Daodejing - Chapter Forty Nine

 

道德經  - 第四十九章

聖人無常心，以百姓心為心。

善者，吾善之；不善者，吾亦善之；德善。

信者，吾信之；不信者，吾亦信之；德信。

聖人在天下，歙歙為天下渾其心，

百姓皆注其耳目，聖人皆孩之。

Daodejing - Chapter Forty Nine

(The quality of indulgence)

The sage has no invariable mind [3] of his own; he makes the mind [4] of the people his mind.

To those who are good (to me) [5], I am good; and to those who are not good (to me), I am also good; - and thus (all) get to be good. [6]

To those who are sincere (with me), I am sincere; and to those who are not sincere (with me), I am also sincere; - and thus (all) get to be sincere. [8]

When the sage rules the world, they keep themselves quiet and non-judgmental, [9] blending the minds of all people under heaven back into a state of pure simplicity. [10]

The people all keep their eyes and ears directed to him, and he deals with them all as his children. [11]

References

1. The English translation is based on the translation by James Legge.
2. The Chinese text is based on the Daodejing in the ctext.org website : https://ctext.org/dao-de-jing.
3. No invariable mind (無常心 wu2 chang2 xin1) - It refers to a sage who transcends personal desires, prejudices, and stubborn subjective ideas, and does not impose his own likes and dislikes on others.
4. Mind (心 xin1) refers to the people's desires, feelings, thinking and opinions.
5. Good (善 shan4) refers to being good, virtuous, capable or excellent.
6. Thus (all) get to be good (德善 de2 shan4) - means "so that everyone will return to goodness," or "this is true selfless goodness." Here “德” can mean “得”, which means obtain or gain.
7. Sincere (信 xin4) - trustworthy, can be trusted.
8. Thus (all) get to be sincere (德信 de2 xin4) - - means "so that everyone will return to trustworthiness," or "this is true selfless trustworthiness." Here “德” can mean “得”, which means obtain or gain.
9. 歙歙 is pronounced as (xi4 xi4) in Mandarin and as (kap1 kap1) in Cantonese（讀音同「吸吸」或「給給」, 當表示「收斂、吸氣、融合」或用於疊字「歙歙」時，讀此音.  )   When the character 歙 is reduplicated in this sentence, it means "to take in, to integrate".  This first part of the sentence means the sage restraining their own desires, cleverness, and subjective biases.
10. 渾其心 (Hún qí xīn): To make the mind blend into a state of pristine, undifferentiated simplicity (like a "浑" or uncarved block of wood).  Rather than projecting their own ego, setting strict rigid morals, or using clever political schemes, the sage internalises their opinions. Because the ruler does not foster competition or promote artificial desires, the people naturally stop scheming, plotting, and competing. Their minds return to an innocent, harmonious, and unified state.
11. In a typical society, people are constantly on high alert. They sharpen their senses to look for advantages, watch what the government rewards, copy trends, and worry about what is safe or profitable. Their minds are hyper-stimulated and anxious.  The sage does not exploit this attention or feed their anxieties. Instead, through a calm, non-interfering presence, the sage helps the people relax their guard. The ruler guides everyone back to a state of a newborn infant (孩)—innocent, spontaneous, and free from calculated greed or malice.

Daodejing - Chapter Forty Eight

 

道德經  - 第四十八章

為學日益，為道日損。

損之又損，以至於無為。無為而無不為。

取天下常以無事，及其有事，不足以取天下。

Daodejing - Chapter Forty Eight

(Forgetting knowledge)

Those who devote themselves to learning, seek to gain something beneficial from day to day; 

Those who devote themselves to the Dao, seek to diminish something harmful from day to day.

They diminish it again and again, until they arrive at doing nothing (that is harmful and that is often based on human dao only).

Having arrived at this point of non-action (Wuwei), then there is nothing that they cannot do.

Successful leaders as a rule do not initiate unnecessary events. 

If they initiate unnecessary events, they are inadequate to be successful.

References

1. The English translation is based on the translation by James Legge.
2. The Chinese text is based on the Daodejing in the ctext.org website : https://ctext.org/dao-de-jing.

