Life in progress

JusJoJan 16/26 – Philosophy

14 Comments

This post is part of Just Jot it January, and the prompt word, “philosophy,” is brought to us by Sadje. Check out her blog here!

I’ve strayed away from it, but at one time, I closely followed the teachings of the Tao Te Ching.

The philosophy of Taoism makes a lot of sense to me.

Chapter 11

Thirty spokes share one central hub; it is the empty space within that makes the carriage useful.
Clay is molded to form a vessel; it is the empty space within that makes the vessel useful.

Doors and windows are cut out to make a room; it is the empty space within that makes the room useful.

Therefore, while substance (Being) offers the benefit, emptiness (Non-being) offers the utility.

As a way to apply this to life, think about living in the present; emptying the mind of thoughts of the past and worries of the future allows a person to fully concentrate on what they’re doing, making their actions more controlled and therefore more useful to the moment.

Something worth thinking about.

This philosophical post is part of Just Jot it January! Want to join in? Just click here to get to the prompt and drop your link in the comments. It’s fun!

Thanks again to Sadje for today’s word of the day!

Unknown's avatar

Author: Linda G. Hill

There's a writer in here, clawing her way out.

14 thoughts on “JusJoJan 16/26 – Philosophy

  1. Dan Antion's avatar

    That’s a pretty good philosophy, Linda.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. Liz H-H's avatar

    I do try to do this, but the damned squirrels keep skittering across the roof of my empty space. Oh well, let them go, as they will and the noise will cease. Until the next time; I am indeed a flawed person, but at least I’m funny. 😉

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Richmond Road's avatar

    It is, of course, literally impossible to live in the present, for we are doomed to always live in the past. Though not very far in the past, for the most part. If living is consciousness, and I think it is basically that for a sentient being, then every event of which we are conscious occurred some time in the past – even the thought itself, as it takes time for the experience to be perceived and interpreted by our consciousness and our brains (which don’t seem to be the same thing), so the experience of being hit on the head by a brick is interpreted fairly quickly, whilst in spotting a distant star in the night sky we may be witnessing (experiencing) an event millions of years into the past.

    And what about walking through a field on a misty evening and seeing an animal in the distance – we begin to recognise it as a dog looking to its left. Gradually we can make out the shape of its ears and nose and we are sure that it is a cattle dog of some sort poised and ready to chase something. But when we get closer we realise that it isn’t a dog at all, but a tree stump. The lack of light, the distance, our eyes and our brains have transpired against us to create a false impression.
    But here’s the question. At the point that we were sure it was a dog were we really experiencing (in the past) a dog or a tree stump? And at what point can we be absolutely certain that it IS a tree stump? Can we be absolutely certain about anything at all?

    So we can only ever live in the past, and we can’t even be sure that the past is what we think it is.

    Like

    • Linda G. Hill's avatar

      And yet …
      “Those who seek knowledge,
      Collect something every day.
      Those who seek the Way,
      Let go of something every day.”*

      At what point can we be certain that it’s a tree stump? When we either get close enough to see it clearly or get out our binoculars. 😛

      What you’ve described is why even in Taoist philosophy, it’s said that we can never be fully one with the Tao. It recognizes that and urges us only to practice stillness and emptiness.

      *From Chapter 48 of the Tao Te Ching

      Thanks for making me think. 🙂

      Like

      • Richmond Road's avatar

        And thank you for making me think likewise.

        The binoculars might help, I suppose, or we could go even further and use a microscope, but under a microscope it wouldn’t appear as a tree stump at all ….
        So perhaps things are defined not by what they are, but how they are viewed. Perhaps everything is a matter of perspective.
        Perhaps everything really is what it appears to be until such time as it appears to be something else.
        I don’t think the taoists would have too many issues with this idea – I don’t think Taoism is firmly cemented into any tangible sense of reality.

        Like

  4. Sadje's avatar

    I love this philosophy Linda. Thanks

    Like

  5. Carol anne's avatar

    Yes! Definitely food for thought Linda! ❤

    Like

Leave a reply to Liz H-H Cancel reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.