Moderator: Community Team
So, if we're to take this literally then, if today all world governments were to simultaneously collapse and the whole world would be submerged in anarchy then everything would become just swell.If you want to be a great leader,
you must learn to follow the Tao.
Stop trying to control.
Let go of fixed plans and concepts,
and the world will govern itself.
The more prohibitions you have,
the less virtuous people will be.
The more weapons you have,
the less secure people will be.
The more subsidies you have,
the less self-reliant people will be.
Therefore the Master says:
I let go of the law,
and people become honest.
I let go of economics,
and people become prosperous.
I let go of religion,
and people become serene.
I let go of all desire for the common good,
and the good becomes common as grass.
The point of the Tao Te Ching, is you are supposed to see diferent things. It is also known as "The book of changes."but sometimes it seems a bit like Nostradamus, letting you see what meaning you want to see in it.
Don't really wanna start the whole gun control debate, but this statement is kinda contradicting. How does one (presumably a leader) rid weapons permanently without enacting prohibitions?Haggis wrote:The more prohibitions you have,
the less virtuous people will be.
The more weapons you have,
the less secure people will be.
It doesn't seem like the quote is referencing the elimination of weapons, but that there is a certain futility in weapon aggregation that overall, leads to less security (through abundance it might be suggesting), not more.TA1LGUNN3R wrote:Don't really wanna start the whole gun control debate, but this statement is kinda contradicting. How does one (presumably a leader) rid weapons permanently without enacting prohibitions?Haggis wrote:The more prohibitions you have,
the less virtuous people will be.
The more weapons you have,
the less secure people will be.
-TG
Anarchy is not the goal, from what I read is if you let go of human laws, as they are artificial and are a cause for dispute, you will have less dispute if people follow the Dao instead of laws.Haggis_McMutton wrote:So, if we're to take this literally then, if today all world governments were to simultaneously collapse and the whole world would be submerged in anarchy then everything would become just swell.Therefore the Master says:
I let go of the law,
and people become honest.
I let go of economics,
and people become prosperous.
I let go of religion,
and people become serene.
I let go of all desire for the common good,
and the good becomes common as grass.
Really ?
An alternative way of reading this, albeit somewhat simplistic, is to say that if you get rid of the rules, then no-one can break them.Crazyirishman wrote:Anarchy is not the goal, from what I read is if you let go of human laws, as they are artificial and are a cause for dispute, you will have less dispute if people follow the Dao instead of laws.Haggis_McMutton wrote:So, if we're to take this literally then, if today all world governments were to simultaneously collapse and the whole world would be submerged in anarchy then everything would become just swell.Therefore the Master says:
I let go of the law,
and people become honest.
I let go of economics,
and people become prosperous.
I let go of religion,
and people become serene.
I let go of all desire for the common good,
and the good becomes common as grass.
Really ?
Governing a large country
is like frying a small fish.
You spoil it with too much poking.
Haha, it's kind of like that, but there's a difference between laws and rules for the purpose of establishing and maintaining order. In some cases, laws--as legislated and enforced by the state--aren't necessary for order to establish itself. Sometimes, even laws (formal laws, i.e. codified laws) among a community aren't needed for maintaining order since the rules (i.e. informal/unwritten laws) are implicitly modified and enforced to sufficiently provide order.clangfield wrote:An alternative way of reading this, albeit somewhat simplistic, is to say that if you get rid of the rules, then no-one can break them.Crazyirishman wrote:Anarchy is not the goal, from what I read is if you let go of human laws, as they are artificial and are a cause for dispute, you will have less dispute if people follow the Dao instead of laws.Haggis_McMutton wrote:So, if we're to take this literally then, if today all world governments were to simultaneously collapse and the whole world would be submerged in anarchy then everything would become just swell.Therefore the Master says:
I let go of the law,
and people become honest.
I let go of economics,
and people become prosperous.
I let go of religion,
and people become serene.
I let go of all desire for the common good,
and the good becomes common as grass.
Really ?
I'm certainly all behind the approach of getting rid of religion
Therefore the Master says:
I let go of the law,
and people become honest.
I let go of economics,
and people become prosperous.
I let go of religion,
and people become serene.
I let go of all desire for the common good,
and the good becomes common as grass.
I'd argue that he was pointing states and politicians into the right direction--which was unfortunately not profitable for those leaders who had their own interests in mind and were in the unique position to achieve their own goals through the power of the state and its institutions.Army of GOD wrote:Haggis, you should remember that Lao Tzu lived like five billion years ago. While I agree with a lot of his philosophy, a lot of it is sort of outdated.
My personal favorite isGoverning a large country
is like frying a small fish.
You spoil it with too much poking.
By implication, politicians attempting to establish the common good achieve the outcome of not promoting the common good.Therefore the Master says:
...