Philosophy of Lying

 

Tell all the truth but tell it slant, Emily Dickinson 

By LiveCanonPoetry on YouTube 

Please find notes on the Philosophy of Lying here.  This topic will be led by Maggie.

Daoism - an introduction

"Believing in Dào" - Chad Hansen 4-22-21 by Scripps College Humanities Institute

About the Speaker

Chad Hansen is Chair Professor of Chinese Philosophy, Emeritus at the University of Hong Kong. He has lived in Hong Kong off and on for almost three decades stretching back to the early 1960s. 

His research has focused on Chinese theory of language and logic (Language and Logic in Ancient China, 1983) and how the concepts used in understanding language and the 心 xīn heart-mind informed Classical Chinese ethical discourse (A Daoist Theory of Chinese Thought, 1992), and led to a reassessment of Daoism (Laozi’s Tao Te Ching: The Art of Harmony, 2009). 

He is past president of the Australasian Society of Asian and Comparative Philosophy, former Chair of the board of the Faculty of Arts and of the Department of Philosophy at HKU. Before coming to the University of Hong Kong in 1991, he was Professor and University Scholar at the University of Vermont. 

Throughout his professional career, he has been invited to visiting positions at major universities around the world, including Stanford, UCLA, Michigan, Pittsburgh, Hawaii and the National University of Singapore.

Chad Hansen's Chinese Philosophy Pages

Please see here: https://philosophy.hku.hk/ch/

Daoism on Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy

Please see here: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/daoism/

 

What is Truth?

 

The Nature of Truth - Epistemology | WIRELESS PHILOSOPHY

In philosophy, defining truth isn't just about playing with words—it’s about figuring out how our thoughts and language connect to reality. Because "truth" is so fundamental, philosophers have spent centuries trying to pin it down, resulting in a few heavy-hitting core theories.

Here is a breakdown of the major ways philosophy defines truth.

1. Correspondence Theory (The Classic View)

This is the most intuitive theory for most people. It states that a statement is true if it corresponds to an actual fact or reality.

• The Idea: If I say, "The cat is on the mat," my statement is only true if there is a physical cat, a physical mat, and the cat is currently sitting on it.

• The Catch: It requires a stable, objective reality that we can accurately perceive. It gets tricky when we talk about abstract things like morality or mathematics. (Is "murder is wrong" true in the same way "the cat is on the mat" is?)

• Can you think of other examples of where Correspondence Theory works well and examples of where the theory does not work well?

The following video gives a more detailed discussion of the theory:

The Correspondence Theory of Truth by Dr

Kane Baker

https://youtu.be/CXKHqeKI0K4?si=b_EA1LiyQpZpO4QS

Please see class discussion notes here.

2. Coherence Theory (The Network View)

Coherence theory argues that a statement is true if it fits logically into a larger, pre-existing system of beliefs.

• The Idea: Truth isn't about a single statement matching a physical object; it’s about how well that statement webs together with everything else we already know to be true. It's like a giant jigsaw puzzle.

• The Catch: A system of beliefs can be perfectly logical and consistent internally, but still completely detached from reality. (For example, a highly detailed fictional universe like Harry Potter is coherent, but it isn't "true.")

The following video gives a more detailed discussion of the theory:

The Coherence Theory of Truth by Dr

Kane Baker

https://youtu.be/kPr_e493Uqc?si=_AippPiutSKjmwjd

 Please see class discussion notes here.

3. Pragmatic Theory (The "What Works" View)

Championed by American philosophers like William James and Charles Sanders Peirce, pragmatism says that the truth of an idea is determined by its practical consequences.

• The Idea: An idea is "true" if it works, if it is useful to believe, or if it successfully guides our actions in the real world. Truth is dynamic and tested by experience.

• The Catch: Just because a belief is useful doesn't mean it's actually true. Believing you are invincible might give you the confidence to win a race, but it doesn't make you bulletproof.

