[lit-ideas] Re: : dao
- From: Omar Kusturica <omarkusto@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2015 12:30:36 +0100
It might have less to do with monotheism and more with the fact that I was
raised in a family of (modern) doctors. Traditional or alternative medicine
is not unknown in these parts either, and the people who go to these medics
do so regardless of religious beliefs. They are said to be quite efficient
for some things like fixing broken bones, but still I don't think that I
would go to them unless I have become completely convinced that the
conventional medicine isn't helping me.
I am quite sympathetic to polytheism on the intellectual level at least.
O.K.
On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 11:51 AM, John McCreery <john.mccreery@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
> The answer is they would likely try both if both were available. I will
> never forget a time when, during my fieldwork, my wife and I had a bad case
> of what the Taiwanese called "Canadian flu." A neighbor said he knew how to
> cure it. The recipe involved a traditional tea made of seven herbs, two
> tetracycline capsules (in those days they were sold over the counter in
> small sundries stores), and a bottle of a soft drink called American Apple
> Cider.
>
> I note your assumption that people with a problem must choose the ONE
> correct answer. I speculate that this assumption is due to growing up in a
> culture rooted in monotheistic religion. To polytheists like the Taiwanese,
> if one god may help you, so may another, and if you are in a hurry to deal
> with some problem it is wise to try as many options as possible since one
> or more may be helpful.
>
> Similar approaches may work in the Western world. When, for example, my
> daughter applied to the U.S. Naval Academy she needed a nomination from a
> member of the U.S. Congress. Since we were still Connecticut voters, she
> applied through both Rosa DeLauro, the Congresswoman who represents New
> Haven, CT and Joe Lieberman who was, at that point still Senator from
> Connecticut. Then, to improve her chances, she also applied through Herb
> Bateman, then the Republican Congressman from the Virginia district where
> her grandparents lived. As it turned out, all three made her an alternate
> in their list of nominations. Someone who was ahead of her on one of the
> three lists decided not to accept the nomination (they might have preferred
> West Point or Swarthmore, no way of knowing). At any rate she was accepted
> at the last moment and chose Annapolis over Duke and Georgetown, where she
> had also been accepted.
>
> A more common example is using a diverse portfolio to hedge investments in
> the stock market. Not knowing what investment will result in the best
> returns, you invest in promising companies in several industries,
> sacrificing the smaller probability of becoming rich for the larger
> probability of a reasonable return.
>
> John
>
> On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 6:34 PM, Omar Kusturica <omarkusto@xxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>
>> As to the practical situation, would these people choose traditional
>> medicine OVER modern medicine ? If I were stuck in a Taiwanese village sick
>> or injured and without access to a modern hospital I might also have not
>> much choice but to turn to a traditional Taiwanese medic.
>>
>> O.K.
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 10:21 AM, John McCreery <john.mccreery@xxxxxxxxx>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Omar,
>>>
>>> I agree completely. But, to note one more example, the naive realism
>>> embodied in Chinese medicine and the naive realism embodied in Ayurvedic
>>> medicine do not conceive the world or the body in exactly the same terms.
>>> Someone trained to think in terms of modern Western scientific medicine can
>>> see both as plausible, if ultimately erroneous, accounts of how things
>>> work, commonsensical if you like. The detailed differences can still be
>>> quite striking.
>>>
>>> John
>>>
>>> On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 6:10 PM, Omar Kusturica <omarkusto@xxxxxxxxx>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> The practical procedures might work rather independently of the
>>>> religious or metaphysical ideas that are associated with them. As an
>>>> example, the ancient Babylonian astronomers / astrologists could predict
>>>> the eclypses of the Sun and the Moon fairly accurately despite of the
>>>> various mystical ideas that they associated with these heavenly bodies.
>>>> Kepler's contributions in astronomy have been useful despite of the fact
>>>> that he thought that the stars were actually sentient beings. In comparison
>>>> to that the five agents seem fairly commonsensical - and again I am
>>>> reminded of some pre-Socratic philosophers who spoke of similar elements.
>>>>
>>>> O.K.
