I really like your attitude towards life, Amity. Always seeing the positive part! — javi2541997

Thanks, it ain't always easy, as you know.
Why be a misery guts? Yer a lang time deid!

¡A la vida! :cool:

This year is special for TPF members: the site turns 10 years old. — javi2541997

Well, I did not know that.

I think it would be worth celebrating. — javi2541997

Yes, indeed.

What do you up to the 10th anniversary of TPF? — javi2541997

Erm...I celebrate each and every day. With a big YAY! to @Jamal, team and members.

Although the anniversary is in October, you know that preparation for major things takes time. :cool: — javi2541997

What date in October? I'll put it in my diary.

I am here if help is needed. — javi2541997

Excellent. @Jamal are you listening? It's your party! :party:

While usage of linked sources and images may be an expansion of creativity, there is the question of how far this could go. If linked information is overused the essay could end up constituting a book and be time consuming if readers were expected to read too many links. — Jack Cummins

Yes. This kind of creative intrusion will certainly not always enhance the writing.
But I think some authors/readers might appreciate a few links, even if they are added at the end as references.

Hah, no books please, we're British! Well yeah, thank goodness for the maximum 5,000 word limit. I tend to read the short ones first.
There is no expectation of readers doing anything so tiring. We have our own limits. I think mine will be tested.

Also, regarding images, it is possible that it could turn the essay more into an art competition. It is also does depend on software for all of this. I am certainly not wishing to be negative and say that links and art should be avoided. However, if there is an expectation to include these, it could make it complicated. — Jack Cummins

Again, no expectation that this is even desired, never mind included.
The emphasis will always be on the writing. It should be clear and not cluttered. It was just one of my morning meanderings. Thanks for responding.

People have varying amounts of time to commit to the activity, even though it several months away. Of course, all sources, even quotes, would need to be acknowledged in order to avoid plagiarism. There is also the question as to whether a bibliography is or not included and this may depend on the form which the author chooses. There is also the question whether links and images would be an aspect of appreciation of the 'essays' or detract from the writing itself. It may be that each person has to navigate this and make choices rather than guidelines being too prescriptive. — Jack Cummins

It is always good practice to reference quotes. This can be done in-text without need for a biography or list at end. The latter is, as you say, up to the author. And I think such would not be included in the word count @Moliere but in-text would?

In general, the focus is on the writing. Most will do that. If a few people are inspired to include feedback with links or images to show appreciation or clarify, then whatever works.

I think @Moliere has made his intentions and the aims of this event clear.
It's still good to talk.Thanks!

I have a question as to the creative aspects and ways of an 'essay' as an 'attempt' to share ideas.

Can we include more than just writing? Writing on the wall is art. Art is textual. Intertextuality.

Can we take advantage of the fact that this is online and use images to illustrate the meanings within?

Also, I remember that some feedback in some of the stories used AI or photographs to give a sense of how the writing affected the reader. How their imagination was captured.

@Nils Loc springs immediately to mind. His creations lifted the words to another level. It enlivened.[*]
I guess the same thing can be done with music and YouTube. To see and hear the connections.
Perhaps, that is going too far...but Images are important. Visuals in philosophy to envisage visions.

***
[*] Feedback to @hypericin's short story, Three Shittyass Ghosts:
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/761686

To my own Red, White and Blue:
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/831978

To @180 Proof's Duct Tape:
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/833309

From Jamal to @Jamal's In the Wake of the Moriscos:
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/764324
following @javi2541997's:
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/761827

I'm certainly of the opinion that openness is the selling point for participation. I have no intent on refusing any submissions, for instance. I'm trying to give just enough structure to guide creative thought without hemming people in too much. — Moliere

Yes. For this activity to work and be an enjoyable exercise for all, there is a need for flexibility. The guidelines reflect that, at the same time as giving structure e.g. word limits and advice. Like:

10) Members please carefully read the essays before offering thoughtful feedback. A more open-ended conversation will take place in the 'Meet the Authors' thread that will be created on June 15th. — Moliere

The issue of how to give, receive and respond to feedback is important to consider.
What kind of 'feedback' is being sought by authors? Comments will vary according to individual experience, taste and confidence. The content and tone - is it about the writing style, format or ideas?
Is it to be more of a conversational questioning, a criticism or review? All of the above?

And my intent is to respond to every submission in a non-critical style -- i.e. I'll read the essay and try to take its own terms without importing my own thoughts, and try to offer pointers to clean up the essay. — Moliere

Like you, I intend to respond to every submission as in the Literary Activity. However, for me. I think this philosophy event will require a different style and way of reading/thinking. Tougher. We will see.

I don't know what you mean by not 'importing your own thoughts' when reading. I read as if in dialogue with the author, trying to understand. This means an engagement of 'self' - thoughts and background.
And, me being me, I tend not to offer 'pointers to clean up' but know that others do this really well.
Authors, I think, appreciate that their writing is being given careful consideration.
I suppose, even a line or two is better than complete silence.

If I am unsure or confused, I stop and ask questions rather than make assumptions and dismiss.
It's a great opportunity for both parties to learn.
It will be interesting to see how we each respond to 'criticism'. Some find it easier than others.

Above all, the authors should be respected and given encouragement. Harsh criticism should not destroy someone's creative spirit.

For thems who already write philosophy essays or have submitted them to journals I'd say that this offers an opportunity for your more experimental side to receive feedback -- things you know just won't publish but that you're interested in. — Moliere

Yes. I think that is what some will find a challenge. And why I think the anonymity appeals. It's like novelists publishing under a different pen-name to try out a different genre.

I hope to be surprised at the Reveal! :cool:

Talking about Articles as an expression of philosophical ideas and a source of inspiration, here is one written by Seán Radcliffe.

It won him the 2023 Irish Young Philosopher Awards Grand Prize and Philosopher of Our Time Award. He is now studying Mathematics and Economics at Trinity College, Dublin, where is he also an active member of the University Philosophical Society.

Reading an assortment of articles can give you an idea of how to write one. Not only the how but the what. Themes or topics that grab your attention, inspire and make you and others want to know more.
The Philosophy Now online magazine offers 4 for free, each month.

***
Excerpts to illustrate clear writing, exposition, hypothesis, questions and a conclusion:

Plato’s Cave & Social Media
Seán Radcliffe asks, has Plato’s Allegory of the Cave been warning us of social media for 2,400 years?

The ‘Allegory of the Cave’ is a Socratic argument recorded by the Greek philosopher Plato, a student of Socrates, and the writer of The Republic (c.375 BCE), which contains a dialogue between Socrates and Plato’s brother Glaucon. [...]

