Phil 101 Week 2

This week we’ll be taking a look at two Asian Sages. To this day there is disagreement among philosophy professors as to whether or not Eastern thought should be studied in philosophy. Thankfully, more and more courses are popping up in universities that deal with the Eastern world. (I personally studied under one of the primary Eastern philosophers of the Southern California region: Professor Sandra Wawrytko.) I feel that many Eastern thinkers have a lot to offer. The two thinkers we are studying, Lao-Tzu (below) and Confucius (below, right), developed their philosophies in a time of political and social turmoil. As we will see, many philosophers develop their positions in response to the world they are born into. Thus sometimes understanding their world helps us to understand their philosophical position. This is especially significant in contrast with the Western philosophers who ask things like, What is truth? These Eastern philosophers, seeing war among their people, instead asked, “What is the way?” The Asian sages were very concerned with both a philosophy and how that philosophy could be actualized in their society. Lao-Tzu Lau-Tzu is an interesting figure about which almost nothing is known. What is known is that, in seeking exile, he was asked to write his teachings down. He did, and he produced the Tao Te Ching. (watch the video to the right for an overview of one of the chapters from this book). We should consider this for a second. Think of all of the “teachers” of our time—whether they write self-help books or anything else—and imagine them being asked to write down their wisdom. Do you think Lao-Tzu was in it for the money? He was seeking exile, seeking disconnection from society. The modern “teachers” I refer to don’t need to be asked to write yet another book helpless Americans will buy in great numbers; they might as well throw their teachings (and their books) right in your face.
	Can you tell where my feelings are on this issue? OK, so some self help books do have some useful information. Not all are seeking money. But there is nevertheless a clear distinction between Lau-Tzu and the modern-day Guru. One of the primary teachings of the Tao Te Ching—and, as Soccio points out, as we read in the first line—is that the Tao cannot be expressed in words. The Tao is something greater. Words can help us understand it, but the Tao goes beyond. Lau-Tzu is expressing a truth that other later philosophers also struggled with: the problem of language. Language cannot fully represent the world. On the other hand, the Tao is still behind everything; it underlies the very words that tell us it is greater than words. Think of Star Wars. What is it in the Star Wars movies that is behind everything? The Force, right? There is no question that George Lucas, the creator of Star Wars, was influenced by Eastern thinking. (By the way, there is a book called Star Wars and Philosopy if anyone is interested.) Consider this line: “He who speaks does not know, and he who knows does not speak” (Tao Te Ching). How many people do you know who willingly tell you "how it is?" This silence Lau Tzu recommends is a far cry from our, general, idea of wisdom in America. Lau-Tzu based his actions on the two opposing forces: yin and yang (as described in Soccio). Since people of his time were fighting for control (yang), Lau-Tzu proposed the opposite (yin), or the way of inaction. Contrary to what it seems, this doesn’t mean literally doing nothing! It means that, rather than attempt direct control over our environment, we should take subtle indirect actions. So, for example, if some teenagers leave beer cans on the beach, we shouldn’t lecture them, we should simply pick up the beer cans and put them in a recycling bin. This certainly does sound crazy, and there have been numerous objections to this philosophy throughout the years. Then again, consider the fighting between democrats and republicans in our own nation. This is what Lau-Tzu is responding to: two opposing forces bickering with each other. I’ll leave it up to you to decide whether this is a good or a bad thing, whether you agree with Lau-Tzu or with the way of direct action.
Confucius Confucius was more active as a teacher than was Lau-Tzu. Confucius was probably the most obvious humanistic (see Soccio) philosopher. He emphasized the idea that humans could change and better their present circumstances through their own intelligence and effort. Confucius was a, in modern terminology, down-to-earth philosopher. He reasoned that we shouldn’t think about things outside of the realm of immediate human existence. Confucius stressed the social over the individual. It is important to note that Confucius saw himself as the preserver of a dying culture. He was not coming up with new ideas, but figuring out ways to preserve the old. Confucius preached and practiced what’s known as the golden mean or “chung-yung.” One of the many interesting things Confucius said about the way, or the Tao, is that “the intelligent go beyond and the stupid to not come up to it.” In our society, we often think ignorance is limiting, but we rarely think this of intelligence. Confucius thinks that being too smart can be an impediment. What do you think of this? Confucius felt that ceremony or “li” was extremely important, insofar as it establishes and maintains harmony. We can stray from the way or “Tao” if we do not follow ceremony and its many forms. This marks a difference in the interpretation of “Tao” from Lau-Tzu to Confucius. Tao for Confucius was more wedded to human action than to some force underlying everything. You might be thinking that this sounds very superficial: who cares about ceremony and good manners? But Confucius felt that following the way and following ceremony were inextricably linked. It is significant that being born into a noble family or being of noble blood have no place in Confucius’ philosophy. Say what you want about his system, Confucius is concerned with pure virtue of thought and of action. You’ll notice that we did not discuss the Buddha and that he is part of chapter two. While I undoubtedly think he is an important figure to study, first, I don’t want to overburden you as students with too much to read and, second, I think his teachings, and the teachings of Buddhism, are more complex. It would be more beneficial to study them in detail than to do a brief overview.