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 9:50 AM, John McCreery <john.mccreery@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Isn't "naive realism" almost as slippery a notion as the Dao? Consider
>>>>> a small ethnographic example. While doing fieldwork in northeastern
>>>>> Taiwan,
>>>>> Stevan Harrell conducted a small survey that included the question, "Why
>>>>> do
>>>>> you participate in festivals?" where the festivals in question celebrate
>>>>> the birthdays of various Chinese deities. The sample was not statistically
>>>>> significant, but the numbers are still interesting. Three of Harrell's
>>>>> fourteen informants were what he labeled "local theologians." Each had
>>>>> constructed an idiosyncratic philosophy incorporating elements from
>>>>> traditional Chinese cosmology. One, an old woman, was the village atheist.
>>>>> She said bluntly that the whole business was nonsense. The remaining ten
>>>>> said only, "It is the custom." Harrell didn't, as I recall, press the
>>>>> issue, but having done fieldwork myself in central Taiwan, I suspect that
>>>>> even the village atheist would turn when sick to Chinese medicine, whose
>>>>> explanation incorporates the same sorts of elements from traditional
>>>>> Chinese cosmology as the village theologians' philosophies: at least the
>>>>> Yin and Yang and the five agents (earth, water, fire, wood, and metal).
>>>>> The
>>>>> elements in question are considered part of everyday reality by billions
>>>>> of
>>>>> Chinese and have been so for more than two millennia. Does that make them
>>>>> naively realistic?
>>>>>
>>>>> John
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 4:15 PM, Adriano Palma <Palma@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Though one of the few things detectable by the dao is that whether
>>>>>> there isn’t or there is god as the religious people claim is utterly
>>>>>> irrelevant (to be issuing a disclaimer: one the features that show how
>>>>>> stupid idiots like Heidegger are is to claim this that and the other,
>>>>>> then
>>>>>> add that that is the destiny of western metaphysics, & it is the destiny
>>>>>> of
>>>>>> imbecility, since lots of thought systems have no metaphysics, if one
>>>>>> were
>>>>>> forced to adopt one would be something like what the intellectuals call
>>>>>> realism, or naïve realism, something along the lines of ‘yes, there is a
>>>>>> universe or a few universes’, let us move to something interesting.
>>>>>> Obsessive compulsive personalities, such as dummett, rorty, Davidson, &
>>>>>> McDowell et al immediately debate whether or not there is really reality
>>>>>> or
>>>>>> just a bit or what what not of reality is real, preferred targets gods,
>>>>>> numbers, moral valuations, truth.. & und so weiter, the dao is silent…)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *From:* lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:
>>>>>> lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] *On Behalf Of *Omar Kusturica
>>>>>> *Sent:* 03 March 2015 17:43
>>>>>> *To:* lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>>> *Subject:* [lit-ideas] Re: dao
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hm... maybe it's just me, but Tao or Dao sounds a little like theus
>>>>>> or deus.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> O.K.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 7:43 AM, John McCreery <
>>>>>> john.mccreery@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Nice point about the capitalization and the lack of any such thing in
>>>>>> written Chinese. The Western habit of capitalizing "Dao" or "Tao" is, one
>>>>>> suspects, a hangover from Christian missionaries who saw in dao an
>>>>>> equivalent to "God."
