

[Sagan]
We live in an in-between universe
Where things change all right
But according to patterns, rules,
Or as we call them, laws of nature

[Nye]
I'm this guy standing on a planet
Really I'm just a speck
Compared with a star, the planet is just another speck
To think about all of this
To think about the vast emptiness of space
There's billions and billions of stars
Billions and billions of specks

[Sagan]
The beauty of a living thing is not the atoms that go into it
But the way those atoms are put together
The cosmos is also within us
We're made of star stuff
We are a way for the cosmos to know itself

Across the sea of space
The stars are other suns
We have traveled this way before
And there is much to be learned

I find it elevating and exhilarating
To discover that we live in a universe
Which permits the evolution of molecular machines
As intricate and subtle as we

[deGrasse Tyson]
I know that the molecules in my body are traceable
To phenomena in the cosmos
That makes me want to grab people in the street
And say, have you heard this??

(Richard Feynman on hand drums and chanting)

[Feynman]
There's this tremendous mess
Of waves all over in space
Which is the light bouncing around the room
And going from one thing to the other

And it's all really there
But you gotta stop and think about it
About the complexity to really get the pleasure
And it's all really there
The inconceivable nature of nature

We can either act in accord with the Way or try to hack our way through life. — Fooloso4

How do you connect with the Way? What does it mean for you in everyday life?
Is to be aware of how you are and what you do? With appreciation and awareness of the best way to live? To be the best you can be? Treating other beings and the world with respect?

Is this being in accord with the Way, about being connected in a creative and caring way?
Why do we need to name it? Why do some lay claim to understanding it better than others? But still do not seem to enjoy the flowing, questioning spirit? Becoming defensive, as if under attack?

This. I find so difficult to believe and imagine. Are we really 'stardust in the highest exalted way'?
Looking around the world...hmm...I think we can enjoy the perspective of 'being in the middle'. Small beings in an enormous universe. Trying to understand...dumbstruck in awe. No wonder we let our imagination wander. For better or worse. Creating stories.

"We Are Star Dust" - Symphony of Science


[Neil deGrasse Tyson]
We are part of this universe
We are in this universe
The universe is in us
Yes, the universe is in us

[Lawrence Krauss]
Every atom in your body
Came from a star that exploded
You are all star dust
From a star that exploded

[Neil deGrasse Tyson]
Look up at the night sky
We are part of that
The universe itself
Exists within us

We are star dust
In the highest exalted way
Called by the universe
Reaching out to the universe

We are star dust
In the highest exalted way
Reaching out to the universe
With these methods and tools of science

[Richard Feynman]
Stand in the middle and enjoy everything both ways
The tininess of us;
The enormity of the universe

[Neil deGrasse Tyson]
The atoms that make up the human body
Are traceable to the crucibles
That cooked light elements
Into heavy elements
These stars went unstable in their later years
And then exploded
Scattering their enriched guts
Across the galaxy

[Neil deGrasse Tyson]
We are part of this universe
We are in this universe
The universe is in us
Yes, the universe is in us

[Neil deGrasse Tyson]
We are part of this universe
We are in this universe
The universe is in us
Yes, the universe is in us

I know this has been a series of side-tracks from the TTC and the OP, Twenty-five. It does seem so far away from an ancient Chinese text. But isn't it all connected?
Just gonna post one more. I love the opening sounds and the apple pie :cool:
[Sagan]
If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch
You must first invent the universe

Carl Sagan - 'A Glorious Dawn' ft Stephen Hawking (Symphony of Science)


Excerpt:

[Hawking]
For thousands of years
People have wondered about the universe
Did it stretch out forever
Or was there a limit

From the big bang to black holes
From dark matter to a possible big crunch
Our image of the universe today
Is full of strange sounding ideas
— Carl Sagan - A Glorious Dawn lyrics

Very well said. Thank you. :sparkle:

This is probably a good thing. I believe i have a different way of relating to the same concepts. I use physics terms to describe ideas that were expressed in a time without physics or even science. I understand that many people prefer to keep things traditional and compartmentalized, but i believe there is more to the Tao than what was written a thousand years ago.

The principles of the Tao are applicable to everything in existence. The Tao holds no meaning for me if it cannot be universally applied to all that exists. The Tao is generally equated with nature and its workings; therefore, why would it not be applicable to the sciences, which aim to understand the workings of nature? In other words, the way nature works (the Tao) should be relevant to scientific inquiry. — punos

If you believe in the Tao as nature and its workings - the world, the universe and everything - then it makes complete sense to include modern, scientific questions.