In many ways, social media can be seen as a modern day version of the cave. We are bombarded with information, opinions, and images that are carefully curated by algorithms and presented to us on a screen. Like the prisoners in the cave, we can become trapped in the limited perspective this engenders, mistaking the shadows presented to us for the real thing. These shadows thus represent the fake news, conspiracy theories, and propaganda that is spread by social media.
[...]

However, the question remains: Will we ever know what is real in the age of social media? [...]

At the heart of this inquiry lies the paradox of perception and knowledge: How can we know what is real when our perceptions are inherently subjective and fallible? Most philosophers think that reality exists independently of our perceptions, and that we can come to know it through reason and empirical investigation. Others contend that reality is nothing more than our subjective experiences, and still others, that we can never truly know what is real. I believe that we need to recognise the interdependence of perception and knowledge. [...]

The creators of social media apps have essentially built a cave for us, and we seem to have submitted to its chains. We often rely on what we see on social media or news outlets without investigating the truth behind it. The Allegory thus points out the importance of having a critical approach to the information we receive, in order to have a more accurate understanding of reality.

In conclusion, Plato’s Allegory of the Cave provides a compelling analogy, and warning, for the dangers of social media. It highlights how social media can create a distorted sense of reality, reinforce existing biases, influence us through external forces, lead to addiction, and disconnect individuals from reality. So while social media can be a powerful tool for communication and connection, it is important to be aware of its limitations and the potential for it to distort our perceptions. By looking at the whole picture, and by drawing on the lessons of the Allegory of the Cave’s reverse form of ontology, we can begin to navigate the complexities, even jeopardies, of social media, and work towards a more informed and enlightened understanding of the world. — Plato's Cave and Social Media - Issue 165 - Philosophy Now

[emphasis added]

***
In writing and submitting an essay or article or piece of philosophy writing:

Note the importance of a Title:

It is the reader's first impression. It captures attention.
It communicates the main idea. It condenses and relates to the content.
It is an intriguing guide, leading to what...?
It shows the care and creativity of the author.

https://www.oxbridgeessays.com/blog/how-to-title-an-essay/

From: https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/949836

***

The philosopher Plato and his inventive myths/stories echoing down the ages...

The Cave, the narrative that occurs in the Republic (514a–517a), is a fantastical story, but it does not deal explicitly with the beyond (the distant past, life after death etc.), and is thus different from the traditional myths Plato uses and the myths he invents. Strictly speaking, the Cave is an analogy, not a myth. Also in the Republic, Socrates says that until philosophers take control of a city “the politeia whose story we are telling in words (muthologein) will not achieve its fulfillment in practice” (501e2–5; translated by Rowe (1999, 268)).

The construction of the ideal city may be called a “myth” in the sense that it depicts an imaginary polis (cf. 420c2: “We imagine the happy state”). In the Phaedrus (237a9, 241e8) the word muthos is used to name “the rhetorical exercise which Socrates carries out” (Brisson 1998, 144), but this seems to be a loose usage of the word. — Plato's Myths - SEP

***

Continuing thoughts on philosophy and literature. And the question of hypocrisy in Plato.
A 20 min podcast by Peter Adamson:

Plato criticized both the epic poetry of Homer and Hesiod, and the tragic and comic poets. Yet he invented myths of his own. So what was his attitude towards literature and myth? Peter tackles this question in a final episode on Plato. — Plato, Poetry and Myth - History of Philosophy without any gaps

I've got an idea for a short article. I'll probably participate. — Arcane Sandwich

:up: :cool:
Maravilloso! Nuffink quite like the scent of inspiration in the morning...or any other time.
Does the writing mood just strike when it likes or does one have to practise at certain times?
I guess it depends on the individual's way of life...or philosophy...

The possible forms of non fiction, as distinct from fiction, may include letters and autobiographical, or life writing, and some other forms. — Jack Cummins

Yes. There are many forms to choose from. Previously:

Philosophy Writing includes:
Essays, Articles, Philosophical texts, Meditations, Personal narratives, Diaries, Memoirs, Correspondence, Letters, Lectures, and Contemporary criticism.

***
Now, for a deeper dive into Literary Forms of Philosophy.
A most fascinating and enlightening paper can be downloaded as pdf - 13 pages:

https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/PHILOSOPHY-IN-LITERARY-FORMS-Radovanovic/98ba2ae50574774d07f8b1445f073569bd1389d6

The different forms:
2.1 Poetic
2.2 Dramatic - dialogues
2.3 Prose
2.3.1 Letters and Epistles
2.3.2 Philosophical Essays
2.4 Literary-Philosophical Genres of the Enlightenment
2.5 Literary Forms of Existentialism
2.5.1. On Existentialism
2.5.2. Undefined Genre
2.5.3. A Novel and a Novella

Concluding Word

... literary forms are legitimate forms of exposition in philosophy. Such works, in addition to reflectively valuable content, possess artistic value, as well. The works of the most eminent philosophers, such as Parmenides, Plato, Pascal, Nietzsche, Sartre, and others, bear witness to that. — B. Radovanovic

***
An excerpt

2.5.1. On Existentialism

A philosophical treatise is often not an adequate form of expression to critically examine the situation of an individual and offer an answer to life's questions, crises, and quandaries. It turns out that a purely literary expression is particularly suitable for considering problems of an individual's life, which is evident precisely in existentialist philosophy. This is the reason for the frequent use of the novel form in existential philosophy. The very fact that certain philosophers of existence were also important authors affected the diffusion and popularity of this movement. In the process of its expansion and development, the philosophy of existence, having gathered a greater momentum and elan, is called existentialism. Major representatives of existentialism in philosophy are Søren Kierkegaard, Karl Jaspers, Martin Heidegger, Jean-Paul Sartre, and Albert Camus. — B. Radovanovic

There is more about Sartre and Camus in 2.5.3.
Interesting that they both received the Nobel Prize for Literature. Sartre in 1964 and Camus...

