Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.
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.
Philosophy East and West – University of Hawai'I Press
Published: Apr 25, 2017
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.