Debate: Daosim

Home › Forums › Debate: Daosim

Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • February 7, 2013 at 2:52 pm #18560
    Anonymous
    Guest

    One way I look at Daoism is that it takes us to the primordial state of being, maybe even before we were aware of ourselves. I think even in the proverbial savannahs we had wants and desires that we unknowingly fulfilled (not sure about that one). It goes along the lines of not desiring, wanting, hoping, etc. and we will not have to worry about disappointing ourselves. Also, know your limits, "know when to stop". On being a leader, it hints at a hands-off approach; that is, the people should not know "the tools of statecraft". Am not too sure about "the further one goes/the less ones know". Today we are told to travel the world and become more enlightened, Daoism states otherwise. But, I think, as a leader one must service your own; they can only be ruled by those who know them and not in the way that leaders have seen in other places.

    February 9, 2013 at 5:50 am #18561
    Anonymous
    Guest

    I would like to touch upon the Legalist idea that human nature is basically selfish, and therefore can be manipulated with a set of rewards and punishments. I agree with this statement, BUT do not believe that rewards and punishments lead to the best possible, most useful results. While they may be good for compliance, the Daoist philosophies of rejecting social conventions and reverting to spontaneity, would result in higher performance and higher quality results in all settings (social, academic, professional, etc.)

    Social Science and modern economic studies have long proven that traditional 21st century rewards and punishments DO WORK, BUT only in a very narrow band of circumstances. They often do more harm than good. If-then rewards work well for simple tasks, where there is a simple set of rules, and clear destination to go to. Rewards by their very nature narrow our focus and concentration, which is why they work in so many cases. But on the downside they restrict our possibilties, and hence destroy creativity.

    Real-world business example that typical rewards/punishments do not work: Microsoft Encarta VS Wikipedia

    Offering financial compensation, Microsoft enlisted a great number of managers, writers, and staff to oversee the creation of a digital encyclopedia called Encarta. On the other hand, Wikipedia offered its writers and staff no financial compensation, and instead promoted the idea of creating an Encyclopedia for fun and for the greater good of the world. No economist would have predicted that the Wikipedia model would triumph over the Microsoft model, but it clearly has. Intrinsic motivators beat out extrinsic motivators by a long shot.

    I understand that my argument is based on the business world, but I also beleive the impact of the rewards/punishment system is hindering us socially. Legal systems did not come from nature. Laws were invented by man, so it does not mean they are the best solution to social order and productivity, or that they will always work.

    I interpret the core Daoist philosophy as a call for autonomy, which I believe all human beings instinctly want. I believe we all innately desire to control our own lives. To master what we are innately drawn to. To do what we do in the service of something greater than ourselves.

    The Dao, The Way ... reverting to our nature, engaging in self-reflection, and subsequently carving out a meaningful purpose for ourselves , might be The Way we can really change the world.

    February 19, 2013 at 6:53 am #18562
    Anonymous
    Guest

    For the record, there seems to be an issue in your argument. Mainly, Encarta was a pay service. Sure, you can get a little info for free, but its main purpose was to get you to buy the software, which was $100+. It is hard to make the argument that Wiki was more successfully than Encarta because the people worked for free with intrinsic motivation. It is more successful simply because it is free. And any economist would predict that ! Kinda like how the newspapers are going bankrupt because people can get info for free. And, one more point, Sue Gardner, the CEO, had a salary last year of $197,000, comparable to other CEO of non-profit organizations of similar size. Not saying that’s wrong, just that it is.

    May 21, 2013 at 6:11 am #18563
    Anonymous
    Guest

    I was going to write about Daoism, but then I thought it would better for me not to interrupt it's natural flow and get in "the way".

    May 21, 2013 at 6:11 am #3207
    Rob_Hugo@PortNW
    Keymaster

    Daoists, please share your thoughts below!

  • Author
    Posts
Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.