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> John
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 3:32 PM, Adriano Palma <Palma@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This wholly correct. Self evidently virtually nothing **is** a
>>>>>> capital character (Chinese is not alphabetical, classical is
>>>>>> ~76.000-82.000
>>>>>> characters, “simplified” [simplified = the print you see on the RPC news
>>>>>> papers] is relatively smaller and graphically eased on.)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The Wade-G has drawbacks and it was abandoned, decades ago, and
>>>>>> pinyin is commonly used when writing chinese alphabetically. Phonetically
>>>>>> ‘t’ ‘d’ is not marked distinguishable in mandarin (Chinese of the north),
>>>>>> quite like ‘p’ ‘b’ in Arabic, both classical & modern. Nothing hinges on
>>>>>> how the English spelling of dao is executed, slightly more acute is the
>>>>>> question of what dao is (something along the lines of ‘the nature of’
>>>>>> ‘the
>>>>>> way of’) in my opinion dao is not metaphysics, though I have been rather
>>>>>> more than I should if I were an expert by the work of chad Hansen, which
>>>>>> –
>>>>>> I take it—is available by oxford university press (a masterpiece, called
>>>>>> daoist interpretation of Chinese thoughts)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Chad is also very informative on (webpage/urL)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.philosophy.hku.hk/ch/
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *From:* lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:
>>>>>> lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] *On Behalf Of *John McCreery
>>>>>> *Sent:* 03 March 2015 08:22
>>>>>> *To:* Lit-Ideas
>>>>>> *Subject:* [lit-ideas] Re: that and this
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is lower-casing "dao" instead of writing "Dao" significant?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> P.S. For those who may not know already, writing "Dao" instead of
>>>>>> "Tao" is only a difference in romanization, "Dao" is in pinyin, the
>>>>>> romanization adopted by the Peoples Republic of China. "Tao" is in the
>>>>>> Wade-Giles romanization that was, at least back in the sixties, more
>>>>>> common
>>>>>> in Western writing about China. Most scholarly writing now seems to have
>>>>>> shifted to pinyin.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> John
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 2:25 PM, Adriano Palma <Palma@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The dao will get to you
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *From:* lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:
>>>>>> lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] *On Behalf Of *Omar Kusturica
>>>>>> *Sent:* 03 March 2015 02:47
>>>>>> *To:* lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>>> *Subject:* [lit-ideas] Re: that and this
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I give up on Thaoism then.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> O.K.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 1:19 AM, John McCreery <
>>>>>> john.mccreery@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The most recent edition of the Taoist Canon is several thousand pages
>>>>>> long, and filled with prayers, incantations, and instructions for
>>>>>> elaborate
>>>>>> rituals to accompany them.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That said, if by "Taoism" you mean only the texts ascribed Lao-tzu
>>>>>> and the Chuang-tzu, it might be worth considering the line from the
>>>>>> former
>>>>>> that reads, "To the Tao we are straw dogs,"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> a statement usually interpreted as conveying the utter indifference
>>>>>> of the universe to our desires.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> P.S. "Straw dogs" refers to images of dogs burned in ceremonies, in
>>>>>> which they themselves have no say whatsoever.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> P.P.S. Yes, there are contradictions between austere advice to adapt
>>>>>> oneself to an indifferent universe and producing the materials that now
>>>>>> fill the Taoist Canon. But if the primordial texts are right, the Tao
>>>>>> doesn't care.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> P.P.P.S. Should anyone be interested in exploring this topic more
>>>>>> deeply, I highly recommend Francois Jullien (1999) *The Propensity
>>>>>> of Things: Toward a History of Efficacy in China *[translated from
>>>>>> the French original *Pour une histoire de l'efficacité en Chine, *
>>>>>> 1992.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Imagine, not that we are chessmen, who at least retain a distinctive
>>>>>> character and may win or lose in combat with those of different character
>>>>>> but instead Go stones, featureless, anonymous, restricted to the point on
>>>>>> the board where a player puts us, our fate determined by nothing we do
>>>>>> but
>>>>>> instead dependent entirely on our position in the pattern of the game.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Consider the implications of this view for strategy, politics,
>>>>>> poetry, art.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> John
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sent from my iPad
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2015/03/02, at 22:07, Omar Kusturica <omarkusto@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I am thinking that Taoism would be the right religion for Mike and
>>>>>> me - there is a couple of texts to read which aren't too long and you
>>>>>> have
>>>>>> done with your catechism. Also, there isn't really much in the way of
>>>>>> prayer, as far as I am informed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> O.K.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 5:44 AM, John McCreery <
>>>>>> john.mccreery@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Bravo! Bravissimo! We have a sage among us.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> John
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 1:11 PM, Mike Geary <
>>>>>> jejunejesuit.geary2@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Lawrence writes: "I suspect Mike Geary has read more of Emerson than
>>>>>> I have – my loss."
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I doubt it. I tend not to read much literary criticism and
>>>>>> commentary since they often contradict my prejudices and I have neither
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> interest nor the energy to go read the actual works -- for what? just to
>>>>>> mount a defense of my prejudices? They don't need any defense, they're
>>>>>> prejudices for Christsake. Philosophy's not so too awfully different.
