I just skimmed over it because well, I really found it hard to read.
But the 'ideal' of American interpretation of Taoism isn't the one I'm familiar with.
Russell Kirkland is essentially trying to define something that Lao Tzu said wasn't definable, to say something 'isn't' means you have to show what 'is'. And the point is, nobody knows what it 'is'.
I'll be honest, I'm not really comfortable in debating Taoism as some academic subject, because I can't say what it is, there are a about 50 chapters in the Tao Te Ching that still confuse me, and a good 10 that....I'm almost certain I know what it means, but sometimes I'm not sure.
And I've read over 15 translations. Chuang Tzu, oh man, yeah, look up esoteric in the dictionary and you'll get his name. It's hard work, I find the Bible easy, I find the Koran easy. The Tao Te Ching is hard*
(and I wish I could come up with a way to describe it as hard, but it's not something that comes easily..)
In some ways, I find the essay very hypocritical in the extreme, even the heading, is just well, it's contradictory.
But I'm not university educated, and not learned in the ways of debating, so I am probably missing something there. As far as cultural appropriation, that I would have to disagree with, the Tao Te Ching isn't some super secret document for a secret society in the depths of China (the nation that it was produced in, doesn't exist anymore either), it's for everyone to read, and everyone to decide on, just the same as the Bible, or the Koran, or the Torah.
Re: let me get all esoteric
But the 'ideal' of American interpretation of Taoism isn't the one I'm familiar with.
Russell Kirkland is essentially trying to define something that Lao Tzu said wasn't definable, to say something 'isn't' means you have to show what 'is'. And the point is, nobody knows what it 'is'.
I'll be honest, I'm not really comfortable in debating Taoism as some academic subject, because I can't say what it is, there are a about 50 chapters in the Tao Te Ching that still confuse me, and a good 10 that....I'm almost certain I know what it means, but sometimes I'm not sure.
And I've read over 15 translations. Chuang Tzu, oh man, yeah, look up esoteric in the dictionary and you'll get his name. It's hard work, I find the Bible easy, I find the Koran easy. The Tao Te Ching is hard*
(and I wish I could come up with a way to describe it as hard, but it's not something that comes easily..)
In some ways, I find the essay very hypocritical in the extreme, even the heading, is just well, it's contradictory.
But I'm not university educated, and not learned in the ways of debating, so I am probably missing something there. As far as cultural appropriation, that I would have to disagree with, the Tao Te Ching isn't some super secret document for a secret society in the depths of China (the nation that it was produced in, doesn't exist anymore either), it's for everyone to read, and everyone to decide on, just the same as the Bible, or the Koran, or the Torah.