For his literary production inspired by the issues of human conscience, in 1957, as the second youngest laureate, he received the Nobel Prize for literature. Although many theoreticians place him among the existentialists, he refused to accept that he belongs to this orientation, as well as to any ideology and trend in thinking. Camus’ most well-known works are novels The Stranger/L'Étranger, The Plague/La Peste and essays The Myth of Sisyphus/Le Mythe de Sisyphe and The Rebel/L'Homme révolté.
Given the topics that his works deal with, as well as the need to speak about the topical
issues of human existence and the absurdity of life using widely accepted forms of narration, a philosopher and a writer Albert Camus opted for expounding his philosophical ideas entirely through literary prose. — B. Radovanovic

The guideline is there to help differentiate what makes this different more than provide a set of rules by which something will or will not be accepted. Someone could even make a point in the threads, for instance, if they feel a particular entry is too poetic/fiction based or something -- I see more value in reflecting on that on the boards than defining it ahead of time. — Moliere

Exactly this. :up:

the idea is to explore ideas together for fun and exercise — Moliere

Yup! :cool:
Looking forward to the diversity...

Poetry and philosophy overlap in many areas. Poetry is concerned with the exploration of human experience: the physical and metaphysical world, issues of ethics and morality, universal questions about existence, knowledge and meaning; reaching for transcendental or universal truths; and so does philosophy.

Poetry and philosophy both place a high value on the precise use of language: philosophers strive for clarity and rigour in their arguments, while poets often seek to evoke emotions and imagery. Both use metaphor, ambiguity and symbolism to convey meanings and appreciate the power of form to convey complex ideas, emotions and aesthetics. [...]

Several philosophers have also been poets, contributing significantly to both fields. Notable examples include Plato (c. 427–347 BCE), Rumi (1207–1273), the Indian polymath, Rabindranath Tagore (1861–1941), Fernando Pessoa (1888–1935), the Portuguese poet whose work blends poetry with existential and metaphysical themes, T.S. Eliot (1888–1965), and Kahlil Gibran (1883–1931) the Lebanese writer, poet and philosopher best known for The Prophet. — At the intersection of philosophy and poetic inquiry - Bera

***

I'd like to draw attention to the highly creative philosophical contributions of @PoeticUniverse.

From 2 recent discussions:
1. Tao follows Nature - started by @Arcane Sandwich.
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/15720/tao-follows-nature/p1

Excerpt:

The Manifestation

Through endless transmutation’s flowing dance,
The Eternal dons ten thousand changing forms,
Like one great ocean lifting countless waves,
Or single sky spawning infinite storms.

Each temporal thing that rises from its depths
Bears witness to that which forever stays,
A momentary expression of the whole,
A fleeting actor in eternal plays. — Poetic Universe

2. What exactly is Process Philosophy? - started by @Darkneos.
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/15737/what-exactly-is-process-philosophy/p1

Excerpt:

A Conversation with the Great Lama
(Who lives near me)
On Reality and Illusion

“Lama, I’ve heard that this world isn’t real,
That all we perceive is mere illusion’s deal—
That rain isn’t wet, and pain doesn’t hurt,
And nothing that seems to exist is quite real.”

“Indeed, that’s the teaching passed down through time,
That reality’s nature is more sublime
Than what our senses tell us is true.
Tell me, does this help when your problems climb?”

“Well, Lama, I’ve tried to see through the veil,
To treat life’s hard knocks as just details that fail
To pierce the true nature of ultimate truth—
But hunger still hungers, and storms still assail.

“The sunrise still wakes me, the night makes me sleep,
My heart still can love, and my eyes still can weep,
Each moment feels solid, each pain cuts as sharp
As if this illusion weren’t merely skin-deep.”

“You speak what you find with admirable sight.
The world does persist, through both day and night,
Appearing exactly, in every small way,
As if the illusion were really quite right.” — Poetic Universe

I would hope this kind of imaginative response to questions in a philosophy thread could have its place in the 'Philosophy Writing Challenge - June 2025'. Given a context and background, I don't see why not... @Moliere @PoeticUniverse your thoughts?

It seems spontaneous and contains humour.
Excerpt:

Space-time energy is doomed to entropic anihilation ; so where did our limited supply come from?
— Gnomon

Heck if I know; I'm on vacation…

To the Ends of the Universe: A Cosmic Road Trip

The Departure

I took a road trip through the universe recently,
Rolled down the windows of my consciousness,
Cranked up some space-time tunes real loud—
The cosmic background radiation was a bit repetitive.

Holy-moly, what an inhospitable joint!
Forget about finding a decent truck stop
Or even a patch of habitable space.
I’d rather be stuck in rush hour in Melbourne.
— Poetic Universe

It is a form of stimulus and response. A musical dance of ideas providing a different perspective.
It is art and it is meaningful. It is part of the bigger process where a single philosophical question can inspire and spark others...

What do others think? Is poetry over the boundary lines? Should it just be used as support for a philosophical point? Or what...

Poetic expression is allowed if it completes or supports the philosophical exploration. — Moliere

Above all:

It should be an exciting interaction, weaving questions, responses and trying to understand the meaning of the text. Of mutual benefit in a positive engagement. — Amity

I admit to not knowing much of Wittgenstein. However, when I was searching for 'poetry as philosophical writing', I found this:

His disposition,” Bertrand Russell wrote of the young Wittgenstein in 1912 , “is that of an artist, intuitive and moody” (cited in Monk 1990 , 43 ). A similar judgment was made some fifteen years later by Rudolf Carnap in Vienna:

His point of view and his attitude toward people and problems . . . were much more similar to those of a creative artist than to those of a scientist; one might almost say similar to those of a religious prophet or a seer. When he started to formulate his view on some specific philosophical problem, we often felt the internal struggle that occurred in him at that very moment, a struggle by which he tried to penetrate from darkness to light under an intense and painful strain…. When finally, sometimes after a prolonged and arduous effort, his answer came forth, his statement stood before us like a newly created piece of art or a divine revelation. (Monk 1990 , 244)

And Wittgenstein himself, hoping, in 1919, to persuade Ludwig von Ficker, the editor of the literary journal Der Brenner, to publish his controversial Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus , remarked, “The work is strictly philosophical and at the same time literary” ( Monk 1990 , 177 ). — Writing Philosophy as Poetry: Literary Form in Wittgenstein

Just one example...

With the guidelines I am wondering how the entries are going to be different from thread topics. It may simply be that many are longer and less of raising a question — Jack Cummins

Yes. This question was raised before. I think you are not alone in wondering what is the point?
We already have 'philosophy writing'. From the original discussion:

The difference being between a post and this is an essay, so I'd expect some kind of complete thought or argument. Whereas with a post I only expect enough of a topic to get a conversation going, I'd think that an essay actually completes a thought or presents a whole argument or tells a story or is in some sense a self-contained peice of writing meant to be presented as a whole for a reader.

