Bothered by two verses.

Comments

• TommyO

  June 2006 edited December 1969

  Any insight is appreciated.
  
  Lao Tsu mentions:
  Give up learning...
  He also says to keep the people simple, fatten bellies and strengthen bones, something like that.
  
  I see education as a very important defense against tyranny. Please comment.
• Carl

  June 2006 edited December 1969

  I take it you mean this... [chref=3]the sage empties their minds,... keeps them innocent of knowledge...[/chref]?
  
  So here goes, but you may find this hard to swallow... To that I would just add, [chref=81]truthful words are not beautiful; beautiful words are not truthful. Good words are not persuasive; persuasive words are not good.[/chref] Of course, just because my words may be difficult to swallow doesn't make them truthful, but the possibility is worth pondering.
  
  Education is the means by which the "tyranny" (in the largest sense of that word) is maintained! Education funnels the consciousness of the child (student) into the particular paradigm of the society into which the child was born. Education is essentially 'brainwashing', though the 'washers' are also the 'washed', and thus [chref=70]ignorance[/chref] continues. It looks like a vicious circle of 'group think' to me. To truly think outside the box, you have to leave the education box behind.
  
  Seeing life from a Taoist 'outside the box' point of view is a journey of unlearning our education in order to [chref=28]return to being a babe[/chref]. Sure, leaving this 'box' behind is scarey - always scarey. But, it is only then that we [chref=15]can be worn and yet newly made[/chref].
• TommyO

  June 2006 edited December 1969

  I have been awaiting a response and I appreciate your reply. This sure is one way to look at it. I don't necessarily disagree with the TTC on this. I guess there are two ways you can take it. The dualism of the universe.
  
  For me, it was education that got me to question. In my ignorance I was inside the box. But I do see those who get into a box through education.
  
  The Mennonites and I think also the Amish educate their children up to the eighth grade. This is one way to keep people simple.
  
  I sometimes think it would be good if we did not know about nuclear weapons. The whole world would sleep more peacefully if this were so. But clever people would learn of it. I don't know. I go back and forth on this issue of education and simplicity.
  
  Thanks again.
• Carl

  June 2006 edited December 1969

  [cite] TommyO:[/cite](1)... The dualism of the universe.
  
  (2) In my ignorance I was inside the box.
  
  (3) The Mennonites and I think also the Amish educate their children up to the eighth grade. This is one way to keep people simple.
  
  (4) ... I don't know. I go back and forth on this issue of education and simplicity.

  (1) [chref=1]These two are the same, but diverge in name as they issue forth. Being the same they are called mysteries,...[/chref]. The 'truth' is not dualism. The nervous system uses a dualistic process to notice difference. But, difference are relative and in the 'end' illusion. Thus, 'watching' for the [chref=56]mysterious sameness[/chref] helps us [chref=28]return to being the uncarved block[/chref].
  
  (2) It is education that makes us ignorant. Ironically, this tends to make the most 'brilliant' people the most 'stupid' among us (e.g., [chref=20] Vulgar people are clear... Vulgar people are alert[/chref], and my favorite, [chref=18]when cleverness emerges, there is great hypocrisy[/chref]). Wow, such heresy. If 'they' knew, they would burn me at the stake I'm sure.
  
  Nature does quite well without education. Life, from viruses, to sharks, to sparrows, to mice, to elephants,... do just fine without education. We are educated to believe that education is the 'key' - especially now on our industrial (post 19th century) earth. What is industry whether in the stone age, the bronze age, or the electron age, but [chref=16] wilful innovation[/chref] by clever people. And make no mistake, I include myself among them. :oops:
  
  (3) Rather, I think it is maintaining an intimate family through a faith based paradigm and a slower life style resulting from the absence of technology that is key to their stability.
  
  (4) I suspect that you desire (through a tribal instinct drive) to help humanity cope. It is extremely challenging to come to terms with the Taoist view that [chref=2]the sage keeps to the deed that consists in taking no action and practices the teaching that uses no words.[/chref] After all, humanity (and all life really) has evolved to take action to solve problems. That's what survival is all about. Ironically, our biggest problems are the result of taking action to fix smaller problems. We just can't win, and that is why in the end one [chref=61]takes the lower position[/chref]. Though we go down fighting every step of the [chref=4]the way[/chref], [chref=21]the way[/chref], [chref=40]the way[/chref], [chref=41]the way[/chref],... [chref=53]the great way[/chref].
• TommyO

  August 2006 edited December 1969

  [cite] Carl:[/cite]Rather, I think it is maintaining an intimate family through a faith based paradigm and a slower life style resulting from the absence of technology that is key to their stability.

  
  I couldn't agree with you more. I think this statement goes to the heart of many an issue.
  
  I have waited a while to post in order to flesh out my direction. But I have always held to what you state above. I would include getting as close to nature as possible. Absence of Technology encompasses this. Hmmm. I contemplate, I grow.
• TommyO

  August 2006 edited December 1969

  and in response to helping others, I seek to only do what I wish others had done to help me to see a better direction. I would have been saved from many years of misdirection if only someone had been there to point toward another way. Taois is another way and I desire to point toward it.
• Carl

  August 2006 edited December 1969

  Hi Tom,

  [cite] TommyO:[/cite]... I seek to only do what I wish others had done to help me to see a better direction. I would have been saved from many years of misdirection if only someone had been there to point toward another way.