This week we’ll be taking a look at two Asian Sages. To this day there is disagreement among philosophy professors as to whether or not Eastern thought should be studied in philosophy. Thankfully, more and more courses are popping up in universities that deal with the Eastern world. (I personally studied under one of the primary Eastern philosophers of the Southern California region: Professor Sandra Wawrytko.) I feel that many Eastern thinkers have a lot to offer.

The two thinkers we are studying, Lao-Tzu (below) and Confucius (below, right), developed their philosophies in a time of political and social turmoil. As we will see, many philosophers develop their positions in response to the world they are born into. Thus sometimes understanding their world helps us to understand their philosophical position. This is especially significant in contrast with the Western philosophers who ask things like, What is truth? These Eastern philosophers, seeing war among their people, instead asked, “What is the way?” The Asian sages were very concerned with both a philosophy and how that philosophy could be actualized in their society.

Lao-Tzu

Lau-Tzu is an interesting figure about which almost nothing is known. What is known is that, in seeking exile, he was asked to write his teachings down. He did, and he produced the Tao Te Ching. (watch the video to the right for an overview of one of the chapters from this book). We should consider this for a second. Think of all of the “teachers” of our time—whether they write self-help books or anything else—and imagine them being asked to write down their wisdom. Do you think Lao-Tzu was in it for the money? He was seeking exile, seeking disconnection from society. The modern “teachers” I refer to don’t need to be asked to write yet another book helpless Americans will buy in great numbers; they might as well throw their teachings (and their books) right in your face.

Can you tell where my feelings are on this issue? OK, so some self help books do have some useful information. Not all are seeking money. But there is nevertheless a clear distinction between Lau-Tzu and the modern-day Guru.

One of the primary teachings of the Tao Te Ching—and, as Soccio points out, as we read in the first line—is that the Tao cannot be expressed in words. The Tao is something greater. Words can help us understand it, but the Tao goes beyond. Lau-Tzu is expressing a truth that other later philosophers also struggled with: the problem of language. Language cannot fully represent the world. On the other hand, the Tao is still behind everything; it underlies the very words that tell us it is greater than words. Think of Star Wars. What is it in the Star Wars movies that is behind everything? The Force, right? There is no question that George Lucas, the creator of Star Wars, was influenced by Eastern thinking. (By the way, there is a book called Star Wars and Philosopy if anyone is interested.)

Consider this line: “He who speaks does not know, and he who knows does not speak” (Tao Te Ching). How many people do you know who willingly tell you "how it is?" This silence Lau Tzu recommends is a far cry from our, general, idea of wisdom in America.

Lau-Tzu based his actions on the two opposing forces: yin and yang (as described in Soccio). Since people of his time were fighting for control (yang), Lau-Tzu proposed the opposite (yin), or the way of inaction. Contrary to what it seems, this doesn’t mean literally doing nothing! It means that, rather than attempt direct control over our environment, we should take subtle indirect actions. So, for example, if some teenagers leave beer cans on the beach, we shouldn’t lecture them, we should simply pick up the beer cans and put them in a recycling bin. This certainly does sound crazy, and there have been numerous objections to this philosophy throughout the years. Then again, consider the fighting between democrats and republicans in our own nation. This is what Lau-Tzu is responding to: two opposing forces bickering with each other. I’ll leave it up to you to decide whether this is a good or a bad thing, whether you agree with Lau-Tzu or with the way of direct action.

Confucius

Confucius was more active as a teacher than was Lau-Tzu. Confucius was probably the most obvious humanistic (see Soccio) philosopher. He emphasized the idea that humans could change and better their present circumstances through their own intelligence and effort. Confucius was a, in modern terminology, down-to-earth philosopher. He reasoned that we shouldn’t think about things outside of the realm of immediate human existence. Confucius stressed the social over the individual.

It is important to note that Confucius saw himself as the preserver of a dying culture. He was not coming up with new ideas, but figuring out ways to preserve the old. Confucius preached and practiced what’s known as the golden mean or “chung-yung.”

One of the many interesting things Confucius said about the way, or the Tao, is that “the intelligent go beyond and the stupid to not come up to it.” In our society, we often think ignorance is limiting, but we rarely think this of intelligence. Confucius thinks that being too smart can be an impediment. What do you think of this?

Confucius felt that ceremony or “li” was extremely important, insofar as it establishes and maintains harmony. We can stray from the way or “Tao” if we do not follow ceremony and its many forms. This marks a difference in the interpretation of “Tao” from Lau-Tzu to Confucius. Tao for Confucius was more wedded to human action than to some force underlying everything. You might be thinking that this sounds very superficial: who cares about ceremony and good manners? But Confucius felt that following the way and following ceremony were inextricably linked.

It is significant that being born into a noble family or being of noble blood have no place in Confucius’ philosophy. Say what you want about his system, Confucius is concerned with pure virtue of thought and of action.

You’ll notice that we did not discuss the Buddha and that he is part of chapter two. While I undoubtedly think he is an important figure to study, first, I don’t want to overburden you as students with too much to read and, second, I think his teachings, and the teachings of Buddhism, are more complex. It would be more beneficial to study them in detail than to do a brief overview.