Zhuangzi and Huizi were strolling along the bridge over the Hao River. Zhuangzi said, “The minnows swim about so freely, following the openings wherever they take them. Such is the happiness of fish.”
Huizi said, “You are not a fish, so whence do you know the happiness of fish?”
Zhuangzi said, “You are not I, so whence do you know I don’t know the happiness of fish?”
Huizi said, “I am not you, to be sure, so I don’t know what it is to be you. But by the same token, since you are certainly not a fish, my point about your inability to know the happiness of fish stands intact.”
Zhuangzi said, “Let’s go back to the starting point. You said, ‘Whence do you know the happiness of fish?’ Since your question was premised on your knowing that I know it, I must have known it from here, up above the Hao River.”
Dominic Smith
check the archive
Jayden Bailey
He meant shut your fucking mouth and look at this happy fish
Levi Kelly
He meant one is all and all is one.
Zachary Peterson
>someone called out my bullshit so i better talk in circles so i dont have to admit im wrong
whats the ancient chinese equivalent of standing up from your computer and pacing circles in your room red faced?
Lincoln Diaz
idk, what?
Jace Collins
no wats the modern equivalent of seeing from all sides?
Ayden Ward
>get blown the fuck out >have to resort to arguing semantics Absolute state of Zhuangzi.
Isaiah Reyes
Not really what this is about, try harder
Jaxson Scott
t.Zhuangzhi
John Taylor
>"whence do you know the happiness of fish" implies he does know the happiness of fish >huizi argues that if you are not something you cannot know it >but his question implies knowledge of something he is not, thereby implying the possibility that zhuangzi can know the happiness of fish. most of the verbal games in oriental literature are about doing clever things with words to make others appear foolish, rather than autistic logically rigid analytical style philosophy.
Zachary Ward
You guys are really dense if you think that's it. This was a literary creation deliberately set down, probably not a setting down of an argument that happened in real life. It's clearly about a certain viewpoint of quietism/skepticism/relativism and a critique of discursive reasoning, than it is a description of a person "arguing semantics to cover up that he got BTFO"
Anthony Phillips
>implying Zhuangzi is still alive
Dominic Barnes
>he thinks Zhuangzi wasn't just shitposting
Nathaniel Allen
Where in the archive? This exchange seems incomplete. Zhuangzi arguing "I observe these fish in this place so I know what it is to be a well off, even happy fish." Any mystical far East bullshit?
Owen James
>"I observe these fish in this place so I know what it is to be a well off, even happy fish." Not the argument, read closer
Caleb Sullivan
>oh ho! Ching chong ching Master Fish-sensei-san He probably just wanted to fuck the fish like one of his japanese animes
Logan Edwards
this is the end beautiful friend seeing and knowing are not the same thing, the mind is capable of more than just logic and emotions did you see any butterflies in the last year? one eye closed
Charles Jackson
herro ferrow Nip-Nong, I am very grad that peopre rike us now post on /rit/ we can finarry teach baka gaijin about our superior phirosophy and take over the evir Gweilo west culture
Parker Perry
>"u phrased the question wrong, i win lol"
Aaron Nelson
two eyes opened where's the vision?
Nolan Gutierrez
ITT: people that don't understand Zhuangzi
“A frog in a well cannot discuss the ocean, because he is limited by the size of his well. A summer insect cannot discuss ice, because it knows only its own season. A narrow-minded scholar cannot discuss the Tao, because he is constrained by his teachings. Now you have come out of your banks and seen the Great Ocean. You now know your own inferiority, so it is now possible to discuss great principles with you. 井蛙不可以語於海者,拘於虛也;夏蟲不可以語於冰者,篤於時也;曲士不可以語於道者,束於教也。今爾出於崖涘,觀於大海,乃知爾醜,爾將可與語大理矣。”
Julian Rivera
Staring at the finger pointing to the moon.
Jaxon Lopez
to know the whole world without leaving one's home, to see the infinite in the dust mote. how do I know these things? by looking
Xavier Nelson
I love that passage.
