Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

Zhuangzi, Wuwei , and the Necessity of Living Naturally: A Reply to Xunzi’s Objection

2014; Routledge; Volume: 24; Issue: 3 Linguagem: Inglês

10.1080/09552367.2014.952174

1469-2961

Danesh Singh,

Emotions and Moral Behavior

AbstractCritical readers can reasonably judge Zhuangzi's 莊子 notion of wuwei 無爲 to offer a persuasive reply to Xunzi's objection to Zhuangzi's emphasis on living naturally, in light of recent theories of action. For Zhuangzi, self-cultivation is possible only when individuals attune themselves to the processes inherent in nature (tian 天). Daoist wuwei depends crucially on two descriptive claims that Zhuangzi endorses and Xunzi rejects. The first claim, backed by Dreyfus' theory of skill acquisition, is that views of self-cultivation which rely on formulas and concepts stand opposed to the Way. The second claim, supported by Elster and Csikszentmihalyi's theories of action, is that conscious deliberation is unable to facilitate self-cultivation. Zhuangzi's normative vision requires that individuals indirectly create conditions for spontaneity, rather than pursue spontaneity directly, since any deliberate attempt at being spontaneous is self-defeating. Notes[1] Unless otherwise noted, for all English translations of passages from Zhuangzi and Xunzi, I will use Watson (Citation1963) and Watson (Citation1968), respectively. All Romanized Chinese words have been changed to pinyin.[2] There seems to be contention in the secondary literature about this point. Van Norden (Citation2000) thinks that approval wins over desire every time (pp. 117–118). Wong (Citation2000, p. 140) says that approvals can potentially win over desires. In this paper, I understand Xunzi as supporting the weaker view that approval can, but does not necessarily, override desire.[3] I am using Van Norden's translation of this passage. Hate in the original Chinese is wu 惡.[4] This is Dreyfus' phrase.[5] Jon Elster calls goals or aims that cannot be pursued directly 'by-product states'.[6] While Jeremy Bentham is the first to make explicit mention of this paradox, I rely on Joel Feinberg's analysis of the paradox of hedonism.[7] While he did not explicitly discuss the paradox, Aristotle believed that friendship was both necessary for the good life and that it required an unselfish disposition toward one's true friends.[8] For an interesting discussion of Daoism and paradoxical thinking, see Moeller (Citation2006, pp. 55–74). For an account of paradoxical thinking as it relates specifically to the concept of wuwei, see Loy (Citation1985, pp. 73–86).[9] This phrase does not come out of the Zhuangzi, but rather can be found in the Daodejing (Ivanhoe, Citation2002, p. 51). Nevertheless, the idea of wuwei as it is employed in the Zhuangzi conveys a similar notion.[10] See Zhuangzi 5/52; (Watson, Citation1968, p. 75): 'The sage hatches no schemes, so what use has he for knowledge?' See also Zhuangzi 6/4; (Watson, Citation1968, p. 77): 'The True Man of ancient times did not rebel against want, did not grow proud in plenty, and did not plan his affairs.'[11] See Watson (Citation1968, p. 97): '[D]o not be a storehouse of schemes, do not be an undertaker of projects.' Ziporyn's translation of this passage seems to be closer to the meaning of the original: 'Not doing, not being a repository of plans and schemes; Not doing, not being the one in charge of what has to happen' (Ziporyn, Citation2009, p. 53).[12] Csikszentmihalyi (Citation1990, pp. 150–151) acknowledges that, 2,300 years before him, Zhuangzi remarks on the phenomenon of flow experience. For a helpful analysis of the similarities and convergences in the views of Zhuangzi and Csikzentmihalyi, see Jochim (Citation1998, pp. 35–74).