Insightful piece, Yuxuan! So many gems and concepts for reflections. I particularly like this: “Wu-wei is not putting yourself in a state of constant reactions. Therefore, you need to improve your mental awareness.”
“Therefore, wu-wei is about becoming aware of what the circumstances are transforming into instead of being driven by one’s subjective preferences and inclinations.”
I think one of the most difficult aspects of Taoism for me, despite my persistent engagement with it, is the place of ethical activism. Despite where the circumstances are going, standing up for human rights always requires acting, contrary to those circumstances.
This is indeed a most challenging scenario for Taoist political thinking. Following the Tao and the relationship with a specific political authority, in many cases, can not be reconciled. The ideal of a sort of harmonious coexistence is not possible to realize.
Depending on the evolution of circumstances, the traditional Taoists would usually have two options: 1) retreat from the political scene when there is political stability and peace, and 2) in times of social and political chaos, stand out to help restore political order and leave the responsibilities of governing to the Confucians, which means sometimes they have to sacrifice themselves in defending the Tao.
In terms of human rights, this is the norm of the time we are in. So, it must be defended, and human liberty must be preserved, even in circumstances where confrontation between the individual and the political is inevitable.
What I saw most clearly in this is the idea of non action in the inner world, not clinging to a single thought or vision, rather than anything relating to non action in the external world. Thanks, the pointer was very much appreciated 🙂
“This is contrary to wu-wei. If we understand it as non-arbitrary actions, then following what is popular and conventional can prove to be disastrous.”
this is a conclusion i did not state but had guiding me in my piece on Daoism and anarchism. this is an attitude i find to be starkly anarchist in nature. Ursula K. Le Guin writes of the anarchist ethos being something along the lines of “living as one might, not allowing the will of others to supersede one’s own.” i find, after reading much anarchist literature, this to be a compelling summary of the subjective thought of an anarchist.
it is one element that trips me up a bit. on one hand, this spirit exists within both, but on the other, anarchist praxis will often lead one to force the issue, so to speak. yet anarchism seeks such a state of affairs; that is, with the principles of Wuwei essentially reigning as they do. it is an acknowledgment of nature and our place in it. i would not doubt that many Daoists would lean towards anarchism (or something similar) as a political philosophy, but it is certainly not necessary, and is up for debate. after all, Baopuzi supported a hierarchical social order, to some extent.
Thanks very much for sharing your insights! I agree with you on the overlapping elements between Daoist political philosophy and anarchism. In a strict sense, Lao Tzu and Chuang Tzu, and the neo-Taoists in the Wei-Jin era, would not reject a limited government model. Their concern is very much about the quality of a political order and leadership quality. So, there is always this inherent tension between the individual and the political establishment.
Most informative and insightful. Time will tell if contemplation and practice will help me to internalize some of these valuable lessons. Thank you, Yuxuan Francis Liu.
Insightful piece, Yuxuan! So many gems and concepts for reflections. I particularly like this: “Wu-wei is not putting yourself in a state of constant reactions. Therefore, you need to improve your mental awareness.”
Thanks for the compliment, Peck Gee :)
“Therefore, wu-wei is about becoming aware of what the circumstances are transforming into instead of being driven by one’s subjective preferences and inclinations.”
Beautifully crafted. Terrifically difficult. Thanks.
I think one of the most difficult aspects of Taoism for me, despite my persistent engagement with it, is the place of ethical activism. Despite where the circumstances are going, standing up for human rights always requires acting, contrary to those circumstances.
What’s your take?
Thanks for sharing your thoughts!
This is indeed a most challenging scenario for Taoist political thinking. Following the Tao and the relationship with a specific political authority, in many cases, can not be reconciled. The ideal of a sort of harmonious coexistence is not possible to realize.
Depending on the evolution of circumstances, the traditional Taoists would usually have two options: 1) retreat from the political scene when there is political stability and peace, and 2) in times of social and political chaos, stand out to help restore political order and leave the responsibilities of governing to the Confucians, which means sometimes they have to sacrifice themselves in defending the Tao.
In terms of human rights, this is the norm of the time we are in. So, it must be defended, and human liberty must be preserved, even in circumstances where confrontation between the individual and the political is inevitable.
What I saw most clearly in this is the idea of non action in the inner world, not clinging to a single thought or vision, rather than anything relating to non action in the external world. Thanks, the pointer was very much appreciated 🙂
Thanks for sharing your thoughts! I like how you put it, very well said!
Thank you. This made a lot of sense.
Thank you, I'm glad it is helpful.
“This is contrary to wu-wei. If we understand it as non-arbitrary actions, then following what is popular and conventional can prove to be disastrous.”
this is a conclusion i did not state but had guiding me in my piece on Daoism and anarchism. this is an attitude i find to be starkly anarchist in nature. Ursula K. Le Guin writes of the anarchist ethos being something along the lines of “living as one might, not allowing the will of others to supersede one’s own.” i find, after reading much anarchist literature, this to be a compelling summary of the subjective thought of an anarchist.
it is one element that trips me up a bit. on one hand, this spirit exists within both, but on the other, anarchist praxis will often lead one to force the issue, so to speak. yet anarchism seeks such a state of affairs; that is, with the principles of Wuwei essentially reigning as they do. it is an acknowledgment of nature and our place in it. i would not doubt that many Daoists would lean towards anarchism (or something similar) as a political philosophy, but it is certainly not necessary, and is up for debate. after all, Baopuzi supported a hierarchical social order, to some extent.
Thanks very much for sharing your insights! I agree with you on the overlapping elements between Daoist political philosophy and anarchism. In a strict sense, Lao Tzu and Chuang Tzu, and the neo-Taoists in the Wei-Jin era, would not reject a limited government model. Their concern is very much about the quality of a political order and leadership quality. So, there is always this inherent tension between the individual and the political establishment.
Most informative and insightful. Time will tell if contemplation and practice will help me to internalize some of these valuable lessons. Thank you, Yuxuan Francis Liu.
Thank you, Leon. I'm glad you find it useful!