Western thought is based on the logical principles identified by Aristotle (384-322 BC). We routinely look for connections between premises, so that we can draw definite conclusions. If we cannot reach certainty, we assume that we lack information, and that we need to keep gathering data.
The problem with Aristotelian logic is that, if it is applied carelessly, it can lead to dangerous delusions. I am referring to delusions entailing aggression, violence and death.
For example, individual A may believe that he knows the most efficient way to grow wheat, and that he can demonstrate it by using logic. Eventually, he succeeds in convincing all his neighbours to appoint him chief of wheat production, and grant him supreme authority over the whole village.
Despite the appeal to Aristotelian logic, the venture is likely to end up disastrously. Why? Because many people do not like to be ordered around, do not care about efficiency, and may not even like eating wheat products.
A decision that looks logical at an individual level becomes an unmitigated disaster when it is imposed on other people. Logic works wonders as long as we respect other people’s choices. In history, countless disasters have ensued as a result of trying to impose seemingly logical ideas on people who disagree.
Lao-Tzu and the non-action principle
Taoism is the first philosophy in history to acknowledge the importance of respecting individual preferences as an essential constituent in nature. The Tao, or the Enlightened Path, entails that we let other people make their own choices, even if we regard them as sub-optimal.
Chapter 48 of the Tao Te Ching formulates the principle of Wu Wei or non-action. It’s the paradox underlying all elements of Taoist thinking. Wu Wei tells us to do less, discard certain projects, and let nature take its course, so the Tao can prevail.
Aristotelian thinkers find Wu Wei incomprehensible. At first sight, they find it inconceivable that, by doing less, we could achieve better results. Should we not rather identify the best course of action, and keep pushing until we achieve our goal?
Lao-Tzu discovered Wu Wei through direct observation, not through linear logic. He lived during the chaos of the Eastern Chou Dynasty (770-256 BC), specifically in the sixth century, and witnessed the massacres caused by constant wars.
Somehow, Lao-Tzu must have arrived at the conclusion that people had been happier in previous times. He may not have known the details of ancient Chinese history, but during the Western Chou Dynasty (1000-770 BC), wars had been small in size due to the small size of cities and armies.
Paradoxical as it may seem, Wu Wei is simply stating a fact of life. Logic and progress are great, but not at the expense of individuality. Lao-Tzu was right in his suspicion that projects involving centralisation and imposition tend to end up badly.
Chuang-Tzu and the use of paradox
Aristotelian thinkers tend to consider the words of Chuang-Tzu as poetry, not as philosophy. They cannot figure out why Chuang-Tzu wrote that “large things sometimes appear small, and small things sometimes appear large.”
Paradoxical statements are anathema to the Western mind. I understand the impatience of those who, after reading a Taoist story, they discard it as illogical and impractical.
What’s the point that Chuang-Tzu is trying to make? Why is he warning us against misperceiving large things as small, and small things as large? Because he had witnessed the disasters arising during the Chang-kuo period (4th and 3rd centuries BC).
Chuang-Tzu had seen strong centralization go hand in hand with war. He had seen large strictures (cities, armies) destroyed while small villages in the mountains had continued to exist in relative peace. That’s the type of paradox that Aristotelians can not immediately perceive.
I must hasten to add that, in the above reconstruction of the origin of Taoist paradoxes, I am giving my interpretation of the historical context. Ancient Chinese sources provide few proven facts of Lao-Tzu’s personal life. Thus, I must rely on societal events known to have happened in those centuries.
Taoist paradox and Confucius
Curiously enough, Confucius (551-479 BC) employed few paradoxes in his philosophy despite being a contemporary of Lao-Tzu. Confucius used colourful adjectives and a plethora of metaphors, but never mentioned Wu Wei.
Many Confucian admonitions clash with Taoist principles in the sense that they subordinate individuality to higher values. I can point for instance to the Confucian love for righteousness as an abstract virtue compared to the Taoist focus on individual choices.
By referring to the qualities of water, Chapter 8 of the Tao Te Ching is providing the basis for countless Taoist paradoxes. It is promoting flexibility instead of strictness, adaptability to current conditions, and the ability to flow smoothly.
Like Aristotelian ethics, Confucianism opted for a steady set of values. It distinguishes good and bad, favours certain types of behaviour, and condemns those who do otherwise.
Lao-Tzu and the other ancient Taoist masters do not endorse such a linear thinking because they fear the loss of flexibility and adaptability, that is, the loss of the individual’s ability to survive and thrive in all circumstances.
If you want to apply effective ideas in all sorts of situations, I recommend my book “Asymmetry: The shortcut to success when success seems impossible.”