The Ancients: LaoTzu

[@Suite_annamite]

*Alan Watts* described *Daoism* perfectly as *"doing nothing effectively as opposed to effectively nothing."*

[@guythellian4805]

This is a great, one hour lecture on the topic. He is informative, must be really learned on all these things, and amusing. Which makes it very easy to listen to. I have just begun my study of this subject and I am grateful to have found his lecture.

[@IronDogger]

“An awkwardly large paperweight?” 🤣Such cleverly used humor in your lectures. I am enjoying these a great deal, thank you for posting. A great portion of the population is bedridden and suffering, forced to watch tv for entertainment and your lectures are a far better alternative. Thank you for providing my mind the exercise it demands since I’m unable to commit to the time restrictions for continuing my lifelong educational pursuits at this time and refuse to drain my brain with tv. I require something engaging to override the massive doses of pain I’m challenged to navigate through and your humor is such a welcomed addition to the education you provide. I cherish education, so thank you for providing these.

[@Pulzyfr]

Holy shit an accurate and good description of Daoism, color me *intensely* surprised

[@jessewallace12able]

Incredible lecture. Helped me in heavy times. I listened to it many times while cooking dinner. Thank you.

[@J5L5M6]

Was actually rereading this yesterday! I surely don't have the grasp on the work that Prof. Cecil does, but it's such a relaxing read for me.

[@windows95ism]

In case anyone was wondering. Red Pine's is the recommended translation of Taoteching.

[@kunalmandalia1165]

Wes you've a gift at sharing these ideas, thanks.

[@NeuroscienceMajor]

Thanks for the uploads. Your lectures are always interesting.

[@Great_Olaf5]

That basic premise of Daoism makes perfect sense to me.

[@raquelkueffner2515]

This way of thinking really helps me out. I’ve been trying to rationalize a reason for making art. I can never find a reason. I just do it because it’s something I do. I don’t really see a real utility for it and the more I study art history, the more discouraged I am to make my own art. Wish I could just unlearn some art history and theory sometimes because it gets in the way of my art making. Ild like to think I can make art without a reason.

[@chewyjello1]

Raquel Kueffner the reason is that it brings you joy and any other reason you assign it right? It’s your art, so it’s up to you! :) (I haven’t listened to the talk yet btw)

[@retiredreplicant.2195]

It is so much enjoyable to listen to Wes, He is wonderful teacher.

[@MG-ge5xq]

Yes, be a stone! Be yourself. Follow your self. Follow your best, most beautiful, nice, interesting. That's your goal. That's your way, your path, your countryroad whatsever. That's the TAO. Your self forms your goal. The goal forms your way. Your way leads you to your goal. But it is within yourself. In your self. That's the circle of goal and way within your self. That's one manifestation of the TAO.

[@SkiesToInfinity]

Great channel. Deserves more attention.

[@jessewallace12able]

No, less attention.

[@aMulliganStew]

28:00 "Hello, Lamppost. Whatcha knowin'?"

[@kabbalisticteddy]

Inline with what you are saying here... at 16:10 and not only at 16:10, if you know what I mean by that, the essence of Tao is that we cannot say what the essence of Tao is, and by that I think I have captured entirely everything you have said at, and before 59:12. For suppose you can say both "Yes" and "No" at the same time. Suppose. Logic is external. That is my point. Do you see this Argument? I mean, by this, I am referring deeply here to the Private Language Argument. Emotion is internal. If we are to be perfect. If we are to follow Taoism entirely. Only emotion is internal. Logic is external.

[@TRUTHRULES777]

Earlier I saw your video on Zarathustra. That’s been showing up Zarathustra I mean a bit lately. When I was probably only 13 I was reading about that and I seen some things and I told my oldest brother who is wonderful but trying to be like the dad even though we had a dad. Ha ha. He was concerned. But I’ve always been kind of spiritual kind of an odd kid but artistic fun crazy. I suppose. He for some reason was trying to make me question things which is a good thing. I have studied different religions a little bit I love ancient histories and peoples. That’s where my heart is. So funny that recently I’ve seen more about the religion that I was feeling when I was young. I did find out that my haplogroup came out of on my mom side the near east turkey Iraq Iran Syria relatively late they came out of there. I’ve always had an affinity. One time I saw a ziggurat that was created upon my wall in my bedroom when I was 15 I saw the slaves walking up and building it. I know it sounds crazy I didn’t know what a Ziggurat was then. I may have seen one but there wasn’t many television shows about that civilization. I knew about Egypt and I’ve always had an affinity to that area over to Rome and Greece also. Also I always loved cows and bulls. When I was a little girl at five I would dress up like it was from India or somewhere seem to be India. And I would ask my mom if I could glue her broken fake gems in her jewelry box onto my head? I think another thing that I wonder how many people have experienced these type of things? used to ask my mother as a child “ If I wasn’t here as me, I would be here as someone else right mom?” Then we all had the Child “déjà vu‘s” Still have them they’re usually much shorter. In my life when I was younger they were much longer probably a minute and a half two minutes. Now myself when I get them usually only 30 seconds. I always wonder about that. It seems like when we’re children we are more in tune and we don’t question ourselves or think we’re weird or odd we just accept what comes our way. I think as a child We Trust what we feel and see as a child. Some of us still stubbornly decide to be that child to a degree and not try to fit into any norm. Honing in on what is in your heart and your core beliefs and we stick to it. We keep learning but we listen to our heart.❤️