  
  Hmmm... I wonder? I've given my kids "a better direction" since birth. It seems to have made some difference, e.g., we never had those 'teenage' problem years, nor the 'terrible twos'. I suppose a lot of unnecessary strife is born of [chref=70]ignorance[/chref]. Parental ignorance. But, this ignorance is not an intellectual ignorance, but rather an emotional ignorance. Alas, dispelling emotional ignorance may rest less on "direction" than we would wish. I say that because I notice all the ignorance of my own youth in my children. Well, maybe not all... I was awfully ignorant. But, oddly, that ignorance drove me to find "direction". If you are not first lost, how can you be found? If you are not first selfish, how can you be self-less? After all, [chref=36]if you would have a thing shrink, you must first stretch it[/chref]. This is one of my favorites, it allows for everything to happen [chref=17]naturally[/chref].
• blacksheep

  September 2006 edited December 1969

  can I go back to the begining a bit? the stuff in Lao Tzu about keeping bellies full and heads empty. Well, read the DCLau introduction again. Don't think about it as what Lao Tzu says - Lao Tzu is an anthology, not an author. Clearly a lot of it is about statecraft - all that stuff about keeping hold of the empire and so on. So I think you should consider the 'bellies full heads empty bit' as being advice for the local big-wigs in the state of Ch'i in China about 23 hundred years ago. You were not meant to use it as advice on how to bring up your kids.
  Please forgive me if I seem a bit terse - I'm new to this game and also on a diet.
  Best,
  BlackSheep.
• ZiggySunshinedust

  August 2007 edited December 1969

  Question...
  
  I definitely seen what you mean about education. I definitely know how it can actually produce ignorance. For one thing, I know that often both sides of the story are not told... how the forefathers were great pioneers, but no one hears how they were probably slave owners... how Lincoln was wise and kind, but no one hears about his depression and dark side... But I like to learn those things. I like to dig past what I was taught in school to see what wasn't readily introduced. Sure, teachers don't have the time to go into every little detail about every single thing, but at times it seemed some things I was learning were too good to be true. Recycling... always told it was important... I found out later in life that while aluminum recycling is productive, researchers are now saying that recycling paper causes more pollution through factories than just throwing paper away..... .......I never heard that in school.
  
  ...But even when I learn the "flip side" of an argument, I'm still wary not to blindly follow what every John, Dick or Harry tells me... I can't very well believe them just 'cause they have an article from an old book, or a pie chart, or a poll.
  
  I'm straying from my point, as usual. I guess I'm just wanting to ask: Is there anything necessarily wrong with wanting to explore and learn, so long as we enjoy it and are cautious about what we intake... or as long as we strive to keep simplicity? Could learning be a form of "play" like we discussed in that post about music?
  
  I like studying on my own... people mostly... what they do and why, how they think, what they say, their language.... kind of a psychology sociology interest.
• Carl

  August 2007 edited December 1969

  [cite] ZiggySunshinedust:[/cite]Is there anything necessarily wrong with...

  Allow me to paraphrase... [chref=2]Thus, ‘wrong’ and ‘right’ produce each other[/chref]. In the end all such notions as good, bad, beauty, ugly, right, wrong, are just reflections of what we [chref=53]prefer[/chref]. And it is what we [chref=53]prefer[/chref] that leads to our endless [chref=63]difficulties[/chref].
  
  Biology drives animals to see their preferences as being caused by external forces; an illusion that works well for survival in the wild. Our brains’ mind, responding to this illusion, but not [chref=32]knowing when to stop[/chref], enables us to ‘over’ survive. How ironic that we call ourselves Homo sapiens (Latin: "wise man" or "knowing man"). Thinking man yes, but knowing man?
• ZiggySunshinedust

  August 2007 edited December 1969

  Hm... Thinking man makes better sense I think. It reminds me (this might be silly) of a quote from a movie called "Dogma" ... pretty much all the characters are Catholic, and one of the messengers brought to help out the protagonist says something like: "Beliefs are dangerous... I'd rather have ideas. You can always change an idea, but changing a belief is tricky." He was talking about the dangers that 'beliefs' can cause... wars, violence, schism, etc. All these things carried out in the name of beliefs.
  
  That statement always rang true with me. "Beliefs" being what we "know" to be true (in cases of religion especially), are in fact difficult to change. "Ideas" are closer to the "thinking" man, who speculates, but doesn't come down to any one answer. ...I think.
  
  'Cause it seems what's true or not true, or right or wrong, moral or immoral, fact or fiction... are always changing through time anyway. It used to be acceptable for grown men to have intimate relations with young boys... now we have "To Catch a Predator." Hence being a "knowing" man doesn't work well, because what we "know" could change in a matter of decades or even minutes. But to think about things, have an idea of what something is or isn't... that is always going to be constant. Because that thing that just changed, may change again. The only thing constant is change.
  
  I guess we can never truly be "knowing man." Applying this to my earlier statement, I used to "know" that recycling is a good thing... now, I "think" it may be entirely different than what I learned before.
  
  So I suppose I'll continue observing and thinking, but realizing that it is only going to temporarily amuse me... realizing (or thinking ) that it is ultimately pointless, because we never really can know.
  
  ........Wow, I just read that. I get confused talking to myself! No wonder most of my friends avoid getting into philosophical conversations with me.
• Carl

  August 2007 edited December 1969

  [cite] ZiggySunshinedust:[/cite] that it is ultimately pointless, because we never really can know.

  Oh but we can know, just not transfer that knowing with words. Words are the illusion, not the knowing. [chref=43]Understanding[/chref] that is [chref=23]enough[/chref].