Today’s mainstream philosophy constitutes the opposite of the Taoist idea of happiness. Why? Because today’s dominant beliefs are hardly reconcilable with the Tao, as depicted in the Tao Te Ching.
What do I mean when I say “today’s dominant beliefs”? On the one hand, the idea that everything is relative, that there are no universal moral prescriptions, and that nobody can reliably forecast the long-term effects of one’s decisions.
On the other hand, the belief that we should set objectives for ourselves and pursue them relentlessly, day after day. This belief goes hand in hand with making detailed plans, so that we can carry them out and constantly measure our progress.
Not everybody subscribes to the beliefs that I have outlined, but many people do, and few will find them questionable, false or ethically wrong. I am not aware of statistical measurements proving the prevalence of these beliefs, but I see them at work in my daily experience.
Why do Taoists oppose those ideas? Is it because Lao-Tzu, Yang-Tzu and Chuang-Tzu lived in Ancient China, and proved unable to come up with better ideas? Is it because the Tao Te Ching is unsuitable for living in an industrial civilisation?
No, the responses to those questions relate to human nature, which hasn’t changed since the times of Lao-Tzu. Today’s idea of happiness is incompatible with Taoism because it assumes a fundamental change in human nature due to industrialisation.
Podden och tillhörande omslagsbild på den här sidan tillhör
John Vespasian. Innehållet i podden är skapat av John Vespasian och inte av,
eller tillsammans med, Poddtoppen.
