Thread 24650885

This shit just advocates for you to be like a blade of grass. Do Chinks really?

>>24650885 (OP)
genuinely just hang yourself if you didn't get this. there are seuss books more complicated than the tao.

>>24650885 (OP)
How did you get filtered by one of the most accessible philosophical texts of all time?

You are smart, only I am an idiot.

>>24650885 (OP)
A blade of grass bends and passes it's wisdom and life to the next generation of grass like it and so it goes. Even if it is cut down, eaten, or burned, it returns in all it's humble glory

>>24650885 (OP)
If you were more like a blade of grass, you'd be a lot smarter.

>>24651177
I thought you were supposed to touch grass not be grass, now I’m confused.

>>24650901
>>24650900

nta. I have read all of Plato and most of the important Aristotle's works, and I didn't find Tao Te Ching easy at all. I think you two are midwits who were either fooled by the fact that the book is short and aphoristic or by a translation that was explicitly made to be clear for wannabe mystic westerners. I read this version https://www.tao-te-king.org/
and had to reread several times each chapter to try to grasp its true meaning, because the message is so summarised that several interpretations are available, which is made worse by Chinese being a high context language. There are some books which would be practically much shorter if they were textually longer, and this is one of them, but I guess that it was written with borderline religious intentions so it is deliberately obscure because of that.

>>24650885 (OP)
Except NPCs are more like demented rabies-infested hyenas than noble blades of wild grass. If you don't get this, you might be one yourself.

>>24651199
Wow. It really did filter you. The Zhuangzi would break your mind. I read the tao te ching every day. It's a symbolic text designed to fundamentally change your process of conception through negation and paradox. It's not easy, it's accessible because anyone can read it without understanding the history of philosophy to interpret a slight nuance based on the argument of a dude 400 years ago. It's not a religious book; religion implies ritual. It's a practical spiritual guide and the first step in unraveling an elaborate process. You arent supposed to read it once, put it down, and know everything, you're supposed to engage with it repeatedly over time, and as you change your relationship with the text changes, which bring about new insights. Ideally you also consult the oracle as well for a better understanding, and do both every day. It's wu wei; action through inaction. The more elaborate the translation and footnotes, the less you get from the experience because it's about The Way (Dao) and not about grasping at meaning.

A cup is useful because it contains nothing, and thus it becomes a container for everything. When you define the limits of the cup, those limits shape the nature of reality. To define the Dao in the process you are is to say the cup only contains 8 ounces tea, when you could refill it hundreds of times with sand if you really wanted.

>>24650885 (OP)
>Do Chinks really?
YES

>>24651231
I understood almost everything you say here but after having worked through the text patiently. You may say that it's accessible because you don't need to know other works to understand it, but if so much work is needed in such a long time span to grasp it (as you say, unless you come up with "it's effortless because I read it using wu wei"), the rare thing is not to be filtered by it, so I wouldn't mock anyone for it. Calling it accessible instead of easy seems like a linguistic trick.

And I don't think that this book's reading doesn't benefit from having a good philosophical background. For example, I found Dao very similar to Anaximander's apeiron, for it is an indefinite reality from which the definite opposites arise. I searched for that comparison and the only mention I found was from r*ddit.

>>24651231
Post rec and translations anon.

>>24650885 (OP)
>ascending "shaky ladders" is dangerous plebs, better to simply "stand firm on the ground" where you are
Totally doesnt sound like preaching weakness in the guise of wisdom/moral superiority. The same boring sort of pathological altruism as christianity that disarms people against tyrants. People are always enamored with the exotic. Philosophers or spiritualfags, who is more impotent against authority?

>>24651354
>The Monarchomachs in particular developed a theory of tyrannicide, with Juan de Mariana describing their views in the 1598 work De rege et regis institutione,[29] in which he wrote, "[B]oth the philosophers and theologians agree, that the prince who seizes the state with force and arms, and with no legal right, no public, civic approval, may be killed by anyone and deprived of his life..."[8] The Jesuistic casuistry developed a similar theory, criticized by Blaise Pascal in the Provincial Letters.

European developed christianism tells you to kill tyrants. Your take is /pol/ coded and cringe.

>>24651393
>instant christbeaner cope reply
Lmao. You take is faggot coded and jewish

LOZI: Piece by piece dissolve into Peace, young one. They will come to the Way in time. All water leads to the sea.

I am different from ordinary people.
I drink from the Great Mother's breasts.”
― Lao-Tzu, Tao Te Ching

The Way's Virtue is its magic will. The Tao Te Ching is the perfect grimoire.

>>24651399
The Bible is not internally coherent (I'm not christian) and, as such, the christian authorities have picked or prioritised one the of the contradictory elements at a time, so to study the impact of christianism in Europe you have to look at what has happened in a hegelian fashion (he thought that the truth of ideas unravels in history), the Bible is certainly not enough. Jewish reparations is a phenomenon no longer than one century, and European implemented christianism throughout its history has never applied the verse of your pic until very recently, after WW2.