[@fedorilitchev5092]

The other day I was reading a book on psychedelics (Decomposing the Shadow). There, the author makes a claim that society constrains what he refers to as the 'syntax' of our lives in ways that blocks people from letting their energy flow in such a way as to have the most of themselves present & embodied. This perspective allows for a pretty powerful reinterpretation of the material in the above lecture as it would suggest that what separates us from the heights of the natural stone is not just that we don't chill out in nature enough but that, even when we do so, we are still unconsciously *doing* a real number on ourselves as psychic energy is still constantly & unconsciously spent maintaining various inner barriers. I recommend the book.

[@christyle2754]

Thank you Wes...I deeply enjoyed this lecture!

[@hide3reptiles365]

Laozi was right, and we can all make good use of his counterintuitive teachings.

[@briantaulbee5744]

This is the clearest explanation of Taoism that I've yet come across. Thank you! I particularly like the segment on the virtue of things being their consistency with their natures. It made me think of this line from Arthur Machen's short story "The White People", which demonstrates just how awful it would be if things weren't self consistent: "What would your feelings be, seriously, if your cat or your dog began to talk to you, and to dispute with you in human accents? You would be overwhelmed with horror. I am sure of it. And if the roses in your garden sang a weird song, you would go mad. And suppose the stones in the road began to swell and grow before your eyes, and if the pebble that you noticed at night had shot out stony blossoms in the morning?" A lack of "virtue" in this sense would be far worse than annoying; it would be horrifying.

[@ThisSentenceIsFalse]

What you describe sounds more fun than horrifying. Lol.

[@tigerlilysoma588]

Sounds like Mescaline to me. And at first the revelations are scary but it is only the absence of what you perceive as normality (safety) that causes the scare. When you begin to feel comfortable in what modern humans would selfishly deem mental unbalance you will be balanced.

[@kabbalisticteddy]

Also exactly on 47:09 I have always said this, and I will repeat it now. I think, Syntax and Semantics are not one and the same. Sorry to re-invent the wheel on this one. Can you... Are you able to see the Ontological Argument derived from this statement?? It belongs to Godel, who borrowed it from Anselm, who heard about Descartes. For the Greeks this wasn't a Problem. And neither it is in Taoism.

[@kabbalisticteddy]

So I am wondering now, if Christianism, that is, the entire Philosophy of Western Thought and a few centuries before, did bring anything new.

[@TRUTHRULES777]

I have always been the kid at the coffee shop that had to study the toy and what I would learn enjoy and not be bored with:) not that as a child I was ever at a “Coffee shop” we didn’t have them. Restaurants family and everyday travels.

[@kabbalisticteddy]

Good talk. Thank you. So where is the point in Eastern Thought at which the Dao and the Tao become one and the same? Looking forward to the next talk.

[@hide3reptiles365]

If you're interesting enough to flush away the comments of others by making 13 consecutive posts of your own, you're interesting enough to have your own blog or vlog go viral. Going viral yet?

[@hejdingamleraev]

Love your talks!

[@anktmans]

I think the concept of an "Empty Boat" is not to be inactive and motionless, but it's about doing things but not getting influenced by its outcome or be focusing on the outcome but doing thing for the sake of doing. I might be wrong but I believe the way it is explained is a bit misleading

[@Bookthief666]

anktmans He could've specified empty of what I guess, as in empty of care, empty of identity, without the lust of result.

[@cheapshot2842]

Though the line is "float aimlessly"

[@kabbalisticteddy]

46:30 to 46:40 What was it meant by that? I always thought it was a joke. Is sarcasm a modern mechanism, so to speak, in the History of Philosophy? Who was the first Thinker to make use of Sarcasm? I do not think Diogenes was Sarcastic. Can we make up a fine-grained context for Alexander and Diogene's meeting? Sorry, take this with a grain of salt, so to speak, because I know Sarcasm is a purely rhetorical, hence verbal, mechanism. I think.