The following video gives a more detailed discussion of the theory:

Pragmatic Theories of Truth by Dr

Kane Baker

https://youtu.be/uD3uRfDj_o4?si=y_BE41cTja2VMXjh

 

4. Deflationary Theories (The "Keep It Simple" View)

More modern philosophers argue that we over complicate things. Deflationism suggests that adding the words "is true" to a sentence doesn't actually add any new meaning.

• The Idea: Saying "It is true that it is raining" means exactly the same thing as simply saying, "It is raining." In this view, "truth" isn't a mysterious property or a deep metaphysical concept—it's just a linguistic tool we use for emphasis or agreement.

The following video gives a more detailed discussion of the theory:

Deflationary Theories of Truth by Dr Kane Baker

https://youtu.be/35QsV8mxMy0?si=i6AQS0pQY2h3OQJr

Summary: A Quick Analogy

Imagine you are a detective trying to solve a case:

• Correspondence: You look for physical fingerprints matching the suspect (direct evidence).

• Coherence: You check if the suspect's alibi aligns perfectly with the timelines of all the witnesses.

• Pragmatism: You follow the theory that successfully leads you to finding the missing money.

• Deflationism: You evaluate each piece of evidence by stripping away the abstraction of "truth" and looking strictly at the base-level claim. For more information, see here.

Which of these theories makes the most intuitive sense to you, or is there a specific type of truth (like scientific or moral truth) you are trying to untangle?

Epistemology

 

Wireless Philosophy: PHILOSOPHY - Epistemology: Introduction to Theory of Knowledge

Introduction

The above video gives an introduction to Epistemology or the Theory of Knowledge.  

Epistemology is a complex area of study and involves many sub-areas including those listed in the following Wikipedia page - Outline of epistemology.

We can only cover a small part of this complex subject which I believe is most relevant to us.  This spreadsheet diagram shows the areas that I plan to discuss.

Analysis of knowledge

The following videos give some analyses of the concept of knowledge. 

• PHILOSOPHY - Epistemology: Analyzing Knowledge #1 (The Gettier Problem)
• PHILOSOPHY - Epistemology: Analyzing Knowledge #3 (Causal and Reliabilist Theories)

Review Questions

1. What are the three types of knowledge?
2. What is the tripartite analysis of knowledge? Is it successful?

See answers here.

References

1. Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy - Epistemology.
2. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy - Epistemology. 
3. Wikipedia -  Epistemology
4. Wikipedia - Outline of epistemology

Moral Philosophy / Ethics

 

Philosophy Bites - Janet Radcliffe Richards on What is Philosophy?

Janet Radcliffe Richards on What is Philosophy?

In term 1 on 18/3/26, Helen led a discussion on moral philosophy / ethics.  Please find below some notes on the subject prepared by Helen:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1k3GGpaMT8YkLnUIQFnsK4w1yMKIopkQT/view?usp=sharing

We will listen to the above podcast and have further discussion on this interesting topic. 

Debate | Legalising the Sale of Human Organs

The following Youtube playlist lists videos of a debate on Sale of Human Organs at the Oxford Union Society on Thursday 29th October 2015. The motion was: This House Would Legalise the Sale of Human Organs.

https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLOAFgXcJkZ2zAkdONvfZuUzx6aiflkTId&si=4mcAOAbYcS3sSHq3

Speakers in order of appearance:

Callum Tipple | Proposition

Naomi Barker | Opposition

Janet Radcliffe Richards | Proposition

Vivienne Parry | Opposition

John Harris | Proposition

Raanan Gillon | Opposition 

This coming Wednesday, 20/5/26, I plan to watch some of the videos in this playlist and discuss the arguments made by both the proposing and the opposing sides.

Arguments of the debate

Please find below my summary of the arguments of the human organ debate:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1tn-t6PbyVzlJhvX_QgvC-Cg10LrgZ2gI/view?usp=sharing 

Kidney trade in Iran

Iran currently is the only country in the world that allows the sale of one's kidney for compensation (typically a payment); consequently, the country does not have either a waiting list or a shortage of available organs.  For more information, please see below:

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

Organ trade - Wikipedia page

Please see below:

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