Whereas a thread can do that, it's really just about having a conversation at all and needn't conclude or be self-contained and can wander more. — Moliere

The difference:

A typical discussion thread involves the author right from the get go.
This can affect the responses. The author also has to maintain the thread, responding directly, sometime immediately to other participants.

Here, the anonymous essay, article or philosophy writing is read and evaluated without bias. The focus is on the ideas and how well they are expressed. How they are understood or interpreted.

Feedback is given by readers and other authors.
A conversation takes place without input/interference by the author.
Until...The Reveal! — Amity

Also, the creative aspects may get lost if it becomes too academic. — Jack Cummins

Even academic essays use imagination and creativity. Think 'thought experiments' and use of 'myths', continuing questions from different perspectives.
The style and format chosen gives voice to the individual's ideas and views.

The guidelines specify poetry only being used as illustration, but it is unclear if the use of fiction can be used at all and to what extent. — Jack Cummins

Poetic expression is allowed if it completes or supports the philosophical exploration. — Moliere

I agree this can be clarified. I played a part in the confusion. Go figure! :smile:
I know that a poem can be seen as a piece of philosophical writing but uncertain as to the balance.

I think in this activity, it perhaps should be given background and context in an Introduction?
The main thing is to make the philosophical point clear, no? To follow an idea through...to a conclusion.
Even if that means there is no conclusion but more questions! Or responses...

That is because the division between fiction and non fiction is far from absolute. — Jack Cummins

Indeed. I'm glad we are having this discussion to explore and clarify meaning.
Some authors, like Iris Murdoch, made a clear distinction between their philosophy and novels.

Is it indeed 'non-fiction'? — Amity

Even as someone who helped draft this, I still have questions...

@Moliere - thank you again for writing such a comprehensive and helpful OP for this activity.

We owe so much to @Baden and the Literary Activity team. They provided the basic core which evolved over the years to showcase and encourage the imagination and creativity of members. Fantastic job, well done! :fire:

In a way, it was/is easier than this one. For example, I'm thinking of Guideline 4.

4) Must fall under the broad category of a philosophical essay. The Essay's Title and Topic are chosen by the author. The philosophical viewpoint can be academic or less formal. It should be systematic with an Introduction, Main Body and Conclusion. This is non-fiction. Poetic expression is allowed if it completes or supports the philosophical exploration. — Moliere

If memory serves, in the Lit. Activity, the broad category was 'a story'.
Even then, there were times when an entry was questioned. This is not a story.
And evaluated accordingly.

I think this is where imaginative writing can be stifled. If the mind is closed or wary of going beyond the traditional. Not branching out to meet the sky and sun.
To think outside the box.

And so, it might be the case with 'philosophy writing'.
And even opening it up as 'Philosophy for All' brings some difficulties and interesting questions.

Is it indeed 'non-fiction'? Well, yes and no.
Isn't everything we write a story? Part of a bigger process...

I'd love to hear your thoughts on this.
In writing a philosophy piece, where do you think the boundaries lie or how far can thoughts fly.

I think writing an 'essay' takes much more time and serious thought, hence the early February announcement. Stories can be written in a day! And I guess some experienced philosophers already have a few tucked away in their sock drawer. But hey, this is a chance to be a 'new' you!
Toss out the worn and grey...become fresh and stripey. Turn the kaleidoscope for a new pattern :cool:

Thanks to everyone who supported this new TPF challenge. Especially @Moliere who has now posted the Welcome and Guidelines. As promised on Feb 1st :up: :cool:

Any further questions or comments can go here:

https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/15749/philosophy-writing-challenge-june-2025-announcement

Enjoy! :flower:

Really great to see this challenge up and running. Thanks to you and everyone who supported this new TPF adventure :cool:

For those who weren't at the beginning of this, you can read it here:
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/15596/tpf-philosophy-competitionactivity-2025-/p1

I hope everyone enjoys! :flower:

So far, I don't see it as 'dehumanising'. People are not being labelled as 'just processes'. It seems to be a way to understand humans and their place in the world. As individuals and part of many processes, relationships and interactions, including the creative. Changing and not static.
— Amity

Except from what I gather they are, I posted something about teleonomic matter which seems to say the same. We care about individuals not processes. — Darkneos

Well, it seems we 'gather' things differently.
We can care about both individuals and processes. It's not an either/or scenario.

I've never heard of 'teleonomic matter', read about it and your conversation:
https://philosophy.stackexchange.com/questions/121491/does-teleonomic-matter-imply-subjectivity-without-identity

***

Your responses and questions flow from one idea to another. I think that is one of the many ways we can process our thoughts/feelings and confusion. There is a chain of interaction between individual brains/minds. This is part of a philosophical process. Just as writing can be a process of clarifying.

Process: https://www.wordhippo.com/what-is/another-word-for/process.html

What do we hope to achieve by following a process. Improved understanding?
For what purpose? That depends on goals and aims. It's why I asked you:

First question: Why is it so important to you? Second, why did you give up so easily? Research is fun!
— Amity

I dunno, why is anything important? — Darkneos

So, here is where the process can go off on another tangent, away from a response which would reveal something specific. What would it matter if replies to your question didn't satisfy you? Is it that you just want to talk? See what others think? What motivated this question, other than other questions...
Is it 'turtles all the way down'?

***

Either way, it seems that some can never get enough of trying to find the 'true' answer.
And will argue until blue in the face, that they are right and others are wrong.
Some like it hot.

But sometimes it's good just to chill out. Get out of your head and any mental tensions.
There are other ways of getting tied up in knots. Following a process to a satisfying end product.
Chains of individual stitches, creating a whole.

In a world that often feels hurried and chaotic, finding solace in simple, rhythmic activities can be a gateway to peace and mental well-being. Knitting, a timeless craft cherished across generations, emerges not just as a creative hobby but as a surprising ally in the quest for mindfulness and relaxation. From the gentle click of needles to the tactile pleasure of yarn, knitting is more than just a means to create; it’s a meditative journey that offers a unique blend of focus, repetition, and creativity. — Therapeutic effects of knitting - a guide to mindfulness and relaxation

Garter Stitch Scarf Pattern – Simple For Beginners
https://www.handylittleme.com/easy-knit-scarf-pattern/

You can multi-task and listen to music at the same time. Or watch a video. You can even think about teleonomic matter...

Insights from Nicolas Rescher's Philosophy: Process Metaphysics (06:43)

In this enlightening video, we unwrap the philosophical gift of process metaphysics, a perspective that sees the foundation of reality not as a collection of static entities, but as a dynamic collage of processes and happenings. We delve into the essence of change and contemplate the notion that change is not merely an occurrence within the universe but the very fabric of the universe itself. [...]

