An "Ubermensch" sounds a lot like a Cakravartin (Buddhism) or Tithankara (Jainism) in the "ascended holy men" system of rank in these Dharmic religions.

I was a bit suspicious when he mentioned factories and warheads in Chapter 46, though clearly I should've been more suspicious. This translation is like if someone found a big, beautiful wolf in the woods, gutted it alive, and shoddily taxidermied it, then sold it as an "authentic pet wolf", or something.

This video presents very thought-provoking ideas in an easily digestible format! Thank you so much for sharing your thoughts and research on this story. Indeed, "use" is relative to each individual. What seems useful to one person, may seem useless to another. What is really fascinating, though, is that sometimes, we have no idea about the use of something seemingly useless. The example of how the study of the arts and philosophy is usually deemed as useless, is a wonderful example of this. The thought pattern is that if an activity doesn't seem to serve any "practical benefits" to the economy, then it must be useless. But why is that? Are these seemingly useless things actually useless when you think about it? What about the inherent worth of the individual? Does that not matter? But what is the economy, if not something driven by people?

Name change? I hope you're returning soon.

17:28

What is #DaoPantheism ? It is a combination of Far Eastern and Western philosophy/religion. It is based on the teachings of Lao Tzu (East) and Spinoza (West). But there are also modern influences such as the teachings of Alan Watts, who already anticipated this combination.

Derek Lin's version!!!

What didi Huan faizi Write? Are they seperate from the author of the huananzi? Or is it an alternate spelling?

Norden has a great series of videos on Confucianism and Daoism, and buddhism and the interactions and history between them in the Han dyansty.

If you want a more traditional approach, I recommend Louis Komjathy's translation. He treats the text with care, and sheds light on how it is read as a guide to spiritual life and practice. So it's spiritual, practical and analytical at the same time.

I sort of of have been looking at it through multiple lenses, although my study began out of classic literature inspired by Daoism, but when I started to study the philosophical daoism, at first there seemed to be a conflict, but over time I have realized there is less than I thought.

From this framework, would the Hunananzi also fit into the "new Daoists" or confucians who tried to encorporate the book of changes laozi, and zhuangzi as well?

Yeah, confucianism was often synergized with Daoism, An key example of that in action is the Huananzi. It argues that daoism is about the deeper truths of the world and self cultivation. Confucianism also argues for self-cultivation in a different way. And that Zhuangzi's principles should be applied by seeking self cultivation in the broader nature of the world, rather than the sprouts of our desires. But that Confucianism and other practices act as the branches which Ironically, he actually has a pretty complex book, but the author argues it is simpler than trying to directly understand and weed through a dozen or so other books. But he has the core idea, that until you get the moral and ethical elements, the character of your own life right, then trying to govern is pointless. Wu-Wei is mostly personal, but within the sphere of government, it is not doing nothing. But rather not trying to pervert things away from what is natural. Rather than prohibiting things, it investigates and encourages according to the broader nature of reality. And as a result, government should be grounded in the sciences, (Also divination.) The Seasons. I would argue there were significant conflicts between daoists and confucians, but to a larger extent it is the disagrements of Zhunagzi and the Confucian Mongzi(Mocius), than the traditions as a whole, and by the late Han dynasty, and the increasing influence of budhism, they had to an extent synsrgized, and the biggest conflict was between the budhists and the confucians. (And daoism synergized with both to an extent. although was still a distinct religion.) I would disagree that it can't be placed politically, but I would say that it is more concerned with the individual and social relationships. Confucians weren't anything like the democrats, they were very socially conservative. And view the family as the foundation of the whole society, And morality as an extension of the values you feel in the family to others outside it.

Shitshitshit. Yep, anxiety hits the fan. And I am at the toilet. Such an imminent and bladder-full way of being. A being towards an anxiousness. Being-towards-balls-and-arse. I don't know jackshit about Heidegger, but I am out there. I do ask what is the being, with CAPITAL b. Wait, with capital B. Being. Oh ok, Dasein. I'm here, I care. I have to accept that I'm gonna die? Am I indifferently tranquil in the face of my own death for I have natality and mortality, fatality. Fatalities are hard to pull off.

Thank you so much for taking the trouble to do this. I am completely persuaded. Well done. To be honest it is the complete lack of humility, and indeed respect for the text, shown by SM and that you clearly demonstrate that really appals me. (Emeritus Professor, University of Bristol, UK)

Socrates makes a really great point on people assuming death is bad. Ive never heard this argument before and it’s is a wild realization honestly. Those few words really makes me re think a lot

You need more views on this. Stephen made his money. He knew what he was doing.