I let go of all desire for the common good,
and the good becomes common as grass.
Anarchy is a worthy goal if you understand it properly. ANarchy means "without rules". It does NOT mean "break all the rules just for the sake of it". It does not mean "f*ck your rules I'm all right Jack". It means "I will examine your rules and I will decide if they are worth following. Make a new rule and I will obey it if I feel it's moral. "Crazyirishman wrote:Anarchy is not the goal, from what I read is if you let go of human laws, as they are artificial and are a cause for dispute, you will have less dispute if people follow the Dao instead of laws.Haggis_McMutton wrote:So, if we're to take this literally then, if today all world governments were to simultaneously collapse and the whole world would be submerged in anarchy then everything would become just swell.Therefore the Master says:
I let go of the law,
and people become honest.
I let go of economics,
and people become prosperous.
I let go of religion,
and people become serene.
I let go of all desire for the common good,
and the good becomes common as grass.
Really ?
Search your feelings, you know it to be true.TA1LGUNN3R wrote:I think Jonesy could be my father.
-TG
TA1LGUNN3R wrote:I think Jonesy could be my father.
-TG
I think you either misinterpret CI or taking anarchy comment to serious. What I think Lao tzu is saying in this chapter is to let go of clinging. You can punish people for breaking laws but you may find that you are making martyrs. Also, saying don't do this because it's not right, you make people want to do it more or you give them the idea.jonesthecurl wrote:Anarchy is a worthy goal if you understand it properly. ANarchy means "without rules". It does NOT mean "break all the rules just for the sake of it". It does not mean "f*ck your rules I'm all right Jack". It means "I will examine your rules and I will decide if they are worth following. Make a new rule and I will obey it if I feel it's moral. "Crazyirishman wrote:Anarchy is not the goal, from what I read is if you let go of human laws, as they are artificial and are a cause for dispute, you will have less dispute if people follow the Dao instead of laws.Haggis_McMutton wrote:So, if we're to take this literally then, if today all world governments were to simultaneously collapse and the whole world would be submerged in anarchy then everything would become just swell.Therefore the Master says:
I let go of the law,
and people become honest.
I let go of economics,
and people become prosperous.
I let go of religion,
and people become serene.
I let go of all desire for the common good,
and the good becomes common as grass.
Really ?
The anarchist will not obey an unjust law, nor will they justify an immoral act just because there's no law against it.
Anarchy works and is the ideal state if you have decent people.
If you don't have decent people you need laws. Unfortunately you then need to have decent people making the laws, which is why I'm an anarchist.
I like this. I think it applies to many things (though I always thought of it as one of those sticks that helps trees grow the right way till they're strong enough to not need it anymore, at which point, if not removed the stick can become a liability).daddy1gringo wrote: I think the idea is that ignorant formlessness has to be trained by rigid form before it can advance to enlightened formlessness, but that enlightened formlessness is the goal, at least for Lao-tzu. It's like when I used to study Chinese martial arts: you come into the class ignorantly formless -- all over the place. Then you get rigid training in how to move your body effectively, a lot like Japanese-style karate, but the goal is to escape the rigid form and become spontaneous and flowing, that is, formless again, but now an educated formlessness.
I feel that Dao functions more as a guide, most likely as a first step, and in a similar fashion to the Buddhist 8 fold path, you eventually have to let go of the thing that taught you how to let go in order to progress to that final stage.Haggis_McMutton wrote:The question then becomes. Is the tao te ching a description of the world in the "enlightened formlessness" stage or a guide as to how we might reach that stage. Because, while I think it might be a good description I don't see it as an effective guide.(unless perhaps if it's just the very first step of a guide, i.e. the step that gets people to think outside the box and realise there is stuff outside our immediate perception and everyday life)
Haha, nice disclaimer!Haggis_McMutton wrote:
I like this. I think it applies to many things (though I always thought of it as one of those sticks that helps trees grow the right way till they're strong enough to not need it anymore, at which point, if not removed the stick can become a liability).
The question then becomes. Is the tao te ching a description of the world in the "enlightened formlessness" stage or a guide as to how we might reach that stage. Because, while I think it might be a good description I don't see it as an effective guide.(unless perhaps if it's just the very first step of a guide, i.e. the step that gets people to think outside the box and realise there is stuff outside our immediate perception and everyday life)
The main flaw of it as a guide is that, for it to work, something like 95% of the people on earth would have to simultaneously adopt it. Otherwise, if just one nation/group did all of those things it would simply be overpowered and taken over by another nation/group (especially if we take into account the period in which this was written).
This seems similar to the problem communism faces, where it would theoretically work great if everyone suddenly developed the right characteristics(putting the group above the self, etc), but unfortunately, that's not gonna happen.
Disclaimer: Above post contains late night ramblings based on inadequate knowledge of eastern philosophy and communism.