Before separation of powers, an effective source of political counterweight was the church, which was the first thing the French revolutionaries tried to get rid of in order to achieve a much more totaliarian state. So no, christianism hasn't supported historically tyrants. They have disputed tyranny with the standard political power and that way they developed antiauthoritarian ideas.

And taoism is perhaps equally antiauthoritarian in Asia and opposite to Confucianism. Its ethics are certainly not revolutionary but they reject the legitimacy of tyrants, who act against wu wei.

>>24651393
>after 1600 years of christian tyranny had served it's purpose of empowering and enriching jewish bankers it was time to give birth to progressivism, the most npc ideology ever created
Wow

>>24651438
>to study the impact of christianism in Europe you have to look at what has happened in a hegelian fashion
Christianity is the jewish controlled oppostion hegelian dialectic force that empowers them lol. Nietzsche was correct about christianity in almost every regard. You sound like the exact NPC OP is describing, is this chatgpt?
>no, christianism hasn't supported historically tyrants
literal nonsense apologetics. The purpose of a system is what it does, not what it purports to do. I dont see taoists and other moralistic cultists revolting en masse to the current state of things, quite the opposite

>>24651491
>The purpose of a system is what it does, not what it purports to do.
>I dont see taoists and other moralistic cultists revolting en masse to the current state of things, quite the opposite

Well, bolshevists revolted en masse to the then current state of things and, according to your pic, they are grandchildren of christianity. Although I like Hegel for coming up with a system that requires to contrast ideas with history, he established a negative historicist tendency in philosophy with no intentions to be logically consistent a priori. And you are a victim of that: you say "the root of commies is christianity" or "the root of progressivism is christianity". From a hegelian point of view one may say that progressivism or bolshevism are not contradictory to christianism but a result of aufhebung which implicitly contains christianism. And that lays everything on the table for simplistic /pol/tards like you to say "YOU SEEE, EVERYTHING IS ALL KIKERY", neglecting the present analitical incompatibilities in ideologies, religions or philosophical systems even if they are historically related.

And you haven't answered to the points in my post showing that christianity has been (at least hypocritically, to hold a more relevant position in politics) a political counterweight with antiauthoritarian ideas. They have done that, not just purported to do.

>>24651199
What the actual autism is that website

Reminder:
>A good man does not argue; He who argues is not a good man.
Also
>A wise man has no extensive knowledge; He who has extensive knowledge is not a wise man.
and
>Much talk will of course come to a dead end. It is better to keep to the centre.

>>24651583
I found it in Wikipedia while I was searching for a free version to read. I was attracted by how autistic it looked, and it's very complete. It has a broken down version with the chinese characters' meaning apart from the regular translation so that you can read it more as if you knew chinese. I'm no expert to say it's the best version or better than others, though.

>>24651551
The "hegelian" dialectic is the only thing attributed to him broaching reality. I'm familiar with his tyranny abiding sophism lol, again you simply reiterate OP's and my own point with your NPC pilpul takes. I take the nietzschean view. Kvetching about /pol/ isnt an argument.
>bolshevists revolted en masse
holy reddit. They were literally funded by wall street
>>24651551
>haven't answered to the points in my post showing that christianity has been (at least hypocritically, to hold a more relevant position in politics) a political counterweight with antiauthoritarian ideas
That's pilpul nonsense. Christianity was the embodiment of authoritarianism for 1500 years. Only after the resurrgence of pre-christian idealism did anything remotely antiauthoritarian come about, and only as a front for the hidden banking aristocracy that remains in power to this day. The one you are paid to apologize for I imagine

>>24651551
>he established a negative historicist tendency in philosophy with no intentions to be logically consistent a priori
Why do people insist on opining on Hegel who haven't read him? In this case I'm thinking the poster might have skimmed some of Hegel's lectures, at best, as well as the famous quote about philosophy being its own time reflected in thought, which of course he could not understand properly because he hasn't really read Hegel. Hegel has a system (an "a priori" system if you like) which thinks it explains history, and it also concludes with Hegel. So it is nothing like historical relativism where 'who knows what's real it depends on the time lol'
>From a hegelian point of view one may say that progressivism or bolshevism are not contradictory to christianism but a result of aufhebung which implicitly contains christianism.
The point of aufhebung isn't "there are no contradictions anymore guys it's all the same", it's the the contradictions form a pattern. Again, never really read Hegel, or not with enough care to understand him.
>Marxist
Ah, that explains everything.

>>24650885 (OP)
As you can tell, almost all non European "schools of thought" have this weird shamanistic way of associating things with nature, it's most likely because their brains still haven't developed beyond the tribal age. Non Europeans think they're deep when they say things like "be rike watuh, my friendo" and "saar, drink the cow urine for it is the nectar of Shiva, saar"

>>24650885 (OP)
It's slave morality gobbledygook made for peasant Chinese who were afraid of dying every hour,

>>24651183
No anon, you're supposed to be bee
What can you not fathom?