As we navigate the moral whirlwind of advancements in genetic engineering, process metaphysics offers a framework to consider the implications of our actions as processes with trajectories that shape humanity's course. We also examine how culture, through literature and storytelling, channels the spirit of process metaphysics, with narratives that reflect transformation and moral awakening.

In our current discourse on climate change and social justice, process metaphysics challenges us to consider the spectrum of possibilities that unfold over time, prompting critical thinking about the patterns of development we weave into our collective future.

This video is not just a philosophical exploration; it is an invitation to reflect on how seeing the world as a series of processes can change your perspective. It encourages you to ponder your contributions to these processes and to consider what verse you will add to the grand symphony of life.

↪Amity's citation is a good effort, but it makes the definition appear to be in terms of Whiteheadian terminology, but then massively expands it with applications to other, earlier areas of thought. — Count Timothy von Icarus

Thank you. Not bad for an initial foray, huh? :smile:
I've never stepped into this river before, so I thank @Darkneos for starting the thread.

There is "process theology," "process metaphysics," etc. The term is most used to apply to metaphysics. Nicholas Rescher's introductory book is the best text I've found introducing it because it explains the benefits and aims of the process view without doing injustice to contrary views, making clear arguments, and most importantly, not using a ton of foreign terminology. Rescher also takes a broad view, so he looks back to process views in Aristotle, Neoplatonism (e.g. exitus and redditus), Hegel, etc. instead of just 20th+ century continental philosophy and its main precursors. — Count Timothy von Icarus

Good to know. I had continued my quick, superficial search and posted part of a paper which mentioned Rescher: The four characteristics that Rescher views as basic tendencies of process thinkers. https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/963482

***

The lable is very diffuse and is applied in different ways by different people — Count Timothy von Icarus

Yes, well. No single, short and sweet answer to the thread title:
'What exactly is Process Philosophy?' Didn't expect there would be!

Nevertheless, it raises interesting questions, like:

...if everything is changing, even the meanings of our words and change itself, how shall we ever say anything true about anything? How does this affect our intuition that certain things won't change (e.g. Napoleon will never become the first president of the USA)?

One can posit "stabilities" in change, but this does not good if such stabilities are themselves subject to unrestricted flux, as well as what it even means to be stable or enduring. — Count Timothy von Icarus

***

So, what is the point of 'Process Philosophy'?

The second part of @Darkneos's query:

I asked the question on Stack Exchange: https://philosophy.stackexchange.com/questions/121885/what-does-process-philosophy-mean-exactly-and-the-ethical-implications-of-it — Darkneos

What are its ethical implications? Or any other kind, for that matter?

How the mind loves to classify, and no mind more so than the philosopher's! And if something, or someone does not fit neatly into the compartments one has, then a new compartment must be created, named, and defined. — unenlightened

I know, I know. It's crazy!

Love the Gilbert and Sullivan quote. Most apt.
Looked for some others. To lighten the day...

“Gilbert's response to being told they (the words 'ruddy' and 'bloody') meant the same thing was: "Not at all, for that would mean that if I said that I admired your ruddy countenance, which I do, I would be saying that I liked your bloody cheek, which I don't.”
― W.S. Gilbert

“It's love that makes the world go round.”
― W.S. Gilbert

Now that's all settled, we can get on with today's play, or not...

Now I can relax! I still know everything! — unenlightened

Yup, indeedy, you do :nerd:

OK. Re my questions as to why it is important to you, I should have looked at this first.

I asked the question on Stack Exchange: https://philosophy.stackexchange.com/questions/121885/what-does-process-philosophy-mean-exactly-and-the-ethical-implications-of-it — Darkneos

And the final question and response:

1
Uhhh…what does that mean exactly? I know that things change but what exactly does that mean and what does that mean for what I’m saying about people and society? –
BoltStorm

Your question, "I'm wondering I guess how would such a worldview function if it stopped seeing living things as "things". ... From an understanding of semiosis, you would not see people as discrete, concretely bounded 'things'. You would see each person as an amazing manifestation of what their genetic, epigenetic, and cultural influences autopoietically combined to form what you recognize as their form and identity. ... Think of a dust devil, and how just the right combination of circumstances came together to create a fleeting form. This is probably not the best analogy but please consider. –
Sarah C Tyrrell

[emphasis added]

I think that response sounds about right, from the very little I've gleaned so far.
What is it that you are saying about people and society? This?:

At a glance it seems to think that what individuals are is a collection of processes, though to me that would appear to have serious ethical implications since it seems kinda dehumanizing to just label people as just processes. Would that change our view of "people" and would it be for the better? I'm wondering I guess how would such a worldview function if it stopped seeing living things as "things".

Sorry for the confusion but I guess it just highlights my lack of comprehension of the subject. I've met maybe two people who subscribe to it and seem to live regular lives, though when I asked them to explain they couldn't, which gave me doubts about it.

I just seems like it would be a bad philosophy if one is concerned with well being and things like that, thoughts?

So far, I don't see it as 'dehumanising'. People are not being labelled as 'just processes'. It seems to be a way to understand humans and their place in the world. As individuals and part of many processes, relationships and interactions, including the creative. Changing and not static.
Just as in:

Essentially it means that all is flux, nothing is static — punos

I figured I'd try to ask it on here to see if anyone knows what it is and what it means, because I just get more lost on it. — Darkneos

I am not one of those who knows what 'process philosophy' is, or means. Getting lost is part of finding out. From chaos comes clarity. Sometimes!
First question: Why is it so important to you? Second, why did you give up so easily? Research is fun!
I don't suppose there is a simple answer to your question of 'exactly'...there never is...

There is a strong tendency to overlook process and to think we simply live in world full of separate things. We use nouns, which indicate some kind of stable entities — what in the philosophical tradition have been called “substances.” It’s quite normal to think of the world as a thing, filled with other things — rivers, mountains, lions, mosquitos, people, all sort of things. It’s also quite normal to think of these individual things as distinct from other things, which they are not. The fish is not the river. It is in the river. The river is not the river valley. It flows through the valley. The valley is not the region. But it is a part of a region. Objects are parts of bigger objects still. Wholes are parts of other wholes. [...]

We cannot understand the things mentioned without understanding the processes in which they are involved. Process philosophers tend to emphasize these processes that interlink these various things, and they emphasize that the things themselves have fuzzy boundaries and are also characterized by their processes.