Zhuangzi sees a fish from the bridge and sees happinness in it.
Huizi sees Zhuangzi and does not see how Zhuangzi can know of how the fish feels.
Zhuangzi immediatelly throws it back at him, since Huizi is not perceiving that this idea he had of him came about in the same way that in between Zhuangzi and the fish.
Except Huizi does not realize it yet even still and proceeds logically, stating that no one is the other, concluding that no one knows of each other because of that.
Zhuangzi, brings it back to the first question, because in the way that it was phrased, Huizi was seeing a knowledge of the fish in Zhuangzi's words and only then questioning how that could come about if not from within the fish. Zhuangzi brings back to earth by saying he got to know the happiness of the fish from the bridge, that is to say, he may not know it from within the fish, but his perception of happiness was always there up the bridge, coming from himself, responding to what he saw in the river. Just like Huizi, even though he is not Zhuangzi, is able to perceive Zhuangzi as someone else different from the fish. If no one is the other, the conclusion is not that no one knows of each other, but that each one knows of each other from where they are and that's all the knowledge there is.
Zhuangzi's initial call was not something he said from being the fish, but from looking at the fish from the bridge.
Caleb Perry
Everything is fractal. Even the prostrate kid that never left his room can know the rest of the world down to some scribbles in an iranian backalley. Its a matter of being truly observant.
Mason Adams
That's the gayest shit I ever heard
Andrew James
No u
Angel Jenkins
Can we stop with this shitpost already?
Logan White
That's not nice, user. Veeky Forums is supposed to be a respectable board where we think out our posts and are nice to others. If you keep this up, I may report you.
Josiah Cruz
It beats most overrated western shit.
Grayson White
Be at home everywhere, then you never leave.
Gabriel Williams
You are gay
Austin Sanchez
Veeky Forums is my only safe space on this site
Andrew Bell
>only the blind man truly sees >to be alive you must first be dead >to go up you must go down >*punts baby son across the room* brothers are as hands and feet; wives and children are as clothing. You may mend your torn dress, but who can reattach a lost limb?
why is chinky philosophy so bad?
Hunter Gray
You always see the wageslave eager for "traveling" and "resting". You dont need to get the fuck out to some meme islands in the caribean to rest, its all so pointless.
James Cooper
What did you expect from ant-people? The only worthwhile asian phil is Hindu, which is god tier tbqh.
Andrew Hill
traveling is not a meme. traveling to paris and the like is a meme
spend your money on memories not objects user
Robert Garcia
maybe you;re just too dumb
Carter Lewis
what is dumb but being smart? to be smart you must be dumb because the knowing flows from the unknowing. for in spring does not the egg come before the chick? and the chick before the swallow? what smart man would put the ox before the cart? the swallow flies head first but would not the swallow fall upon the fields if not for the tail? perhaps i am too smart. i leave you with this question. are you a smart user?
Xavier Price
>he thinks the Tao can be spoken of lmao'ing @ western society SO hard right now
Noah Lopez
Ant people? It was communism that ruin the cultural wealth and philosophy of china. Martial arts, paintings, books, were all burned due to the cult of mao. And you know who came up with Communism? The jews.
Anthony Parker
samefag chink who does;nt know how to use apostrophe's
David Wood
>but your not a fish >im also not you why did Zhuangzi even reply to this shit bait
Kayden Lee
Not staring at the finger pointing to the moon.
Adrian King
no staring
Benjamin Perez
the joy of life crosses boundaries where words do not.
Robert Nguyen
Yes What you mean is >look at the happy fish >how do you know they're happy if you're not a fish >how do you know I don't know they're happy if you're not me >if I can't know what you know you can't know what the fish know >well actaully
Xavier Campbell
so much babbling here, just nourish the life in you, thats all.
you wont need that if you nourish life. you only feel that need now cause it is a way to distract your thirst for life. once that is gone, its palliatives will be unnecessary.
