Recovering Laozi’s Philosophy

序 Preface

這本書的目的是建立老子的邏輯系統，是重新分析《道德經》，瞭解老子哲學的邏輯。最困難是脫離傳統道家一千八百年來已經建立的思維。

傳統道家的錯誤扭曲了老子的邏輯，形成邏輯模糊和矛盾的道家文化，深深影響我們的思維。我們必須先突破這種文化，才能有「天然、獨立」的思考能力。

本書的目的

本書的目的是：脫離傳統道家的迷思，建立完整的老子哲學，使整本《道德經》的詮釋可以脫離傳統道家的錯誤解讀。

《道德經》所描述的老子哲學，是和古希臘、西方哲學、和佛家哲學一樣是普世哲學，並不是特別深奧的思想。

本書將以《道德經》中疑難的章節為例，重新建立老子的邏輯結構，完全證明傳統道家的假設是不需要的。

Preface

The purpose of this book is to build Laozi’s logic from the analysis of the Tao Te Ching, or the Sutra of Tao and Te,[1] which will be referred to as the Sutra in this book. To analyze the Sutra to understand the logic of Laozi’s philosophy, the most difficult thing is to overcome traditional Taoism that has been established in the last 1,800 years.

The mistakes in traditional Taoism has distorted Laozi’s logic and formed a vague and contradictory Taoism culture, which has deeply affected our thinking. We must break away from this culture before we can have the ability to think about “natural and independently”.

 The Purpose of This Book

The purpose of this book is: to overcome the traditional Taoist myth and to establish a complete Laozi’s philosophy so that the interpretation of the whole Sutra can be free from the traditional Taoist misreading.

The Laozi’s philosophy described in the Sutra is as universal as the ancient Greek, Western, and Buddhist philosophies, and is not a particularly profound thought.

The book will re-interpret several difficult chapters of the Sutra as examples to re-establish Laozi’s logical structure, fully proving that the assumptions of traditional Taoist are not needed.

重新詮釋《道德經》

現在，我們面對一個比較開放的社會，發現盲目用「民族主義」來保護傳統道家的不當。所以，我們重新詮釋《道德經》，指出傳統道家的錯誤，顯出老子的邏輯系統。

因為消除傳統道家的錯誤，才能恢復老子哲學，才能把正確的思考邏輯帶回我們的社會。這是一千八百年來，老子哲學的重要里程碑。

老子的邏輯結構從《道德經》第一章浮現出來，並且整本《道德經》都能反映出老子的邏輯結構，可以完全脫離傳統道家的矛盾。

中國傳統道家的迷思

首先，我們要瞭解傳統道家會迷失的原因，因為「貴無論」王弼 (公元226-249年) 引入的「有生於無」和「以無為道」論述，嚴重扭曲了老子的基本「有無相生」的思考邏輯。從此，《道德經》失去一致完整的邏輯，成為現在神秘的傳統道家，有「複雜不清」的思想系統。[2]  這樣的錯誤又經過一連串的歷史，造成一千八百年的迷思。

Reinterpretations of the Sutra

     Now, the society is more open, we find it inappropriate to use “nationalism” blindly to protect traditional Taoism. Therefore, we reinterpret the Sutra and remove the mistakes of traditional Taoism to show Laozi’s logical system.

Because, only by eliminating the mistakes of traditional Taoism, we can restore Laozi’s philosophy and can bring correct thinking logic back to our society. This is an important milestone in Laozi’s philosophy for the last 1,800 years.

Laozi’s logical structure emerges from the first chapter of the Sutra, and the whole Sutra reflects this consistent Laozi’s logical structure. Therefore, we can be completely free from the contradictions of traditional Taoism.           

The Myth of Chinese Tradition

First of all, we need to understand the reason that traditional Taoists get lost, it is because of the introduction of the “Yu born in Wu” and “Wu as Tao” assumptions introduced by Wang Bi (226-249 A.D.) of “Pro-Wu Group” seriously distorted Laozi’s basic logic of “co-arising of Yu and Wu”. From then on, the Sutra has lost its consistent and complete logic structure and became a mysterious traditional Taoist with a complex and unclear thought system.  Such mistakes went through a series of histories, resulting in 1800 confusion.

中國自古就認為邏輯思考是愚民惑眾，所以不注重邏輯。在《道德經》失去邏輯後，反而可以讓歷史學者在《道德經》的章句中，湊出一個特殊的詮釋，加上自己獨特的願景，立論來表示自己思想的神秘。這樣，《道德經》變成文人在無邏輯的拘束下，發揮自己的想像力。在中國社會中，模糊的邏輯並未造成明顯的問題。

直到十九世紀，開始受到西方的挑戰，傳統道家才會在思想上，感到與西方格格不入。但是，當時在列強的侵略下，很快產生了強烈的「民族主義」，為了保護中華傳統文化，而宣稱《道德經》是一部與眾不同的中國思想，更認為中國的思想不能用西方的思考邏輯來分析。

這種「民族主義」尚有遺存時，鮮有人會接受西方思想來批評傳統道家的思想。仍然以「中外之分」來保護中國特殊的思想，無法去分析歷史上可能的錯誤。

Since ancient times, China has thought that logical thinking is a way to fool people, so it does not pay attention to logic. After losing the logic of the Sutra, we let the historical scholars select verses from the chapter of the Sutra to come up with special interpretations, coupled with their unique vision, to express the mystery of their thoughts. In this way, the Sutra becomes free of logical restraint and allows the display of their imagination. In Chinese society, such vague logic did not cause obvious problems.