>>>>>> Except for logic, philosophy seems to be the perfect field of study for
>>>>>> me. Since the beginning of time and creativity, no one has ever put
>>>>>> forward a philosophy that was falsifiable (as they love to say in the
>>>>>> sciences). In short, whatever I assert is undeniably assertable, and if
>>>>>> assertable then, real in the assertion. Just as one of Saul Bellows'
>>>>>> characters said (in Gravity's Rainbow ?) when challenged to give a rhyme
>>>>>> for "month" responded with: "Onth. Onth rhymes with month." There's no
>>>>>> such word, they said. "Ah, but you're wrong," Bellows' man bellowed. "In
>>>>>> the assertion: onth rhymes with "month", onth is the subject of the
>>>>>> sentence, and as we all know, the subject of a sentence is a noun and all
>>>>>> nouns are words, ergo, "onth" is a word and it rhymes with month. Now
>>>>>> that's my kind of philosophy. But that's Literature, not Philosophy you
>>>>>> object. Alas, you're so literal. Philosophy is just plotless
>>>>>> literature.
>>>>>> Both are about ignorance and wonder, the only difference between
>>>>>> Literature
>>>>>> and Philosophy is that Literature has a lot more wiggle room. Both are
>>>>>> trying to find out what the hell's going on with us. Now it's been my
>>>>>> experience that you can usually avoid being nailed down a lot easier when
>>>>>> arguing Lit Crit than arguing philosophy because some philosophers seem
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> actually be trying to make sense of what they're saying. There are no
>>>>>> such
>>>>>> straight- jackets in literature. An example from philosophy: pick out
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> most cogent of the following: (1) I think ...in a manner of speaking.
>>>>>> (2)
>>>>>> I think I am therefore I think . (3) I think I think I am. (4) I
>>>>>> think I
>>>>>> am, therefore I think I am. (5) I think I am not therefore I am. (6)
>>>>>> I
>>>>>> am therefore I think I am. (7) I think not, therefore... (8) I am I
>>>>>> before I am knowing I think. (9) I am thinking that I am thinking
>>>>>> that I
>>>>>> think. Etc., etc., etc.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I've always like Literature and Philosophy because both have always
>>>>>> seemed so wondrously frivolous and unfalsifiable and yet so urgently near
>>>>>> to my own existence. Although ideas are often argued with passion, none
>>>>>> of
>>>>>> it matters --- except in the challenge to one's own little cosmos.
>>>>>> Existence doesn't seem to give a shit what we think. Often I wish I
>>>>>> were
>>>>>> far, far more read into philosophy, but I know I'll never be .
>>>>>> Occasionally I'll stick my toes into some inviting waters and thrill to
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> confusion and challenge of it. To me it's fun, even when most of the
>>>>>> arguments leave me out in left field. Life is fun. I would never have
>>>>>> believed that being 71 can be so damn much fun. Let me be hopelessly,
>>>>>> totally, completely wrong, I don't care. I'm jubilant in my error.
>>>>>> All I
>>>>>> want is to get as many Existence kisses as I can before I go where no
>>>>>> thinking goes...therefore ...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>>
>>>>>> John McCreery
>>>>>> The Word Works, Ltd., Yokohama, JAPAN
>>>>>> Tel. +81-45-314-9324
>>>>>> jlm@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>>> http://www.wordworks.jp/
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>>
>>>>>> John McCreery
>>>>>> The Word Works, Ltd., Yokohama, JAPAN
>>>>>> Tel. +81-45-314-9324
>>>>>> jlm@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>>> http://www.wordworks.jp/
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>>
>>>>>> John McCreery
>>>>>> The Word Works, Ltd., Yokohama, JAPAN
>>>>>> Tel. +81-45-314-9324
>>>>>> jlm@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>>> http://www.wordworks.jp/
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> John McCreery
>>>>> The Word Works, Ltd., Yokohama, JAPAN
>>>>> Tel. +81-45-314-9324
>>>>> jlm@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>> http://www.wordworks.jp/
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> John McCreery
>>> The Word Works, Ltd., Yokohama, JAPAN
>>> Tel. +81-45-314-9324
>>> jlm@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> http://www.wordworks.jp/
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> John McCreery
> The Word Works, Ltd., Yokohama, JAPAN
> Tel. +81-45-314-9324
> jlm@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://www.wordworks.jp/
>
Other related posts:
