tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26951738.post8865529780114359202..comments2024-03-25T11:49:21.281-07:00Comments on The Splintered Mind: Flow and the Not-So-Skillful Zhuangzi?Eric Schwitzgebelhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11541402189204286449noreply@blogger.comBlogger15125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26951738.post-30081483355529761502016-03-03T21:37:47.032-08:002016-03-03T21:37:47.032-08:00The message here is that ultimately the butcher se...The message here is that ultimately the butcher sees the structure of emptiness permeating throughout the oxen, and has to merely manipulate and guide the fullness of his cleaver into these apertures and hollows of the ox. It is a story illuminating the nature of fullness vs. emptiness, the substantial vs. the insubstantial, the yang as opposed to the yin. As Master Sun stated: "To advance irresistibly, push through their gaps". It is not about flow. <br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00449075860776992426noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26951738.post-57589985122311009642007-05-16T21:08:00.000-07:002007-05-16T21:08:00.000-07:00That's appealing, but I have a textual and a psych...That's appealing, but I have a textual and a psychological concern. Textually: He does say he can't see the whole ox. What does that mean? Psychologically: When we're caught up in expert activity, isn't part of that just not responding to, not noticing, shutting oneself out to certain things -- irrelevancies or distractions, the noticing of which would interfere with the activity? That works great except when the "irrelevancy" turns out to be important!Eric Schwitzgebelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11541402189204286449noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26951738.post-67912308226034814882007-05-14T11:53:00.000-07:002007-05-14T11:53:00.000-07:00Just a comment. Rather than 'spontaneous, skillful...Just a comment. Rather than 'spontaneous, skillful reactivity", I think of the state of the butcher as being one of total awareness of the possibilities in a state of relaxed preparedness. This eliminates the sense that a person is trapped in a state or is focused on a task to the exclusion of other sensory input.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26951738.post-14259431195983651082007-03-13T17:41:00.000-07:002007-03-13T17:41:00.000-07:00I've never really known what to do with these more...I've never really known what to do with these more mystical and metaphysical passages in the Zhuangzi. I confess that's a weakness in my view!<BR/><BR/>In my teaching, by the way, I downplay the similarities between Laozi and Zhuangzi, and I teach the Zhuangzi first as the historically earlier text (following the order of Graham 1989).Eric Schwitzgebelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11541402189204286449noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26951738.post-27534534469980144652007-03-13T11:17:00.000-07:002007-03-13T11:17:00.000-07:00It seems to me that the p. 77 quote has the Way "d...It seems to me that the p. 77 quote has the Way "doing" a great deal. We might have to agree to disagree about this, though I don't think it would count as much of a disagreement since I see both views as within the range of plausibility.<BR/><BR/>I also doubt that Zhuangzi was self-consciously following Laozi. There's no evidence that the two were even lumped together as "Daoists" until Sima Tan of the Han Dynasty, who was likely bunching philosophers together for the sake of imposing a little historical systematicity on the Hundred Schools period.<BR/><BR/>Of course, this hasn't stopped me from teaching them both as Daoists.Justin Tiwaldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15004961943595375641noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26951738.post-45497026907538166162007-03-13T09:11:00.000-07:002007-03-13T09:11:00.000-07:00Thanks for the tips. I had the impression that th...Thanks for the tips. I had the impression that there were only three occurrences of "wu wei" in the Inner Chapters and had been looking for them (I don't have a searchable Chinese Zhuangzi). I found the one on Watson p. 83, but not the other.<BR/><BR/>It seems to me the p. 77 quote needn't be read in any rich way -- the way "does nothing, has no shape" is Graham's translation (Graham, p. 86). The p. 83 quote sounds more traditionally wuwei-ish as Watson translates it "in the service of inaction" but Graham gives it a pedestrian translation: "go rambling through the lore in which there's nothing to do."<BR/><BR/>What you say about "wu wei" taking on a life of its own after the Inner Chapters were written seems exactly right to me. I think it's salutary to see if we can do without it entirely, in fact, taking "wu wei" in those chapters not as a term of art but simply as a way of saying doing nothing.<BR/><BR/>Part of the issue here might turn on whether Zhuangzi was aware of a tradition of using "wu wei" more as a term of art, as one sees in the Daodejing -- and that depends in part on dating the Daodejing. I like to see Zhuangzi as *not* influenced by earlier "daoist" writings; but I'm not Sinologist enough to have an expert opinion on that.Eric Schwitzgebelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11541402189204286449noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26951738.post-4551401098981647732007-03-12T15:25:00.000-07:002007-03-12T15:25:00.000-07:00Hi again,I did a quick search and only found two o...Hi again,<BR/><BR/>I did a quick search and only found two other occurrences of "<I>wuwei</I>." <BR/><BR/>The first one appears in Ch. 6, where the Way is decribed as <I>wuwei</I> (echoing <I>Laozi</I> 37). (Watson, Basic Writings, p. 77)<BR/><BR/>The second one appears in Ch. 7, where Confucius describes some flagrant violators of ritual principles as follows: "they wander free and easy in the service of <I>wuwei</I>. (Watson, p.83)<BR/><BR/>Not a knock-down argument for the conventional reading, but then again nothing ever is! <BR/><BR/>The dearth of references to <I>wuwei</I> is rather remarkable. By contrast, the phrase is ubiquitous in the commentaries on these seven chapters. The term obviously look on something of a life of its own after the Inner Chapters were written.Justin Tiwaldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15004961943595375641noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26951738.post-4912526828697000402007-03-12T14:45:00.000-07:002007-03-12T14:45:00.000-07:00I agree that if you go outside the Inner Chapters ...I agree that if you go outside the Inner Chapters for your reading of wu wei -- especially to the Daodejing -- then it's not plausible to interpret the phrase as meaning literally doing nothing. The phrase doesn't appear much in the Inner Chapters themselves, though. I wonder whether, where it does appear, it can be interpreted simply as "not doing anything" -- as in the yak passage.Eric Schwitzgebelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11541402189204286449noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26951738.post-87264009534191057782007-03-12T11:16:00.000-07:002007-03-12T11:16:00.000-07:00Hi Eric,I like your use of the dialogue with Huizi...Hi Eric,<BR/><BR/>I like your use of the dialogue with Huizi! <BR/><BR/>As for your reading of "<I>wuwei</I>" as "doing nothing," let me just say that in <I>some</I> cases it really does imply "doing nothing." But that's just because <I>wuwei's</I> most basic sense is to be in accord with what's self-so (<I>ziran</I>). Thus the useless tree practices <I>wuwei</I> by literally doing nothing, since that what's self-so for it. But when other things do what comes to them naturally, this isn't always "doing nothing" in the literal sense. Off the top of my head, "the Way does nothing [<I>wuwei</I>] and yet there is nothing it does not do" (<I>Laozi</I> 37). (The more conventional translation, "the Way does nothing and leaves nothing undone," isn't true to the grammar.) We could read that as a straight-forward paradox, but I suspect neither you nor I want to do that. Alternatively, then, we could read the first clause not as "doing nothing" but more conventionally as "not striving to do anything." Add to this the fact that the early texts didn't distinguish between the characters "<I>wei</I>" ("do") and "<I>wei</I>" ("artificial or conscious action"), and we've got a pretty good case for the more conventional reading.<BR/><BR/>But all of this beside your basic point that we have some work yet to do before connecting <I>wuwei</I> to skill, which I agree with.Justin Tiwaldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15004961943595375641noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26951738.post-2374422548443021912007-03-12T10:05:00.000-07:002007-03-12T10:05:00.000-07:00Thanks for the long, thoughtful comment, Justin!Yo...Thanks for the long, thoughtful comment, Justin!<BR/><BR/>Your point (1) is interesting. I agree it is in the spirit of the Zhuangzi to reverse values in that way. One apparent counterexample is the weasel, who is only catching rats. But maybe that exception is sufficiently explained by the fact that the weasel is implicitly being compared to Huizi.<BR/><BR/>I'm not as sure about point (2). I think you're right that in *Graham's* interpretation of the Zhuangzi the feeling of spontaneity might conflict with the feeling of agency mentioned by Csikszentmihalyi. But I want to cast Graham's interpretation into doubt. Basing my thoughts on the Inner Chapters alone, I'm not sure whatever value remains in skillfulness is incompatible with feeling the agency of it.<BR/><BR/>On your (3): I agree there's an important difference that can potentially be drawn between merely considering outcomes and being invested in them -- maybe Zhuangzi is getting at this in his dialogue with Huizi at the end of Ch. 5? So in response to your last question, let me borrow ZZ's own words and say that maybe it's a matter of not letting likes and dislikes getting in to do one harm.