The focus on processes is rarer than the focus on stable things. But especially in light of our environmental concerns today, and the fundamental importance of understanding the intersection of biological and human processes in order to address those concerns, a focus on processes is vital. [...]

...the first four characteristics that Rescher views as basic tendencies of process thinkers. In Rescher’s words:

1. Time and change are among the principle categories of metaphysical understanding.
2. Process is a principle category of ontological description.
3. Processes are more fundamental, or at any rate, not less fundamental than things for the purposes of ontological theory.
4. Several, if not all, of the major elements of the ontological repertoire (God, nature as a whole, persons, material substances) are best understood in process terms.
5. Contingency, emergence, novelty, and creativity are among the fundamental categories of metaphysical understanding. (5-6) — The Basics of Process Philosophy - Reason and Meaning

Interesting to read the 16 thoughts on the article.
Also that 'a future post will focus on Heraclitus, Laozi, and the Buddha as some of the original process thinkers.'

***

the answers I get make even less sense than the wikipedia entries — Darkneos

If we take only one example, from many, why doesn't this make sense to you? :

Ecology
With its perspective that everything is interconnected, that all life has value, and that non-human entities are also experiencing subjects, process philosophy has played an important role in discourse on ecology and sustainability. — Wiki - Process philosophy

Process Philosophy:
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/process-philosophy
A bit too hefty. Then there is:

***

Process philosophy is characterized by an attempt to reconcile the diverse intuitions found in human experience (such as religious, scientific, and aesthetic) into a coherent holistic scheme.

Process philosophy seeks a return to a neo-classical realism that avoids subjectivism. This reconciliation of the intuitions of objectivity and subjectivity, with a concern for scientific findings, produces the explicitly metaphysical speculation that the world, at its most fundamental level, is made up of momentary events of experience rather than enduring material substances.

Process philosophy speculates that these momentary events, called “actual occasions” or “actual entities,” are essentially self-determining, experiential, and internally related to each other.

Actual occasions correspond to electrons and sub-atomic particles, but also to human persons. The human person is a society of billions of these occasions (that is, the body), which is organized and coordinated by a single dominant occasion (that is, the mind). Thus, process philosophy avoids a strict mind-body dualism.

[...]

1. What Counts as Process Philosophy
a. The Perennial Process Tradition
Process philosophy argues that the language of development and change are more appropriate descriptors of reality than the language of static being. This tradition has roots in the West in the pre-Socratic Heraclitus, who likened the structure of reality to the element of fire, as change is reality and stability is illusion. Heraclitus is famous for the aphorism that one can never step in the same river twice.

In Eastern traditions, many Taoist and Buddhist doctrines can be classified as “process.” For example, the Taoist admonition that one should be spontaneously receptive to the never ending flux of yin and yang emphasizes a process worldview, as do the Buddhist notions of pratyitya-samutpada (the inter-dependent origination of events) and anatma (the denial of a substantial or enduring self).

More recently on the continent, one finds process philosophers in Hegel, who saw the history of the world as processive and dialectic unfolding of Absolute Spirit and in Gottfried Leibniz, Henri Bergson, Nikolai Berdyaev, Friedrich Nietzsche, and Pierre Teilhard de Chardin. Even David Hume (insofar as he rejected the idea of a substantial self in favor of a series of unconnected perceptual “bundles”) can be considered a process philosopher.... — IEP - Process Philosophy

Just for starters.

Basically, it's either to live in this capitalism or live outside the grid. What helps is to use political power to pressure these tech companies, but since the US voted for a lunatic that will just build a techno-feudal empire, that won't happen anytime soon.

To choose anything within this system might be seen as morally wrong, and if we are all dependent on this system, then we have to live in this system while trying to change it at the same time . — Christoffer

Yes. Quite so. Trying to find me some serenity in a world gone mad! Thank you. :sparkle:

Grant me the serenity
to accept the things I cannot change;
courage to change the things I can;
and wisdom to know the difference.

We call all things “things,” but not all things are the same or require the same type of treatment.

The illegitimate step lies in assuming that there must be a single standard applied at all times, for all types of situations, regarding every type of subject matter.

Why assume that there is any unity of this kind applying to the world, that all existence must form one single system with a single set of laws and rules applying to all of it? That too is part of the circular assumption of the sole universal authority of Reason—an assumption that, I would argue, ironically has deep roots precisely in the idea of God.

Exactly this. Assumptions galore. And circularity. As is the Way of Nature. No morals included.
Apart from those of human beings. Who argue over them...intelligently, or otherwise.

***
I agree with this:

Ziporyn argues that Daoism believes in no ultimate purpose, intention, principle, morality. — Joshs

However, some translations of the TTC appear to suggest that there is a goal, with aims. An example:

Nature is ultimate, the principle of initiating is ultimate, and the principle of perfecting is ultimate. And the intelligent person is also ultimate. Four kinds of ultimate, then, exist, and the intelligent man is one of them.
Man devotes himself to satisfying his desires, fulfilling his purposes, realizing his ideals, or achieving his goals. But goals are derived from aims. And all aiming is Nature's aiming, and is Nature's way of being itself. — TTC trans. by Archie J. Bahm

From the article's Conclusion:

Natural axiarchism offers a way to avoid human-centred morality. The axiarchic creative principle seems nothing like human beings, and does not even care about their lives and values.

And from the cosmic perspective, everything is the best. From our limited perspective, however, things can be good or evil. Specifically, human acts are good when getting closer to the creative principle, but evil when far from it. — The Best Possible World, But Not For Us, Issue 165, Philosophy Now

Definition from Wiki:

Axiarchism (from Greek axia {ἀξία, a-ksi-a} 'value' and arche {ἀρχή < (verb) ἄρχω} 'rule') is a metaphysical position that everything that exists, including the universe itself, exists for a good purpose. The word was coined by Canadian philosopher John Leslie.[1][2] — Wiki - Axiarchism

The article links it to Taoism:

Just so, instead of being human-targeted as many theistic ethical systems are, natural axiarchism chooses the way of nature as its ideal.
This view resonates most of all with the Chinese philosophical religion of Daoism. ‘The Dao’ means ‘the way of nature’, and in Daoism human values are totally grounded in natural forces and processes.
Daoism advocates following a simple orderly life, living in unity with society, and respecting and preserving the diversity of life forms. Living in harmony with nature is Daoism’s fundamental principle. In this way, natural axiarchism can be seen as a metaphysical grounding for Daoist morality. — Philosophy Now

There is an assumption that the universe exists for a good purpose. Of what use is an 'axiarchic creative principle' if it doesn't care about human live and values. Arguably, part of Nature. Also, that there is only form of Daoism and way of thinking about it.

