Is Wu-Wei of Taoism a coherent idea?

[rousseau]

Wu wei is a concept literally meaning non-action or non-doing. Wu wei emerged in the Spring and Autumn period to become an important concept in both Taoism and Chinese statecraft.

In the Tao Te Ching, Lao Tzu explains that beings (or phenomena) that are wholly in harmony with the Tao behave in a completely natural, uncontrived way. The goal of spiritual practice for the human being is, according to Lao Tzu, the attainment of this purely natural way of behaving, as when the planets revolve around the sun. The planets effortlessly do this revolving without any sort of control, force, or attempt to revolve themselves, thus engaging in effortless and spontaneous movement.[dubious – discuss][citation needed]

Sinologist Herrlee Creel considered Wu wei a distinguishing factor between the more "purposive" religious Taoism of governmental Huang-Lao, emphasizing a striving for immortality, and the philosophical Taoism of the Zhuangzi, which emphasizes Wu wei in the sense of not striving, often considering the search for immortality secondary, laughable, or harmful.[1]

I was out in my backyard reading a book on Taoism last night and I got to thinking if Wu-Wei actually made any sense in reality. In theory I like the idea of spontaneous action, non-doing, acting in a non-contrived way, and yet I'm not convinced that this idea actually makes any sense in practice. A few things:

1) Isn't 'non-doing' itself a form of doing, and in itself contrived?

2) What would the difference be between spontaneous and non-spontaneous action? And if we always want to act spontaneously, what does that mean for when we need to concertedly plan?

3) Given the above, in what ways is Wu-Wei actually a useful idea?

 

[Bomb#20]

"A strong conviction that something must be done is the parent of many bad measures." - Daniel Webster

 

[Random Person]

Wu wei is a concept literally meaning non-action or non-doing. Wu wei emerged in the Spring and Autumn period to become an important concept in both Taoism and Chinese statecraft.

In the Tao Te Ching, Lao Tzu explains that beings (or phenomena) that are wholly in harmony with the Tao behave in a completely natural, uncontrived way. The goal of spiritual practice for the human being is, according to Lao Tzu, the attainment of this purely natural way of behaving, as when the planets revolve around the sun. The planets effortlessly do this revolving without any sort of control, force, or attempt to revolve themselves, thus engaging in effortless and spontaneous movement.[dubious – discuss][citation needed]

Sinologist Herrlee Creel considered Wu wei a distinguishing factor between the more "purposive" religious Taoism of governmental Huang-Lao, emphasizing a striving for immortality, and the philosophical Taoism of the Zhuangzi, which emphasizes Wu wei in the sense of not striving, often considering the search for immortality secondary, laughable, or harmful.[1]

I was out in my backyard reading a book on Taoism last night and I got to thinking if Wu-Wei actually made any sense in reality. In theory I like the idea of spontaneous action, non-doing, acting in a non-contrived way, and yet I'm not convinced that this idea actually makes any sense in practice. A few things:

1) Isn't 'non-doing' itself a form of doing, and in itself contrived?

2) What would the difference be between spontaneous and non-spontaneous action? And if we always want to act spontaneously, what does that mean for when we need to concertedly plan?

3) Given the above, in what ways is Wu-Wei actually a useful idea?

The opposite of "doing" is "being". One way to think of it is "doing" carpentry vs "being" a carpenter. If a carpenter is who you are then it doen't seem like work.

 

[rousseau]

"A strong conviction that something must be done is the parent of many bad measures." - Daniel Webster

How do you determine whether or not something needs to be done?

Is it really non-intervention in world affairs, rather than straight up non-intervention? Non-intervention in anything but one's own life?

 

[abaddon]

1) Isn't 'non-doing' itself a form of doing, and in itself contrived?

The goal is partly deep engagement and partly full authenticity. A spontaneous person isn't contrived, he has a "virtue" of being very open with you. Even if at first he had some work to do on himself to get that way.

Zhuangzi describes a butcher who can slice a bull into pieces quickly without touching bones. He's so skilled he hasn't had to sharpen his knife in many years.

But notice he has had to sharpen his knife in the past. He didn't attain this wu wei effortlessly. It's an acquired skill. If you join a martial arts class, they'll have you repeat movements over and over and over. The goal is, when life calls this skill into action, it happens without the yammering bit of the brain getting in the way. The body can do it with fuller engagement with the surrounds than the abstraction-prone mind is capable of.

 

[rousseau]

1) Isn't 'non-doing' itself a form of doing, and in itself contrived?

The goal is partly deep engagement and partly full authenticity. A spontaneous person isn't contrived, he has a "virtue" of being very open with you. Even if at first he had some work to do on himself to get that way.

Zhuangzi describes a butcher who can slice a bull into pieces quickly without touching bones. He's so skilled he hasn't had to sharpen his knife in many years.

But notice he has had to sharpen his knife in the past. He didn't attain this wu wei effortlessly. It's an acquired skill. If you join a martial arts class, they'll have you repeat movements over and over and over. The goal is, when life calls this skill into action, it happens without the yammering bit of the brain getting in the way. The body can do it with fuller engagement with the surrounds than the abstraction-prone mind is capable of.

Gotcha, so it's more something that someone achieves, rather than a state of mind. The end result of learning.

