Action through inaction (taoism)

[Scarlett Wampus]

Originally Posted by cfer

Okay, but how does that work, then? If you're in a situation where you need to do something for you, it might not be the best solution to the whole problem. Does this make sense? I don't really have any good examples off-hand.

Maybe I'm better off asking it this way...Does wu wei differentiate between good for the individual and good for the majority? The two are often not the same.

I'm probably not the best person to be taking a shot at this question since my experience of living through Taoist principles is limited, its just too damn strange. Anyway, here is a suggestion: -

Even with a great deal of knowledge we are always going to be limited in the accuracy of our predictions regarding the outcome of our actions. Given the enormity of the manifest Tao there will always be something lacking in our understanding of it. Even if we were astronomically intelligent its working could still be beyond our understanding if the Tao mainly operated beyond the realm of conceptual thought. Lao Tzu seems to suggest this was the case, and that ultimately we had to abandon knowledge in favour of a particular kind of instinctual awareness & power that is (unfortunately) only available to us through mystical insight. This mystical insight allows for the possibility of living in accordance with Tao without the necessity of knowing what it is! Without it we inevitably go astray.

Now consider that someone who is privy to this insight may have a radically different way of seeing things to others. Ideas about individual good as opposed to collective good may not make sense to such a person, or simply be deemed irrelevant, nor could they explain why this is so to someone who was not able to access this insight. In addition, the good of their actions would transcend our cultural, personal, whatever, notions of what the good is, yet if Lao Tzu is to be believed, all things would be in greater harmony as a result.

Taoism is trippy.

---
Adam, I'm a man baby! I'll make sure I add gender to my profile since my nick has everyone thinking I'm a woman!

[Jaymes]

Originally Posted by cfer

Maybe I'm better off asking it this way...Does wu wei differentiate between good for the individual and good for the majority? The two are often not the same.

This may be lack of sleep talking, but I seem to recall a story--that I now can't find for the life of me--that compared the Tao to the sea, and how it can wash uptiny plankton or beach whales, and that it doesn't differentiate.

[opensoul7]

Well my take on action through inaction would be that when your faced with a problem or a situation you can take action or do nothing , either way though you have made a action/decision that has consequences.Example you see someone getting robbed , you can help or not help , but no matter what you choose to do you have made a decision that will have consequences good or bad.Just because you choose to do nothing does not mean you are not responsible for the result/outcome.Your inaction does not make the situation go away but perhaps makes it worse , therefore the problem is still there and growing and now will effect more people and continue to get larger.But you chose to do nothing , the key phrase being "chose", God gave us free will , the ability to "choose" for ourselves what to do , how to think , of feel , ect, ect.But in "choosing" to do or not to do you still have made a choice! Sorry if I was repeating myself there , just wanted to clarify myself as much as possible.

[Master Vigil]

Maybe I'm better off asking it this way...Does wu wei differentiate between good for the individual and good for the majority? The two are often not the same.

I think with more study, and the understanding of humility and simplicity, you will find that "good for the individual" and "good for the majority" are in fact the same.

Also, let us not forget that Taoists do not view things as good or bad. That is very important.