If the Tao is eternal and there is a flow in time and space, it should not be limited to the TTC. Let it soar outside the text box. :sparkle:

Could you explain more about 'the principles of the Tao'? Other than to say it is Nature?

Can anyone truly claim to know exactly what Lao Tzu meant? Was Lao Tzu the only person in the history of the universe capable of understanding the Tao as he did? When two people observe the same event, will their accounts match up perfectly? No, not really. Does this mean that both are wrong, or could it indicate that they saw different aspects of the same phenomenon? For me, Lao Tzu is merely supplemental; he is not the last or only word on the matter. — punos

Given the amount of confusion, translations and interpretations, the answer to your question is No.
I am not sure that I would describe the author/s of the TTC as 'merely supplemental'. That would cause great offence to many people.
There will always be more to be said...
I think it's time I left the discussion. I have a novel to read. Yet another story. :sparkle:

How do you connect with the Way? What does it mean for you in everyday life? — Amity

... sages abide in the business of nonaction, and practice the teaching that is without words.

(Dao chapter 2)

I am not a Daoist sage. For the most part all I have to offer are words, most of which are not even even my own.

A great deal has been written about nonaction (wuwei). Cook Ting is an example of wuwei and a practice that is without words. Of course he acts but by carving between the joints his actions are rhythmical and effortless, they meet no resistance. To reach this point, however, requires a great deal of effort. Certainly it is not something that occurs on its own or happens to us while we sit idly by. It does however require a kind of passivity, a looking and observing instead of just doing. It is a doing guided by seeing how things are.

Right action follows right desire:

Always eliminate desires in order to observe its mysteries;
Always have desires in order to observe its manifestations.

(Dao Chapter 1)

Is to be aware of how you are and what you do? — Amity

I think so. And also of how others are and what they do.

Readers often form a picture of a peaceful, idyllic way of life, but:

To embody the Way is to be long lived,
And one will avoid danger to the end of one’s days.

(Dao Chapter 16)

The first sentence suggests that, as a mental or cognitive device, we can consider the Tao as the value zero, representing the silent void that is the Tao. The second sentence explains that what occurs in the quantum vacuum is similar to how a zero (the vacuum) can spontaneously transition from a true vacuum to a false one. The same procedure i used to derive the -1 and +1 values from zero is analogous to how the vacuum spontaneously produces particle-antiparticle pairs. It follows the same pattern. — punos

As I noted, I'm repeating my arguments. For me - Tao = metaphysics; quantum vacuum = science.

I am not a Daoist sage. For the most part all I have to offer are words, most of which are not even even my own. — Fooloso4

Ah well, never mind, poor human. We got the internet! [*] And sometimes we can offer some words of wisdom, from own experience and careful reading. Applying it to real life. And we don't even know if our words harm or help...

A great deal has been written about nonaction (wuwei). Cook Ting is an example of wuwei and a practice that is without words. Of course he acts but by carving between the joints his actions are rhythmical and effortless, they meet no resistance. To reach this point, however, requires a great deal of effort. Certainly it is not something that occurs on its own or happens to us while we sit idly by. It does however require a kind of passivity, a looking and observing instead of just doing. It is a doing guided by seeing how things are. — Fooloso4

So, when it comes to reading, reflecting and writing...cutting through the bullshit really is a matter of practice. Even writing a few sensible words can take effort, if our aim is to be clear and understood.
It takes time and patience to be still in an awareness of thoughts and feelings. Seeing how things are, is not as easy as it sounds.

Right action follows right desire:

Always eliminate desires in order to observe its mysteries;
Always have desires in order to observe its manifestations.
(Dao Chapter 1) — Fooloso4

I note this is the Ivanhoe translation. What seems to be common in the TTC is the prescriptive form.
Here, the use of 'Always', followed by a command. This doesn't seem to account for any exceptions.

But yes, I can see how it makes sense. If in mysterious mode, we let go of the desire to know facts? We simply let thoughts be. Stillness is the order of the day.
If we want to know (by observation), then we must engage the brain. This takes into account subjectivity and objectivity, yes? What is 'right desire'? Is it to keep a mental balance? And so, this will result in beneficial behaviour? Well, we can only hope...