 

[abaddon]

Here's an interesting article about an interesting-looking book (I have it but haven't had a chance to read it yet): https://www.brainpickings.org/2014/04/21/trying-not-to-try-slingerland/

Western thought has suffered from centuries of oppressive dualism, treating intuition and the intellect as separate and often conflicting faculties — a toxic myth that limits us as a culture and as individuals. Fortunately, Slingerland points out, recent decades have brought a more embodied view of cognition acknowledging the inextricable link between thought and feeling and debunking, as Ray Bradbury so eloquently did, the false divide between emotion and rationality. (We’ve seen, too, that metaphorical thinking is central to our cognitive development, and metaphor is itself rooted in emotion.) The Chinese tradition, on the other hand, has a millennia-long history of cultivating a more integrated model of the human experience:

"For the early Chinese thinkers … the culmination of knowledge is understood, not in terms of grasping a set of abstract principles, but rather as entering a state of wu-wei. The goal is to acquire the ability to move through the physical and social world in a manner that is completely spontaneous and yet fully in harmony with the proper order of the natural and human worlds (the Dao or “Way”). Because of this focus on knowing how rather than knowing this or that, the Chinese tradition has spent a great deal of energy over the past two thousand years exploring the interior, psychological feel of wu-wei, worrying about the paradox at the heart of it, and developing a variety of behavioral techniques to get around it. The ideal person in early China is more like a well-trained athlete or cultivated artist than a dispassionate cost-benefit analyzer."

​

Slingerland poses a pause-giving contrast:

"The ideal person in Western philosophy is not only disembodied but also radically alone."​

​

​

 

[rousseau]

Sounds something like this, to me:

 

[abaddon]

... so it's more something that someone achieves, rather than a state of mind. The end result of learning.

Both a state of mind and learned, if my understanding is correct. Like flow -- more accessible to an artist or athlete.

Also a matter of genuineness. Ever had a convo that just flowed, where people weren't pausing and thinking before speaking, but everyone was so engaged it just felt like the connect was strong? The persons were being "real", and you felt it in your gut.

 

[Bomb#20]

"A strong conviction that something must be done is the parent of many bad measures." - Daniel Webster

How do you determine whether or not something needs to be done?

Is it really non-intervention in world affairs, rather than straight up non-intervention? Non-intervention in anything but one's own life?

I think Webster was only arguing for Taoist non-intervention in moderation -- more for a lack of bias between intervention and non-intervention, rather than either the typical bias for action or the Taoist bias for inaction. For any X, it may or may not be the case that X needs to be done; but we can never determine that "something" needs to be done when we haven't yet come up with a list of particular "somethings" to do determinations on.

 

[steve_bank]

There are many expressions in Taoism not defined by clear linear logic. There are practices that lead to a state. As I understand it wu wei is a stillness resulting from eliminating constant disturbances from your social environment. Similar to Buddhism. Karmic cause and effect in your mind tjhat keeps you enhaged in things you have no control over, best example is current politics.

Like most traditions, the practices are supposed to lead to practical life results.

Lao Tzu..Those who speak do not know, those who know do not speak. Means to me that the actual experience is impossible to translate to words.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wu_wei

Sinologist Herrlee Creel considers Wu wei, as found in the Tao Te Ching and Zhuangzi, to denote two different things.
1.An "attitude of genuine non-action, motivated by a lack of desire to participate in human affairs" and
2.A "technique by means which the one who practices it may gain enhanced control of human affairs."

The first is quite in line with the contemplative Taoism of the Zhuangzi. Described as a source of serenity in Taoist thought, only rarely do Taoist texts suggest that ordinary people could gain political power through Wu wei, and in the Zhuangzi does not seem to indicate a definitive philosophical idea, simply that the sage "does not occupy himself with the affairs of the world."

 

[abaddon]

Ed Slingerland is a good starting place to explore this concept. He has a few youtube vids, and wrote a book "Trying Not to Try".

I reread my post and thought "Yikes, sounds like suggesting athletic training" and talking of spontaneity as a skill. You DO meditate and practice before the spontaneity. But much of that is to learn what to let go, to let be, so that your head gets out of the way. Inaction isn't inaction of the body but of the planning/controlling intellect. So any training isn't to contrive being spontaneous, but because your mind tends to grasp at control and needs to relax that tendency.

Still, there are the persons that have studied it indepth. Like Slingerland.

 

[rousseau]

Sounds something like this, to me:

Ed Slingerland is a good starting place to explore this concept. He has a few youtube vids, and wrote a book "Trying Not to Try".

I reread my post and thought "Yikes, sounds like suggesting athletic training" and talking of spontaneity as a skill. You DO meditate and practice before the spontaneity. But much of that is to learn what to let go, to let be, so that your head gets out of the way. Inaction isn't inaction of the body but of the planning/controlling intellect. So any training isn't to contrive being spontaneous, but because your mind tends to grasp at control and needs to relax that tendency.

Still, there are the persons that have studied it indepth. Like Slingerland.

I'd think the above speaks to it pretty well. Once you gain enough experience in an activity your behavior in the activity becomes integrated into your automatic wiring. Being competent no longer takes forceful effort, but emanates naturally from you.

To me this goes hand in hand with a comment in the article above that the culmination of knowledge is a state of wu-wei, not knowing this or that. Acquiring knowledge translates itself into doing not knowing. And so in ancient times this competency and effortlessness would be explained in mystical terms like 'wu-wei', which can be described today by the result of deliberate practice, and 'feeding' our instinctual ability.