>>24650900
>>24650901
You two are joking, right? Last time I took a brief look into the tao te ching there were like a million different translations of it, and they vary wildly in how much sense they make. And when they do make a lot of sense it's often because the translator is heavily filtering it through their preferences.

>>24651231
sounds like a dumb ideology

>>24650885 (OP)
Writer looks like a cool dude.

>>24651999
>Why do people insist on opining on Hegel who haven't read him? In this case I'm thinking the poster might have skimmed some of Hegel's lectures, at best, as well as the famous quote about philosophy being its own time reflected in thought, which of course he could not understand properly because he hasn't really read Hegel. Hegel has a system (an "a priori" system if you like) which thinks it explains history, and it also concludes with Hegel. So it is nothing like historical relativism where 'who knows what's real it depends on the time lol'

My post says that he set an historicist tendency among bad philosophers, not that he was part of that historicism. I know that Hegel considered analytics a moment of the dialectical method so he is not overtly irrational like some of his inheritors, who use his philosophy to justify their contradictions as a part of dialectics.

>The point of aufhebung isn't "there are no contradictions anymore guys it's all the same", it's the the contradictions form a pattern. Again, never really read Hegel, or not with enough care to understand him.

I know that's not Hegel's idea. Again, my whole post was about pointing out how people misuse Hegel, in this case by equating philosophies or ideologies just because they are historically related. And that was what the anon I was replying to was doing, since he said "Christianity is the jewish controlled oppostion hegelian dialectic force that empowers them lol" >>24651491

So there are two main misuses of Hegel's dialectic: Justifying our own mistakes and philosophical and political contradictions by saying that history is a constant reconciliation of contradictory movements, and equating the adversary movements as part of a single movement (possibly ignoring that Hegel thought that the cunning of reason makes such a genealogy to point at the Absolute teleologically, which is absurd to me but it shouldn't be so for the guy I replied to).

>Marxist
>Ah, that explains everything.

I'm not even remotely marxist.

>>24650885 (OP)
You haven’t read it

>>24652910
rupi kaur ahh faggotry

Lao Tsu said to Monkey, King of the land of fruit and flowers, Great Sage Equal of Heaven, Master of the 69 Changes, Possessor of the Dragon King of Under the Sea's magic elongating Wishing Rod, "Hey mate, watch my immortality pills." The greatest being in the Universe then ate all the immortality pills, and deciding to trick Lao Tzu shat into the pill case. Lao Tzu turned back and ate the "immortality pills."

Daoists eat Buddhist shit, more olds at 11.

>>24651199
>I am a retard
>ipso facto, you must be a retard too

Sorry bud some of us are literate

>>24650885 (OP)
Unlike Le Based Christianity which tells you to be like a lily of the field?

>>24653001
zoomgroids need lethal injections

>>24652047
if this is your state now you'll kill yourself on something like heidegger

>>24651345
1/ read the daodejing
2/ compare all available translations
3/ ????
4/ profit!

>>24652017
Stupidest shit I have read this week.
Congratulations.

>Westoid reactionary utterly BTFO by Daoist philosophy
Why is this so common?

I just ordered a copy of The Norton Anthology of World Religions: Daoism today for $57.

I hope this somehow in some manner angers the faggot OP.

>>24654263
Did you drink too much of Shiva's nectar today, saar?

>>24653001
You don’t understand the art of translation, do you?

>>>Westranny obsessed with the cataloging, categorizing, defining and the naming of things and putting everything into a nice little box
>All ideologies MUST have their own flag
>Meanwhile, daoism basically says out the gate: "don't get obsessed with the naming of things"
>Westranny goes REEEEEEEEEE, shits pant

Makes sense honestly.

>>24654294
No.

>>24654351
I love it so much.

>>24654351
Basè. Westoids are so young.

>>24654351
>>24654860
>>24654866
Jeet hands have typed this.

>Keep It Simple Stupid if it were a religion/philosophical tradition
>WTF!? I DON'T FUCKING GET IT, THIS IS FUCKING RETARDED, AHHHHHHHHH!!!
This will never not be fucking hilarious to me.

>>24650885 (OP)
>>24651199
Have you read the stoics?
To westerners, the most familiar, most appropriate introduction to the dao is stoic philosophy. Grasp it, understand it, reflect on it. Afterwards, read this book again, it will be like meeting an old acquaintance.

>>24650885 (OP)
Like it or not this is the civilization that'll dominate the world soon. Maybe learn a thing or two from them

>>24650885 (OP)
>>24655702
Daoists have always been a minority in China.

>>24655702
China is never gonna dominate the world. They can't even dominate Taiwan.