<BR/><BR/>Let me also resist somewhat your continuing to speak of wuwei/non-action in terms of skillful action. Maybe it should just be read quite flatfootedly as not doing anything!Eric Schwitzgebelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11541402189204286449noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26951738.post-35375087259376429542007-03-11T11:23:00.000-07:002007-03-11T11:23:00.000-07:00Eric, Great entry! I agree with much of this and ...Eric, <BR/><BR/>Great entry! I agree with much of this and have just a few additional observations. <BR/><BR/>(1.) There are a couple noticeable differences between the skillfulness of people like Huizi and the lute player and skillfulness of people like the butcher, and I think the differences cut across other famous anecdotes in the <I>Zhuangzi</I>. First, Huizi and the lute player are engaged in professions of high social value. They aren't just some anonymous cook working in a lord's kitchen. They are admired and loved by all. Second, the kinds of work the butcher does is more of a constant, less dependent upon the fluctuations of social trends and economic circumstances.<BR/><BR/>This suggests that it's not just skillfulness that Zhuangzi advocates but the skillfulness of the sort that isn't socially overvalued or whose usefulness is too dependent on time and place. This fits well with the passage you quote from the "On the Equalization of the Things" chapter ("…don't insist, but lodge in the usual [<I>yong</I>]"). <BR/><BR/>(2.) Here's one possible <I>disanalogy</I> between Flow and the kind of skillfulness that Zhuangzi admires: part of the phenomenology of Flow is a powerful feeling of one's own self-control or agency. This strikes me as contrary to the spirit of the <I>Zhuangzi</I>. Of course, Ivanhoe and Graham would probably agree with this. I assume Zhuangzi's value state is only comparable to Flow in certain respects.<BR/><BR/>(3.) As for the use of the word "spontaneous" to describe "non- action" (<I>wuwei</I>), I agree that this can be misleading. And you're right to point out the butcher's somewhat neglected afterthought: he pauses, he steadies his gaze, he also seems to contemplate his next move. This no longer sounds much like spontaneity. Or if it is, it's more like the "spontaneity" of a chess player than that of a pianist, which seems to be stretching the concept beyond all plausibility.<BR/><BR/>The response has to be that non-action isn't just present-mindedness in the sense of <I>not thinking at all</I> about what comes next. It has make allowances for the fact that we can stop to contemplate our next move or consider the consequences of our actions. <BR/><BR/> This makes me think that we should more carefully distinguish between thinking about a future outcome and being invested in that outcome. I don't know how to characterize "being invested in an outcome" except to say that it involves some kind of emotional attitude, and that it would be such that failing to achieve the outcome would be cause for disappointment and regret. <BR/><BR/>I wonder if we couldn't make a similar move in response to the lesson you take away from the weasel story: that we can't lose sight of the bigger picture. Zhuangzi seems to make this point quite often, most famously in the Cicada-mantis episode in "The Mountain Trees" (ch. 21). There must be some analogous way in which you can remain aware of your surroundings and the big picture without being unduly concerned about them. But I'm not sure how best to characterize this. Any suggestions?Justin Tiwaldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15004961943595375641noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26951738.post-26328649034191737592007-03-06T09:14:00.000-08:002007-03-06T09:14:00.000-08:00Yes, Mark has accepted. Brian Leiter says so, so ...Yes, Mark has accepted. Brian Leiter says so, so it must be true!<BR/><BR/>I had forgotten that you're in his neck of the woods. Sorry about that!Eric Schwitzgebelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11541402189204286449noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26951738.post-30029313751668698522007-03-05T21:16:00.000-08:002007-03-05T21:16:00.000-08:00Oh, did Mark accept? That's be a big loss for BYU...Oh, did Mark accept? That's be a big loss for BYU, although I can certainly understand his leaving here. (I would)Clark Goblehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03876620613578404474noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26951738.post-17915959386837594682007-03-03T08:13:00.000-08:002007-03-03T08:13:00.000-08:00Thanks, for the tip, Clark. I'm afraid I've never...Thanks, for the tip, Clark. I'm afraid I've never really had the patience and trust necessary to make much sense of Heidegger. But I should take another crack at it. Maybe when Mark Wrathall arrives here at UCR next year (as it looks like he will), he will help inspire and guide me!Eric Schwitzgebelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11541402189204286449noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26951738.post-16255174938579546122007-03-02T16:30:00.000-08:002007-03-02T16:30:00.000-08:00Just in passing this is a big deal in Heidegger's ...Just in passing this is a big deal in Heidegger's philosophy as well.Clark Goblehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03876620613578404474noreply@blogger.com