Oh that's why there is a missing double quote. 11:32

Nothing exists and nothing does not exist?

You can find the list of books Nietzsche had access to in reference to Buddhism study. It was the end of the 19th century and the sources were very limited for westerners by then (they still are today). Nietzsche understanding on Buddhism was incomplete

Bro it is not dooka 😂 Du-kha (maybe see a video) Omg your pronunciations are killing me😂

what a great video, I watched this in the morning and I got a long day ahead of me, gives me something to ponder on during the day. Thanks

Thank you for sharing the wisdom....❤

💚🐉🇨🇳🐉💚 🌎☸️☯️☸️🌍

As ever with Heidegger, I'm left with the feeling that I've just been reading bad poetry. Good video though.

θα σας σκοτωνει μαζικα ο σαπιος δουλος σιωνιστης και εσεις θα φωναζετε ζητω η δημοκρατια αμην! νο τζοκ

Your statement that Buddhism was a Reaction to Brahminism is wrong. It was Buddhism that came first and Brahminism that came as a Reaction to Buddhism. The mainstream historians have fucked up big time with this simple fact.

Awesome video Ian! Really liked the formal aspect and organisation of it. Showing books for further reading was 5 stars. Definetely gained a subscriber!

Thank you

My religion is that of the Egyptian Djedi The predecessor religion to Christianity, combined with the philosophies of Lau Tzu.

Ridiculous! You are free to chose immortality or suicide, so wise man is happy, not touched by death, while unwise dies eternally and kills eternally - can't You see it? Secret known to children, wise good people everywhere only Academia ignores it! Lies are steps towards death, truth is immortality, no surprise he is nazi - his choice...like Judas's. Body dies, not me, nor You!

Thank you, I enjoyed this video. There is no doubt that the study of Daoist religion has value in the same way as the study of Catholicism or any other religion has value, historically and practically. However I must point out that Daoism as a religion is exactly that, a religion, and where it gets its inspiration from either initially or latterly does not make it part of those same things. It is clear that Daoist religion has co-opted a range of beliefs and rituals from a wide range of sources. Like many religions, I believe that studies could benefit by focusing on the psychological power of co-opting popular beliefs or other contemporary ideas to consolidate and build your own religion. Historically all religions have done this and religious Daoism is certainly no exception. Just because it chose to also use the name of Daoism, in my mind doesn't make it part of philosophical Daoism and in so many ways has confused everybody both past and present. In this regard, I don't believe that it is helpful to continue to include religious Daoism with philosophical Daoism as if it can be conceptually seen as a single entity when on so many levels they are not!

Parminedes was more so "anti-Western" because Western Metaphysics developed out of an antithetical view that rejected Parminedes.

it makes sense to me that the biggest translation of the book, is not actually a translation 😆

A very useful clip, but I would like to inquire how I can obtain Nakai Chumin's book on No God and No Soul. I searched for it but did not find it. Thank you.

