Abstract

In this essay it is argued that the dao of the Daodejing is neither a non-being nor anything transcending all senses, but a non-empty transforming unsummed totality that defies our ability to experience it, and thus dao is unnamable descriptively. For Laozi, one can grasp metaphysical insights concerning dao via the futile attempts to "force" a sign to "name" dao. Also, Laozi's views are compared with Wittgenstein's, and it is shown that Laozi has another option of holding that any sign "forced" to "name" dao must be meaningless.

pdf

Additional Information

ISSN
1529-1898
Print ISSN
0031-8221
Pages
pp. 352-379
Launched on MUSE
2017-04-25
Open Access
No
Back To Top

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Without cookies your experience may not be seamless.