The thread title: AXIARCHISM as 21st century TAOISM

The article and the OP don't really focus on the 21st century or its diversity. Such as:

In the early years of the religion’s formation, Daoism quickly integrated several aspects of Chinese cosmology that were not obviously an initial part of the religion. The most prominent of these were the concepts of yin and yang. Daoism’s ability to syncretize with its surrounding context continued throughout the tradition’s history. When Buddhism entered China, Daoism absorbed many elements still seen today, elements such as the presence of altars to the bodhisattva Guanyin in many Daoist temples.

Since Daoism did not travel in the same manner as, and lacked the popularity of, Buddhism, its numbers in America have grown relatively slowly. Today, it is estimated there are around 30,000 Daoist practitioners living in the United States. Now that American Daoists are becoming a larger part of the religious landscape, this openness to change is shaping the religion in distinct ways and presenting unique issues. [...]

Currently, American Daoism in the 21st century is undergoing a phase of self-definition as it grapples with issues of interfaith interaction, decentralization, and the contrasting practices of converts and immigrants. Some scholars have suggested that a specific form of “American Daoism” will not form; rather, the great diversity of practice within America will result in “American Daoisms.”

From: https://hwpi.harvard.edu/files/pluralism/files/american_daoism_in_the_21st_century_1.pdf

News from the Guardian.

Revealed: Microsoft deepened ties with Israeli military to provide tech support during Gaza war
Leaked documents shed light on how Israel integrated the US tech giant into its war effort to meet growing demand for cloud and AI tools.

The Israeli military’s reliance on Microsoft’s cloud technology and artificial intelligence systems surged during the most intensive phase of its bombardment of Gaza, leaked documents reveal.

The files offer an inside view of how Microsoft deepened its relationship with Israel’s defence establishment after 7 October 2023, supplying the military with greater computing and storage services and striking at least $10m in deals to provide thousands of hours of technical support.

Microsoft’s deep ties with Israel’s military are revealed in an investigation by the Guardian with the Israeli-Palestinian publication +972 Magazine and a Hebrew-language outlet, Local Call. It is based in part on documents obtained by Drop Site News, which has published its own story.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/jan/23/israeli-military-gaza-war-microsoft

I use Microsoft. Can anyone recommend other options?

My personal non-religious philosophical worldview has some aspects in common with ancient Chinese Taoism : the Way of Nature. But I just came across another name for a similar concept. In Philosophy Now magazine (12/24 ; 01/25) the cover title is The Return of God. It presents articles on various attitudes toward the god concept; including Atheism and Agnosticism. — Gnomon

Thank you. I'll take a look. :sparkle:
https://philosophynow.org/issues/165/The_Best_Possible_World_But_Not_For_Us

My guess is that this boils down to just another ethical system based upon humility, kindness, acceptance and such. If that's the case, let's stop being so vague and just enumerate the things I need to do in 10 simple commands. I've been following these taoist threads a bit, and I'd rather someone just speak in prose and not poems and lay it out. — Hanover

I'm not someone who follows 10 commandments, and none of them are all that simple. Strict Rules or Guidelines are not in prose and can be pretty dogmatic. You really want things to be set in stone?
Some do, and it is in this lack of flexibility and movement that we find some cannot deal with changing
world realities. There is a wish to return to traditional moralities, as laid down by Man. Or dictators.

From the Tao follows Nature thread. Following Bahm's translation of the TTC and his part in developing the Humanist Manifesto:
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/963041

Be creedless; that is, be intelligent enough to make adaptations without dependence upon some formula.
Be self-reliant; that is, be not dependent upon supernatural agency for intellectual support or moral guidance.
Be critical; that is, question assumptions and seek certitude scientifically.
Be tolerant; that is, be open-minded and hold conclusions tentatively.
Be active; that is, live today and grow by exercising his capacities.
Be efficient; that is, accomplish the most with the least effort.
Be versatile; that is, vary his interests to attain a variety of interesting thoughts.
Be cooperative; that is, find some of his satisfactions in social activities.
Be appreciative; that is, make the present enjoyable by his attitude.
Be idealistic; that is, create and live by ideals which he finds inspiring. — Wiki - Archie J. Bahm

But goals are derived from aims. And all aiming is Nature's aiming, and is Nature's way of being itself. — Translated by Archie J. Bahm, 1958

Also, not sure of this. Human goals or aims seem not to be the same as that of Nature.
How do we even know if Nature has a goal or aim? Is it simply to be itself?
So, how useful is this? The Tao just is. Humans just are? No, there is a vision here of improvement and growing. But will humans, their greed and inventions kill nature? Or will Nature always survive. No matter what? The Universe is greater than our world.

Returning to the TTC, 25. And another translation. Why this one, out of the many? Are you working your way through the terebess list? https://terebess.hu/english/tao/_index.html
Or is it one that 'works' for you, or prefer, in some way?

There exists something which is prior to all beginnings and endings, Which, unmoved and unmanifest, itself neither begins nor ends.
All-pervasive and inexhaustible, it is the perpetual source of everything else,
For want of a better name, I call it Nature. If I am forced to describe it, I speak of it as "ultimate reality." — Translated by Archie J. Bahm, 1958

I think Bahm stands out well in comparison to some already discussed. [ See below * ]
The voice seems authoritative, explanatory, yet not dogmatic. It goes further in describing the Tao as 'ultimate reality'. It's nature is that of Nature. The Tao follows Nature. It is both called Nature and accompanies it. A combination of Part and the Whole. As a seed or source - growing like the fruit of cherry tree. The circle of the seasons. The eternal return.

My problem lies in what is meant by 'ultimate reality'. According to Bahn:

Ultimate reality involves initiation of growth, initiation of growth involves completion of growth, and completion of growth involves returning to that whence it came.

Nature is ultimate, the principle of initiating is ultimate, and the principle of perfecting is ultimate. And the intelligent person is also ultimate. Four kinds of ultimate, then, exist, and the intelligent man is one of them. — Translated by Archie J. Bahm, 1958

The word 'ultimate' is repeated. Does it mean the same thing, every time? There are 4 kinds. How do they pertain, or relate, to 'reality'?
Ultimate: Fundamental, basic, primary, absolute, infinite, model or ideal, conclusive, unquestionable...
https://www.wordhippo.com/what-is/another-word-for/ultimate.html
Reality: Actuality, existence, world, truth...
https://www.wordhippo.com/what-is/another-word-for/reality.html

There is an emphasis on the 'intelligent man'. What does he mean by this? Why the emphasis on 'intelligent'? Not all men are. Unless, it simply means having an ability to think. It's unfortunate that Bahm keeps to the word 'man' rather than 'human' or 'human beings' (as per Jane English update). Then again, a man of his time. Edit: On a re-read, I note he also used the word 'person'.

