Individualism vs. collectivism

[Don]

As I look up the aspect of "individualism vs. collectivism" in Taoism,
Buddhism, and Confucianism, I'm looking at a lot of contradictions
about the stance of each philosophy, some saying it's really
individualistic, others saying not so much.

Here's a taste of what others are saying, and I don't mean to
disparage any, just try to examine what the stance of each seems to be
and how it matters.

(paraphrasing some of what they're saying)

1. Confucius individualism vs. collectivism:
the vision of human beings as free, independent and autonomous
individuals is and always was a mirage.

2. The Buddha taught that we are all interconnected and
interdependent in ways that make extreme individualism untenable. This
doesn't negate the validity of individual liberty, it just means that
the individual will is not completely sovereign.

3. Buddhism does not advocate any political ideology. However, the
Buddha set up his order of monks as a democratic socialism. Goods and
property are collectively owned, but governing is done by popular
decision. In a similar way, women were and are held in higher esteem
in Buddhism than other belief systems contemporary to the Buddha's
time

4. The dichotomy of emphases on individualism in Taoist thought is
openly discussed as important, like in the following.

(quoting
My thoughts of Individualism, Buddhism, and Taoism
by poetbee)

So it’s come to my attention after years of studying practicing
Eastern Religion, meditation, and thinking about it that I’ve come to
terms on the subject of “Individualism” and the manner in which
Eastern Religion traditionally treats this subject. In many traditions
the awareness of the self, or the “ego”, is something that practice,
meditation, and training is trying to wipe out. That our awareness or
self-awareness as creatures and intelligent life forms is simply a
construct of the mind; the mind is something we are trying to
dissipate or minimize so that we can become one with the Great
Universe or our Buddha Nature. In many traditions, as long as we have
“mind” and “ego” then it means we are hindered in our path to
Enlightenment or future advancement.

I would like to completely disagree on that topic. I feel as long as
we are alive and we are living on this planet then as human beings we
will have some kind of “ego.” . . . .
(unquote)

Seems to be an ongoing dialog about "individualism" in Chinese
philosophy, interpreted by Westerners. An important analog to it
seems to be the Chinese government affirmation in a unified version of
Buddhism, Confucianism, and Taoism (can't come up with the name of
that).

In case you're wondering, yes I would like to relate this focus on
"individualism" to the question of Yang Chu and his seeming egoism,
naturalism, and individualism, that seems to argue against
selflessness in Taoism. I admit to being somewhat off-put by what
Taoism seems to assert about self, selves, elves, etc.. bookburn

[Marquard Dirk Pienaar]

Maximum profit per individual is the most irrational
individualistic trait in existence,
which is based on psychological ideas about the "One".
If someone else gives a reason why maximum profit
per individual should be allowed, like it is, i'd like
to see it, because i have never seen any rational reasoning
for it.

[noname]

i'm not sure what you think Taoism seems to asssert about self, selves, and so forth, or which bits of it are offensive to you?

[Don]

"Offensive" is too strong, even "aversion" is more opinion than I'm
aware of. I do have my individual way that is not the same as the
Way, so there's individualism for you. Possibly I get Buddhist cant
about self in this news group that strikes me as odd. I can relate to
Cook Ting and his way of carving; the idea of identifying with an ugly
tree because it survives being made into blocks, or something, not so
much.

You have any flags to raise about any of this, I'm prepared to salute.
book burn

[pi]

Don: Individualism vs collectivism

Humans are programmable meat.

You can program (indoctrinate) them to be extremely individualistic or highly cooperative (collectivist).

To put it simply, if you run an agricultural society, you want to turn your folks into an egotic bunch too busy fighting one another to fight your oppression.

However, if you run an industrial society based on a heterarchical division of labour, you want folks to be able to cooperate, and a lot.

Imo.

pi

P.S. Please see: cooperative vs non-cooperative game theory for more details.

[noname]

i don't much do flags. i'll just spew words.

taoism considers desire the worst offense, same as buddhism i think.

the sage is just a plain old superhero whose super-power is that he keeps the sun of Tao at his back, rides its current down the stream, and twiddles the multiverse in his spare time.

the sage is said to have no mind of his own, only the mind of the people. lots of things are said about the character of the sage.

not so much is said about self, ego, things like that; those are covered as the reversal of the way of the sage. the sage does this, the sage does that, you have to figure out the internal workings that comprise the sage.

hth.

