We do not have the exact birth and death dates for Lao-Tzu, but according to the tradition, he lived a couple of generations earlier than Socrates (469-399 BC). The philosophical ideas of Socrates partially overlap with those of Lao-Tzu.
I find it particularly interesting to compare their views on the spiritual aspects of philosophy. Taoism represents a turning point in Eastern philosophy because it abandons old religious beliefs and favours respecting natural law.
Similarly, Socrates refused to accept blindly the theological traditions of ancient Greece, and this was one of the charges he had to face when he was indicted in Athens. Socrates didn’t use the concept of “Tao” or “natural law” in the manner of the Tao Te Ching, but he was known to listen to his inner voice, that is, the voice of reason.
Like the ancient Taoists, Socrates paid respect to nature and adopted a modest lifestyle; he consumed simple food and wore simple clothes; as for shoes, he chose to walk barefoot. Taoists would have praised Socrates for his simple, self-reliant manner of living.
A major commonality
To which extent does the spirituality of Lao-Tzu, Yang-Tzu and Chuang-Tzu resemble that of Socrates? There is one major commonality and various factors of differentiation. I consider it crucially important to grasp these ideas because, for people like Socrates, the lack of understanding can have lethal effects.
In his works “Phaedo,” “Crito” and “Apology,” Plato (427-347 BC) reported in detail the last months of Socrate’s life. A good part of “Phaedo” is devoted to spiritual themes, especially the question of the soul’s immortality.
By comparing ancient Taoism with Plato’s explanations, we can zoom in on Socrates’ views on spirituality and perceive the commonalities and differences that I have just mentioned. Let’s review those details and see why they are important.
On the one hand, Taoism and Socrates coincide on the idea that, in order to do well in life, we should figure out the truth. I am not saying that Lao-Tzu and Socrates employed the precise same wording, but the idea is very similar.
For Taoists, the primary goal of philosophy is to align one’s actions with the Tao or natural law. For Socrates, it is precisely this intellectual search that makes life worth living. His life was devoted to asking questions and looking for logical, sound answers, irrespective of the religious traditions in Athens.
Lao-Tzu’s devotion to the Tao or natural law is very similar to Socrates’ love for the truth. For Taoists, alignment leads to a better lifestyle, better decisions, and happiness overall. Plato, Socrates and Aristotle (384-322 BC) did not say that the search for truth guarantees happiness, but regarded such a lifestyle as the best, the one that maximises one’s chances of happiness.
The highest spiritual experience
In “Phaedo,” Plato explained that Socrates had believed the human soul to be immortal. After his death, Socrates expected to be reunited with the souls of great deceased philosophers and was looking forward to conversing with them.
Nevertheless, Socrates considered it more important to stay loyal to the truth than to prolong one’s life, earn wealth, grow popular, or ascend to a position of power. In the “Apology,” we can read the details of the trial against Socrates and his defence based on his love for philosophical truth.
Taoism and Socrates regard adherence to philosophical truth as the most elevated spiritual experience. It generates profound contentment and enjoyment of life, enabling the philosopher to perceive aspects that would otherwise remain unheeded.
In practical terms, Taoists hold stronger expectations. They do expect their adherence to the Tao to improve their station in life, or at least, to prevent it from deteriorating. They do expect their respect for natural law to play in their favour in a tangible manner, not only spiritually.
Curiously enough, Socrates never held high expectations of philosophical inquiry leading to a better life in piratical terms. I see his resignation in “Crito,” as reported by Plato, in the sense that Socrates was willing to stay in Athens and possibly face a severe penalty instead of seizing the chance to escape.
I find it puzzling that Socrates was reluctant to place strong hopes on the power of reason. He regarded the pursuit of truth as a vastly beneficial spiritual experience, but not one that will necessarily lead to happiness, peace and prosperity.
Plato made exactly the same mistake by praising the pursuit of truth as a great spiritual experience, one reserved to elevated souls, but not one that is guaranteed to end well. Eventually, he would end up advocating in “Republic” a quasi-totalitarian city organisation, whereby truth would be imposed from the top.
Conversely, the differences between Taoist spirituality and Socratic philosophy lie in the Taoist adamant conviction that, if we align our actions with the Tao, good things will happen. For Taoists, there is no difference between the correct path and the practical path. Those are one and the same.
Invisible and effortless
Chuang-Tzu used to describe the Taoist spiritual experience as one of constant flow. If we align our actions with the Tao or natural law, we will be moving downstream, that is, with little effort and maximum speed.
If we align our personal energy with the Tao, we will surely feel stronger and more agile. As indicated in Chapter 8 of the Tao Te Ching, we’ll become like water, automatically flowing, and capable of benefitting everyone we meet.
The underlying difference between Socrates’ ideas and Lao-Tzu’s is thus of fundamental importance. Taoist spirituality is strongly individualistic, but at the same time, objective. It does not rely on whim, but on the strict conformance with the Tao.
In contrast, the Socratic spiritual experience remains mostly subjective. Indeed, Socrates wanted to pursue the truth, but he was still hanging on his own individual perceptions. He did not expect other people to necessarily arrive at the same ending.
When he consulted the Oracle at Delphi (actually, it was a close friend of his who did so), the Oracle confirmed that no man on earth was wiser than Socrates. Fair enough, but what is the point of so much wisdom if it remains linked to subjective experience?
Taoists like Chuang-Tzu describe true wisdom as “invisible and effortless,” but at the same time, as objective. An excellent decision, depending on the context, should be the same for all individuals immersed in those circumstances.
In contrast, Socratic spirituality appears self-defeating. If we read Plato’s “Apology,” we cannot fail to ask ourselves why Socrates failed to see that he had been framed. If he had asked Lao-Tzu, Yang-Tzu or Chuang-Tzu, they would have told him to escape and start a new life far from Athens.
They would not have advised Socrates to keep making great speeches but jeopardising his life. Even if Socrates drew vast spiritual contentment from his philosophical pursuits, he could not see the train coming to him at full speed. That’s the kind of spiritual experience that most people prefer to avoid.
If you are interested in putting rational ideas into practice in all sorts of situations, I recommend my book “Against all odds: How to achieve great victories in desperate times.”