It was not until the nineteenth century, it began to be challenged by the West. Traditional Taoism felt ideologically cannot consistent with the West. However then, under the aggression of the great powers, a strong “nationalism” is created to protect the traditional Chinese culture and declared that the Sutra is a different Chinese thought, and cannot be analyzed by Western thinking logic.

When such “nationalism” remains, few people will accept Western ideas to criticize traditional Taoism. It forms a division of “China vs. Others” to protect Chinese special thinking and it is impossible to analyze possible mistakes in history.

邏輯思考的重要

我們認為邏輯思考是社會的力量，我們要避免像傳統道家的矛盾和模糊的邏輯。邏輯是一切思考的重要根據，尊重邏輯的社會才能穩定地進步。

如克拉克 (Clarke) 在他的著作中所說：「邏輯研究的重要是因為它可以建立一個普世原則來支配我們心裡的思考方式。除非人能邏輯地思考，否則沒有人能正確地思考。」

他又說：「邏輯不是讓一個人準備好爭論，也不是增加人類知識的存量，而只是教我們如何正確思考。」[3] 這也是我們討論老子哲學的目的。

老子的邏輯系統

我發覺《道德經》的邏輯並不模糊或矛盾，我們可以重新分析《道德經》，而避開傳統道家的特別解釋。老子哲學主要的概念可以用「對立統一」來表示，他以「無、有」二元論的基本思考[4]。

老子在《道德經》的第一章，用非常簡潔的語句，表達了一個完整的邏輯結構，整本《道德經》用不同的例子，顯出這個邏輯結構。

老子的「對立統一」原則是古希臘就有的觀念。所以，老子的哲學並不是中國獨有的，而是和古希臘哲學、黑格爾、佛家哲學一樣的普世邏輯。這是一個特別重要的發現。

Importance of Logic

We believe that logical thinking is the power of society. We should avoid fuzzy and contradictions of traditional Taoism. Logic is an important basis for all thinking, and so a society can progress steadily.

Richard Clarke says in his book[5], “The importance of the study of Logic is derived from its undeniable claim to a universal dominion over the minds of men. No one can ever think correctly unless he thinks logically.”

He continues to say: “It is not to make a man ready in an argument, nor to add to the stock of human knowledge, but to teach us to think correctly.” This is also the goal of this book.

Philosophical System of Laozi

I find that the logic in the Sutra is not vague or contradictory, and we can reanalyze the Sutra and avoid the special interpretations of traditional Taoism. The main concept of Laozi’s philosophy can be expressed in the form of “unity of opposites”, and he thinks of the basic theory in terms of the “Wu and Yu” dualism.

Laozi in the first chapter of the Sutra, with very concise statements, expressed a complete logical structure, the whole Sutra, and the whole book as different examples to show this logical structure.

Laozi’s principle of “unity of opposites” is a concept that existed in ancient Greek. Therefore, Laozi’s philosophy is not unique to China, but the same universal logic as ancient Greek philosophy, Hegel, Buddhist philosophy. This is a particularly important discovery.

與世界接軌

本書的主要的目的是回到一個共同的世界，消除傳統道家的思想所形成的「中外之分」，因為傳統道家的思考使我們無法和世界接軌。至於沒有深受過傳統道家影響的人，我們要指出老子哲學和西洋哲學、佛家哲學有共同的邏輯結構。目的也是要消除對老子的誤解。這兩種方法是希望我們的社會可以與世界接軌。

致謝

我要感謝很多人的幫忙，使這個努力可以改變大家對傳統道家的認識。使為「社會維新」的工作可以告一個段落。這本書的中文初稿是由林靜娥校正，英文初稿是由 Helena Wang和 Morlie Wang校正。特別在此感謝。

Connect to the World

The main purpose of this book is to return to a common world and eliminate the division of “China vs. Others” formed by traditional Taoism, which prevents us from connecting with the world. For those who have not been deeply influenced by traditional Taoism, we simply want to show that Laozi’s philosophy and Western philosophy and Buddhist philosophy share a common logical structure. The aim is also to dispel misunderstandings about Laozi. Both ways want to connect our society to the world.

Acknowledgment

I wish to thank many people for their help in changing our understanding of traditional Chinese Taoism. This shows a major step in the completion of the attempt to introduce a “Social Reform” our society. The Chinese drafts were reviewed by Ching O Lin and the English drafts were reviewed by Helena Wang and Morlie Wang. I would like to take this opportunity to thank them.

---

[1]  The name “The Sutra of Tao and Te” was first suggested by Henry Lim of the Academy. We shall refer to this book as simply “the Sutra.”

[2]       傳統道家因此以為自己有特別的思想體系，只是因為它失去一致的邏輯結構，可以自由發揮，成為世界罕見的特殊思想系統。

[3]       Richard F Clarke, Logic, Manuals of Catholic Philosophy, Longmans. Green & Co., 1889, p.1-2. Chapter 1.

[4]      為脫離傳統道家的假設，我們用墨子的「同、異」的概念來表示「無、有」，「無」是無分別，「有」是有分別。

[5]       Richard F Clarke, Logic, Manuals of Catholic Philosophy, Longmans. Green & Co., 1889, p.1-2. Chapter 1.

Available at amazon.com