[{:-])))]

Don wrote:

> I would like to relate this focus on
>"individualism" to the question of Yang Chu and his seeming egoism,
>naturalism, and individualism, that seems to argue against
>selflessness in Taoism. I admit to being somewhat off-put by what
>Taoism seems to assert about self, selves, elves, etc..

<< begin quote from the Chuang-tzu, Chapter 1 >>

Lieh Tzu could ride the wind and go soaring around with cool and
breezy skill, but after fifteen days he came back to earth. As far as
the search for good fortune went, he didn't fret and worry. He escaped
the trouble of walking, but he still had to depend on something to get
around. If he had only mounted on the truth of Heaven and Earth,
ridden the changes of the six breaths, and thus wandered through the
boundless, then what would he have had to depend on?

Therefore I say, the Perfect Man has no self; the Holy Man has no
merit; the Sage has no fame.

<< end of quote >>

<< begin quote of Feng's TTC >>

Forty-nine

The sage has no mind of his own.
He is aware of the needs of others.

I am good to people who are good.
I am also good to people who are not good.
Because Virtue is goodness.
I have faith in people who are faithful.
I also have faith in people who are not faithful.
Because Virtue is faithfulness.

The sage is shy and humble - to the world he seems confusing.
Others look to him and listen.
He behaves like a little child.

<< end of quote >>

[{:-])))]

On Mon, 20 Nov 2017 12:06:46 -0800 (PST), Marquard Dirk Pienaar
<mdpi...@gmail.com> wrote:

>Maximum profit per individual is the most irrational
>individualistic trait in existence,
>which is based on psychological ideas about the "One".
>If someone else gives a reason why maximum profit
>per individual should be allowed, like it is, i'd like
>to see it, because i have never seen any rational reasoning
>for it.

Some may argue for how the world is better now
than it ever was, and at the same time see the world
as being some how in deep doo-doo.

Some will give credit to mercantilism, colonialism, imperialism
and of course, capitalism. Others may differ, and they
might like to quote selected statistics and measure
how they measure to make a point.

Capitalism may result in what ever the market will bear.
Prices may rise and fall and standards of living vary.

Taoism may be found to have its hermits, Sages,
reclusive people who have lost any and all desire.

- stories exist and may prove nothing rational

[{:-])))]

noname wrote:

> Don wrote:
>
>> In case you're wondering, yes I would like to relate this focus on
>> "individualism" to the question of Yang Chu and his seeming egoism,
>> naturalism, and individualism, that seems to argue against
>> selflessness in Taoism.
>
>
>
>
>
>> I admit to being somewhat off-put by what
>> Taoism seems to assert about self, selves, elves, etc..
>
>i'm not sure what you think Taoism seems to asssert about self, selves, and so forth, or which bits of it are offensive to you?

When Yang Chu was called hedonistic
because he enjoyed and appreciated life
without feeling any need to make things better,
and said, if only everyone could appreciate things
as they are instead of rushing about creating new
gadgets to own that end up owning the owner,
the elves were sad.

- at the village

[x]

What happened to the value of bubbles..

"Flop drop fail promise provide and allow for precious nothingness bubbles of fun that make it really something" - Zozo

[{:-])))]

x wrote:
> undifferentiated wrote:
>> noname wrote:
>> > Don wrote:
>> >
>> >> In case you're wondering, yes I would like to relate this focus on
>> >> "individualism" to the question of Yang Chu and his seeming egoism,
>> >> naturalism, and individualism, that seems to argue against
>> >> selflessness in Taoism.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >> I admit to being somewhat off-put by what
>> >> Taoism seems to assert about self, selves, elves, etc..
>> >
>> >i'm not sure what you think Taoism seems to asssert about self, selves, and so forth, or which bits of it are offensive to you?
>>
>> When Yang Chu was called hedonistic
>> because he enjoyed and appreciated life
>> without feeling any need to make things better,
>> and said, if only everyone could appreciate things
>> as they are instead of rushing about creating new
>> gadgets to own that end up owning the owner,
>> the elves were sad.
>>
>> - at the village
>
>What happened to the value of bubbles..

Tiny bubbles, in the wine, make me feel happy, make me feel fine.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mlCiDEXuxxA

>"Flop drop fail promise provide and allow for precious nothingness bubbles of fun that make it really something" - Zozo

I like beer, it makes me a jolly good fellow.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8i5k4I1AOEI

- aye, like beer