Is to be aware of how you are and what you do?
— Amity

I think so. And also of how others are and what they do. — Fooloso4

That makes sense. And I like how you are comfortable with a degree of uncertainty.

Readers often form a picture of a peaceful, idyllic way of life, but:

To embody the Way is to be long lived,
And one will avoid danger to the end of one’s days.
(Dao Chapter 16) — Fooloso4

I'm not sure about this. Perhaps, there is an image of an ancient sage, sitting still in his serenity. Won't there always be some challenging circumstance? 'Danger' to be avoided if we think the way that we are told to. Hmmm. Danger from what or who? Everything and everyone? A few? There is no guarantee of a long life. Unless, this refers to eternity. Oh, dear...eternal heaven or hell?

***
[*]
Here's something:

The Daodejing teaches that humans cannot fathom the Dao, because any name we give to it cannot capture it. It is beyond what we can express in language (ch.1). Those who experience oneness with dao, known as “obtaining dao,” will be enabled to wu-wei .

Wu-wei is a difficult notion to translate. Yet, it is generally agreed that the traditional rendering of it as “nonaction” or “no action” is incorrect. Those who wu wei do act.

Daoism is not a philosophy of “doing nothing.” Wu-wei means something like “act naturally,” “effortless action,” or “nonwillful action.” The point is that there is no need for human tampering with the flow of reality. Wu-wei should be our way of life, because the dao always benefits, it does not harm (ch. 81) The way of heaven (dao of tian) is always on the side of good (ch. 79) and virtue (de) comes forth from the dao alone (ch. 21).

What causes this natural embedding of good and benefit in the dao is vague and elusive (ch. 35), not even the sages understand it (ch. 76). — IEP - Daoist Philosophy

Is it any consolation at all to know that the vagueness is not understood by the sages! :smile:
This is when it becomes clear that we are not meant to know...so why do we go on so?

I use physics terms to describe ideas that were expressed in a time without physics or even science — punos

Lao Tzu was pretty sophisticated. He understood the difference between science and metaphysics. 10,000 things = reality/science; Tao = metaphysics.

I understand that many people prefer to keep things traditional and compartmentalized, but i believe there is more to the Tao than what was written a thousand years ago. — punos

So, you're going to improve on the Tao Te Ching. I'm having a hard time figuring out how to respond.

Can anyone truly claim to know exactly what Lao Tzu meant? — punos

Of course not. I didn't say your understanding was wrong, only that it's very different from mine.

I would just like to ascertain the fundamental difference between our notions of the Tao. Perhaps if you state it more precisely i can make more appropriate clarifications. Personally, i have not detected a significant difference, but of course, i might be wrong about that. — punos

Metaphysics is at the heart of my understanding of philosophy, science, and human thought in general. If you look back through the threads I've started, you'll see it's the one subject I come back and back to. I see the Tao Te Ching as metaphysics, you don't. For me, that's a fundamental and profound difference.

Those who want to relate the Tao to either physics or information or logos, might do well to look for those connections in the much older book, the I Ching. — unenlightened

I have thought I should spend some time with the I Ching. I haven't because 1) I am put off by its connection with divination 2) I've heard conflicting ideas about how and how much it is connected with Taoism 3)I'm lazy. Perhaps I should get off my ass and dig in.

We name things. We carve them up. By dividing we multiply. We take what is one and regard it as many. This is the way of man. — Fooloso4

I have always thought of naming as described in the Tao Te Ching as something humans do. That's consistent with my understanding of human nature, psychology, and language. I don't think, although I'm not sure, that's the way Lao Tzu saw it.

This does not mean we bring the myriad creatures into existence any more than we bring the part of the ox into existence. — Fooloso4

I think the Tao Te Ching means what it says. That calls for a change in what you mean when you say "reality" and "existence." In my experience, no one can agree on that. I find Lao Tzu's way of seeing things compelling.

This doesn't seem to account for any exceptions. — Amity

Except:

Attain extreme tenuousness

If in mysterious mode, we let go of the desire to know facts? We simply let thoughts be. — Amity

I don't think it is a matter of letting go of the desire to know facts. It is the source of facts that is mysterious.

Danger from what or who? — Amity

Doesn't avoiding danger require knowing the source?

This is when it becomes clear that we are not meant to know...so why do we go on so? — Amity

We do act and can come to a better understanding of our actions and motivations.

Yah, everything conditioning those of us born into human history is not the Tao. — ENOAH

I agree as long as you include our biological evolution in your definition of human history.