[@alan2here]

I'm good at being the empty boat, and it does give you a certain amount of "oh he's just the empty boat, he's no harm" when you're turning round and round in one of life's eddies, or tumbling aimlessly over a waterfall. Maybe I should embrace this.

[@Len124]

I imagine our aversion to simple _is-ness_ and our need to imbue everything with a purpose, as if being for the sake of being is not sufficient justification for existence, must be a byproduct of our hardwiring for this tool-using niche we've carved out for ourselves. We take that fundamental schema and lay it over every aspect of our environment in an attempt to make our universe conform to our oldest and most familiar abstraction. It's the Law of the Instrument, but in this case, we are the instrument: _when all you have are thumbs, everything looks like a hammer._

[@lerneanhydra697]

That poem Seeking but Not Finding the Master" is nearly identical to when Liu Bei and his Peach garden brothers go to Kongming(Zhuge Liang)'s house. I wonder if it is the inspiration.

[@RH-D]

Thank you. That was brilliant. It’s New Year’s Eve 2021. I’m in England. My best friend is in California. She will be watching a film. I’m going to bed early and I told her that I was going to listen to some sexy philosophy lectures. I found your video. It’s fun, and pretty smart, too. I’ll send her the link to it, even though I’m not even hetero in love with Huxley. I do have a crush on him, though.

[@tigerlilysoma588]

The Dhao De Ching and The Red Book by Carl Jung are my personal religious materials.

[@konstantinosmei]

The Tao of physics is actually a cool book

[@tulegendarbassov5148]

Some of the thoughts from Alan Watts there. Especially one about the sewer system Inspector. Good to see a whole lineage of thinking behind the lecture.

[@alayoncito001]

Thank you.

[@TRUTHRULES777]

I always love libraries. I picked up Wayne Dyers Tao book. i’m not sure what year it may be 2010 to 12?. I have to say it was calming and yet some things didn’t quite make sense and I would really try to find the sense. I think humans can make sense out of anything if they want too..But it didn’t really fully touch my mind or my heart. Bit of it did but it felt slightly empty. Calming Because for me it just kind of numbs me out when I read it. Now I haven’t read a whole lot of it. No expert on it at all.

[@kabbalisticteddy]

Before 47:09 I mean immediately before... Once one lives in a barrel, they do not develop anymore. Sorry. You are wrong on this one. Because, personally I am aware of what you are trying to say. It is good Logic, but it is Syntax, really... It's a Language Game.

[@returntofleet5613]

Thank you teach! :)

[@kabbalisticteddy]

So is it the case that you are saying now, and before, that meditating is compulsory in understanding things? It depends on the meaning of meditation. For me meditation is different, is a different act then it is for anyone else... Do you see this Argument? I think not.

[@samisaleh6186]

Thank you for uploading!

[@johnpoulsen7582]

Best to listen to this while stoned

[@rauldempaire5330]

Great, thank you!

[@kabbalisticteddy]

0:05 to 12:33 Yes. I mean yes, but not entirely. Think about, the History of Philosophy. Did Plato know Socrates, personally? And when did Aristotle come into the picture. These are not secrets. History of Philosophy. I am saying the entire History of Philosophy. Western is sufficient. Why are we speaking Chinese know??

[@kabbalisticteddy]

Before 16:10 Is it Dao or Tao? Let's be concrete here...

[@kabbalisticteddy]

Right. Dao. I get this. However, is it a way, a special Path if you think, when, or where, or both... A special point on this abstract space in which Dao and Tao are One. If you know what I mean.

[@kabbalisticteddy]

I am lying. Sorry. I mean... I lied, not lying right now. Sorry.

[@alan2here]

How could everything taken as a whole have any collective purpose beyond having in parts every purpose?

[@kabbalisticteddy]

59:11 You know what the essential problem of Taoism, or Daoism as you name it, is? It is that particular point at which one, anyone, can say both "Yes" and "No" at the same time. And that particular point in the History of Western Philosophy is the statement "I am lying." I hope this makes sense. Sorry I don't understand Chinese Philosophy, because I cannot read Chinese. I just know the basics. I think. There are uncountably many characters in Chinese. I think.

[@kabbalisticteddy]

It has to do a lot with the flow of time, and it is not a Paradox. Can you see this? I may be wrong. But I would not say, I am lying.

[@paulwolstenholme1673]

Very briefly and simply put by Chuang Tzu " To place oneself in subjective relation with externals, without consciousness of their objectivity,-this is Tao. " Having said that, l liked the lecture, i enjoyed it, found it funny etc but it does not represent the fullness of Taoist thought by any means. Do not think that by listening to this lecture you will gain an anywhere near even-handed understanding of Taoist thought.