Man devotes himself to satisfying his desires, fulfilling his purposes, realizing his ideals, or achieving his goals. But goals are derived from aims. And all aiming is Nature's aiming, and is Nature's way of being itself. — Translated by Archie J. Bahm, 1958

Curious about Bahm, I discover:

He was a member of numerous committees to support and promote the exchange of philosophical ideas and organized the Albuquerque Chapter of the Southwestern Regional American Humanist Association in 1954. He was one of the signers of the Humanist Manifesto.[2] He was also an organizer, past president, and past secretary-treasurer of the New Mexico Philosophical Society. — Wiki - Archie J. Bahm

The Humanist Manifesto
https://web.archive.org/web/20121020110719/http://www.americanhumanist.org/humanism/Humanist_Manifesto_II

For anyone looking for a list of '10 Commandments', this might come close:

Bahm in 1933 contributed “A Religious Affirmation” to The New Humanist, listing items that “a person should”:

Be creedless; that is, be intelligent enough to make adaptations without dependence upon some formula.
Be self-reliant; that is, be not dependent upon supernatural agency for intellectual support or moral guidance.
Be critical; that is, question assumptions and seek certitude scientifically.
Be tolerant; that is, be open-minded and hold conclusions tentatively.
Be active; that is, live today and grow by exercising his capacities.
Be efficient; that is, accomplish the most with the least effort.
Be versatile; that is, vary his interests to attain a variety of interesting thoughts.
Be cooperative; that is, find some of his satisfactions in social activities.
Be appreciative; that is, make the present enjoyable by his attitude.
Be idealistic; that is, create and live by ideals which he finds inspiring.

***

[*]
To compare:

Something mysteriously formed,
Born before heaven and earth.
In the silence and the void,
Standing alone and unchanging,
Ever present and in motion.
Perhaps it is the mother of ten thousand things.
I do not know its name.
Call it Tao.
For lack of a better word, I call it great

[...]

Therefore, “Tao is great;
Heaven is great;
Earth is great;
The human being is also great.”
These are the four great powers of the universe,
And the human being is one of them — Jane English (update)

***

There was something formless and perfect
before the universe was born.
It is serene. Empty.
Solitary. Unchanging.
Infinite. Eternally present.
It is the mother of the universe.
For lack of a better name,
I call it the Tao.

[...]
The Tao is great.
The universe is great.
Earth is great.
Man is great.
These are the four great powers. — Translated by Stephen Mitchell, 1988

Have we had this one? — unenlightened

I can't recall but I don't think so. Worth a repeat, anyway! :cool:
Your link takes me to 'Video unavailable'. I found this one:



I learned the truth at seventeen
That love was meant for beauty queens
And high school girls with clear skinned smiles
Who married young and then retired
The valentines I never knew
The Friday night charades of youth
Were spent on one more beautiful
At seventeen I learned the truth

Chorus

And those of us with ravaged faces
Lacking in the social graces
Desperately remained at home
Inventing lovers on the phone
Who called to say, "Come dance with me"
And murmured vague obscenities
It isn't all it seems
At seventeen

A brown eyed girl in hand-me-downs
Whose name I never could pronounce
Said, "Pity please the ones who serve
They only get what they deserve"
And the rich relationed hometown queen
Marries into what she needs
With a guarantee of company
And haven for the elderly

Chorus

Remember those who win the game
Lose the love they sought to gain
In debentures of quality
And dubious integrity
The small-town eyes will gape at you
In dull surprise when payment due
Exceeds accounts received
At seventeen

[ Instrumental break ]

To those of us who knew the pain
Of valentines that never came
And those whose names were never called
When choosing sides for basketball
It was long ago and far away
The world was younger than today
And dreams were all they gave for free
To ugly duckling girls like me

Chorus

We all play the game, and when we dare
To cheat ourselves at solitaire
Inventing lovers on the phone
Repenting other lives unknown
That call and say, "Come dance with me"
And murmur vague obscenities
And ugly girls like me
At seventeen
Songwriters: Janis Ian. For non-commercial use only.

In short, while physics provides empirical insights into the workings of the universe, metaphysics offers a framework for understanding the underlying principles that govern those observations. One can inform the other. — punos

Isn't this necessary if we are to have an holistic approach to understanding life?
It's similar to what I've just discussed with @Fooloso4.
Regarding the play of opposites.
I see no reason why this would be objected to by the author/s of the TCC.

We would not expect attaining and tenuous to be joined together. They seem to contradict each other, but throughout there is a play of opposites:

Everyone in the world knows that when the beautiful strives to be
beautiful, it is repulsive.
Everyone knows that when the good strives to be good, it is no good.5
And so,
To have and to lack generate each other.6
Difficult and easy give form to each other.
Long and short off-set each other.
High and low incline into each other.
Note and rhythm harmonize with each other.
Before and after follow each other.
(Chapter 2) — Fooloso4

Thank you. I understand the play of opposites. Isn't this found in other philosophical, or even literary, texts where unity is comprised of interconnection and interdependence. For some reason, I'm reminded of Plato's interplay of serious and fun. The humour not always obvious.
The Ying/Yang. The natural themes of birth/death. Reason/emotion.
All make up Life as we know it. Pain/Pleasure.


I am beginning to appreciate the artistry in some translations of the TCC.

Here is the equivalent excerpt from Jane English:

Under heaven all can see beauty as beauty only because there is ugliness.
All can know good as good only because there is evil.

Therefore having and not having arise together;
Difficult and easy complement each other;
Long and short contrast each other;
High and low rest upon each other;
Voice and sound harmonize each other;
Front and back follow each other.

Except:

Attain extreme tenuousness — Fooloso4

I had a hard time understanding this the first time round.

And if I ever had an inkling, it is no longer shining through the dust of memory.

Would it be worth your while to explain again? My brain is turning away.

Yes. Fortunately, it is possible to reach a better understanding of actions and motivations. By ways and means...

Perhaps I'm blaming my brain when really I've had enough!
This haunting sense of deja vue...

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?

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:

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?