New semester...
So, waiting on grades for the old semester, I figured I'd get a head start on my reading for next semester.
One of my courses is "Foundations of Chinese Thought", which seems pretty interesting. It, however, has 6 books or so on the reading list so it seems prudent to get a headstart on that.
One of which is the Tao Te Ching, by Lao Tzu. While the introduction was pretty interesting (there seems to be some evidence, if not consensus, that there was no individual named Lau Tzu, and it seems to be more of an anthology of 'collected sayings'), the book itself is a load of crap. It's anti-knowledge in it's outlook, yet elitist at the same time.
A line of conversation that one can draw from the book:
Person 1: "Cleverness is bad. Acting is bad. Don't act, and goodness will follow. This is apparent to those who follow the way; those who are clever will forever remain ignorant of the way"
Person 2: "Wait... if one doesn't act, then *nothing* happens... How does goodness just... follow?"
P1: "Ah... You are ignorant of the way."
P2: "Yes, right... Hence the question. What are you talking about?"
P1: "Do not seek knowledge. Those who travel far, know little. Those who travel least, know most."
P2: "Right, so that really didn't *explain* anything. This is really just a bunch of obscure sayings that, if I were a poor rice farmer in Asia 2000 years ago, where it's not *possible* for me to travel, or learn to read or any of these things, would provide me with some sort of comfort that my life was somehow 'better' than the life of 'sages'. But it's not evidence-based, and it's certainly opaque to reason. This just seems like nonsense one feeds to an oppressed class to tell them that, deep down, they should really be *happy* with their oppression. It's unintelligible, obscure crap that self-contradicts."
P1: "You are ignorant of the way"
Etc...
I'm liking Confucius much more, so far (though am still in the modern introduction), and am looking forward to Mencius.