[@benquinney2]

Let reality be reality

[@wiszaraskabir5814]

Here you have difficulty translating Lao Tzu, I know more about him because he is me and I am him, he was a fool and a wise man. Tao is the pathless path. A professor will not be able to deep it up. It is the ultimate

[@matsulrich7765]

4:27

[@ou-rb2gv]

It's not that you can't translate Taoism, it's that you can't quantify , describe "The Tao," correctly with words. Any words.

[@ou-rb2gv]

This one was funny lol!

[@samuraichilton]

Thank you!!!

[@kabbalisticteddy]

An advice I'd give to anyone, Mr. Cecil... To anyone I'd give this advice. Speak, or write, or both, as if... I am saying. As if. You know what I mean by that. As if you could read this scripts long after you're gone and.., be like, wow! I think.

[@TPGNATURAL]

I like Wes Cecil and his Western thought process. Because of his inability of letting go of his Western conditioning he is lost in trying to understanding Taoism. To him rightly so thinking Taoism is ridiculous. Zen to many people is the philosophical descendant of Taoism. Zen in the Art of Archery by Eugen Herrigel is a good starting place to understand the Tao. If took years for Mr. Herrigel to loosen the arrow. The funny thing to me in Wes Cecil comedy is those who have a Western and somewhat understanding of the Tao get to laugh at Wes Cecil says about the Tao and get to laugh at Wes Cecil lack of understanding of the Tao.

[@tigerlilysoma588]

You should listen to the lectures before you post about them. And learn about philosophy from the books themselves, not KZbin videos or comments.

[@tigerlilysoma588]

As someone who has studied the Dhao extensively you definitely did not watch the video.

[@TPGNATURAL]

@@tigerlilysoma588 I do listen to the lectures and I have been reading books on philosophy for more than half of my life. Example, from your reply to me I say your comment fits, illusion of explanatory depth. In my first comment, professor of philosophy Eugen Herrigel wrote the book Zen in the Art of Archery. It took him approximately 5 years to loosen the arrow properly. Read the book to learn why.

[@TPGNATURAL]

@@tigerlilysoma588 This is the nature of the unenlightened mind: The sense organs, which are limited in scope and ability, randomly gather information. This partial information is arranged into judgements, which are based on previous judgements, which are usually based on someone else's foolish ideas. These false concepts and ideas are than stored in a highly selective memory system. Distortion upon distortion: the mental energy flows constantly through contorted and inappropriate channels, and the more one uses the mind, the more confused one becomes. To eliminate the vexation of the mind, it doesn't help to do something; this only reinforces the mind's mechanics. Dissolving the mind is instead a matter of not-doing: Simply avoid becoming attached to what you see and think. Relinquish the notion that you are separated from the all-knowing mind of the universe. Then you can recover your original pure insight and see through all illusions. Knowing nothing, you will be aware of everything. Remember: because clarity and enlightenment are within your own nature, they are regained without moving an inch. Than again this maybe is baloney.

[@kabbalisticteddy]

47:36 In essence you are wrong here. I think it is obvious.

[@bradrandel1408]

🦋🕊🌹

[@Silly.Old.Sisyphus]

an empty boat with an outboard motor ain't empty

[@Granniopteryx]

(Comment posted 2 days after this lecture was uploaded). Why fewer than 900 views so far? Wake up, people!

[@robertclayton7493]

Or, perhaps optimally, don't.

[@PhotographyChismisPH]

Weird that people laugh dismissively. Really runs counter to western sensibility.

[@kabbalisticteddy]

I find what you have said here a little unsatisfactory, for the following reason. You are, as a fact, speaking in Chinese here. If you know what I mean by that. If I was to translate word by word in Classical Chinese what you just said, in this talk, Lao Tzu himself would not be impressed, because you are only reciting what he said. If you know what I mean by this statement. Symbol by symbol. Word by word. Lao Tzu. Our mission is, if one may say this, our delicate mission here is to bring new stuff to the table, as an addition to what Lao Tzu himself had to say. So let us translate in Western, or Indo-European if you want, Languages, this, or these particular meaning(s). If, I was to analyze a little Lao Tzu, I would say that this translation has failed, in this talk. In other words, speak English, if it is possible, or else, or else Learn Chinese, which I am sure you are, in fact, able to do while you study Lao Tzu. It is not hard.

[@kabbalisticteddy]

Wittgenstein knew all you are saying here. Word by word. What do you bring new here? Really. Think about this. Should take a minute.

[@peterdollins3610]

The stupidest philosophy I have heard so far.

[@jessewallace12able]

That’s your own stupidity you have recognized.

[@PhotographyChismisPH]

Stupidest comment i've read so far.