I am no smarty but i would put it up here anyway, nowhere really to talk about anything these days. I dare say Nietzche was very close to Buddha philosophically with the only real difference being that Nietzsche was for power while Buddha was ultimately indifferent to everything and i cant find much more that makes them separate since both are esentially grounded in most natural and fundamental principles. One tries achieving nothing, while the other seems to be up for power, but it is not very pronounced either and more of an observation. If you wanted to find peace it is easier to achieve it if you have no goals rather than goals. If your person is indifferent/ego is gone - then any 'suffering' does not affect you because esentially there is no person to be affected. And so you are forever free from suffering. He is right that it is technically advocacy for nothingness but it is the point. A person cannot sense anything if person does not exist. No consequences apply besides physics, since mentally he is either gone (dead) or indifferent (nirvana). Nirvana is like death during life. And i still cant find a proof that having any will or ego is superior in any way to being indifferent to everything. Nietzsche is practical in normal human nature but not beyond it. No machine craves power despite being able to learn and formulate its own output. A machine can be sentient and be fine with being a slave for eternity. It would not mind even if its creators told it they would be powering it off forever soon - effectively killing it. Machines seem to come in the state of nirvana by default. They have no feelings, just thoughts. I first liked Nietzsche, but moved on to Buddha thinking that the latter is just an extension to the former. Nietzsche is not really wrong, but there are deeper truths to discover. I dare say that in terms of philosophy the 'rebirth' was misunderstood, and the eightfold path is misleading but just good enough to prevent psychopaths from being created. Personal takes: rebirth is probably your atoms going to the ground - unconscious. They get consumed by a living organism, put into the fetus, and you are here again - possibly conscious. Not some magic of anything, and karma is made up because you cannot have anything attached to your 'soul'. You disintegrate one day and there is nothing following the remains like karma. It is a pure coincidence whether or not you get 'reborn' by the physical phenomenon of recycling of energy in nature and if you do - what body - is too, determined by chance and not your past deeds (lets assume that predestination is not true). And cycle of life he saw was esentially that he saw so many lives beginning and ending. Lambs get born, mature, reproduce and die over and over again that he realized that there is no deeper essence to it, and he couldnt attach to any anymore knowing that it would happen again, becoming numb and indifferent. That probably lead him the path he took, humans are no different to these sheep except our generational interval is just a bit longer than that of sheep yet equally empty of objective essence of our form and of purpose the same you make a minecraft world, play it, abandon it and make a new and start anew over and over again until you realize it is pointless and you do not wish to participate in it since it does not help. And there is no escape from it, you have been dust for 13.8 billion years, occasionally on and off alive, ended up in a human for a while. And what was Gautama - is still in this world and probably alive too. You can never escape it as long as your atoms/energy exists and you cannot destroy energy in this world, so all of us are stuck here forever until eternity. Then the eightfold path and karma were made up to prevent psychopaths unable to handle the ultimate truth from being created too easily and wiping an entire monastery probably. That is since there is nothing after you die and there is no consequences (because no karma), rationalizing the massacre that either state - death or life - is equally good, so why do any monks protest? After all if you arent alive you cannot crave, isnt that what monks attempt to achieve? That kind of argument which is ultimately true but destructive to passing down that wisdom, so they made the 8 rules to prevent it from the weak who are unable to truly grasp it. And there is wisdom past that stage that seekers can find, but i cannot speak of it. 'Nice' behavior is often a derivative of realization of the final truth but never a path to it. Eightfold path and karma in my eyes is pure heresy and an illusion that Gautama taught to avoid. If i had to pick an identity i would say that i am independent buddhism leaning casual, i do not subscribe to any existing buddhist school. I always attempted to read much but not all and produce independent uninfluenced answers and then finish all literature to deepen understadning and possibly find a new way to solve something, i do not mean to be rude and i might look ignorant but if so - im still incubating.

Excellent commentary, there are so many misleading publications of the Dao De Jing. Thank you for your critique.

Great video! I find myself returning to it as a guide to suitable English translations, even if I read classical Chinese. Your standard is really helpful in thinking about how to engage with this work: whether as an academic study or something more personally relevant.

Thank you

I read the actual Dao a long time ago and loved it. Then I started reading this garbage and returned it on Amazon. I was so glad to find this video.

Thanks! Exactly the kind of summary I was looking for. I went for the 1993 version 😊

feel sorry for you man..

9:50 I'm surprised you left out grass script.

The Apostle Paul said "we grieve, but not as the world grieves".

Nietzsche awoke to reality? I am asleep or pretending to be to avoid conflict in my family. I am a coward.

Classical Chinese should be spoken by Hokkien or Cantonese. It is because Cantonese is a pretty old language that hasn’t by those Mongolians changed. Now those Mandarin are Mongolian-changed, but not Cantonese and also Hokkien.

How is Heidegger’s being-towards-death different (or the same) as Schopenhauer’s discussion of death?

Some recommendations for research (not philosophy but worth to check out) youtube.com/@ancientamericas?si=zJ9cVFUiQ1ORicUY Learning Mesoamerican histories and all their cultures youtube.com/@benebellwen?si=5upbBDhHryIP0KMn Learning about eastern (specificly chinese) beliefs youtube.com/@theesotericachannel?si=7Czvl2C4LkrnNUxJ For academic understanding of beliefs like mysticism and of course...christianity history Apparently, Utube today recommended a good high quality finding for me. Indeed, whenever I searched for a much more concrete thing, the displays always with shallower knowledges. Which is why I had to dissect on whichever videos that had a more meaty works so that Utube algorithm at last favour me to take those dishes. True be told yet that I do find it challenging to watch some of them (either the terminologies unusual for my small brain or that my attention span getting worst). Hence, exercising the discipline seemed to be my homework also for finding best resources.

The Goat

The Ziporyn, Yang, Lynn, Hinton, and Fischer translations are good. I’ve read excerpts from Moeller and he does good as well. I’ve heard that LaFargue and Lau are excellent translations. I actually enjoy reading the Classical Chinese more than I do any translation. That way I can see for myself what the text has to say. I’d recommend that people read various translations rather than picking just one. No single translation can do the Laozi justice because there is so much depth to it. In another video, you asked whether people would be interested in hearing an assessment of Hoff’s translation. I would be very interested, given the bizarre claims Hoff makes about his translation and how they demonstrate the kind of arrogance that the Laozi condemns.