Ideal Daoist Society Analysis
While attempting to figure out a good topic for my final paper, I reflected back to the question on our Midterm exam that asked us to give a comparison between our modern society and the ideal Daoist society. This question peaked my interest, which lead me to wonder how ideal societies differ throughout the world. I decided to compare the differences between the perfect society as described in Sir Thomas More’s Utopia to the ideal Daoist society introduced in class by Lao Tzu and Chuang Tzu. Obviously a society is made up of many different aspects, so I decided to focus on three main aspects: the structure of the society’s government, the education of the citizens within the society, and the society’s perspective on war. Each of these societies
…show more content…
is depicted as the “perfect” society in their respective regions in the world, but that begs the question from an objective point of view, which is better? Even though the society depicted in Sir Thomas More’s Utopia as well as the Ideal Daoist society introduced by Lao Tzu and Chuang Tzu are supposed to be considered “perfect” societies, I believe that Utopia would be be better overall in terms of government structure, education of its’ citizens, and it’s perspective of war. First, analyzing the structure of each society’s government structure produces some interesting distinctions. Looking at the Utopia of Sir Thomas More’s fictional novel, there is a hierarchy of a title known as a phylarch. Each household contains multiple families, and one person in each household is appointed as a phylarch. Every ten phylarchs are overseen by a senior phylarch, and these senior phylarchs are overseen by the chief executive. This system allows for each household to be represented in the government even though not every citizen gets a direct vote. This holds familiar similarities to the representative democracy system that is present in the United States; however, there are obviously numerous differences that make each system fundamentally different. Comparing the phylarch system of Utopia to the government structure of the ideal Daoist society, there are more striking differences to consider. For starters, there are as few laws as possible, this is to simplify the governing power and give citizens the freedom to live a more natural life. There is also no hierarchical ranking of positions in the government since there is only one ruler. This ruler holds very limited power over the society’s citizens, and doesn’t rule by fear. From the Dao De Jing, Lao Tzu explains the perfect ruler by stating “A leader is best, When people barely know he exists. Of a good leader, who talks little, When his work is done, his aim fulfilled, They will say, ‘We did this ourselves.’” Under these circumstances, in a society with few laws and with a strong emphasis on its citizens living a more natural life, a ruler with little power makes sense; but this would be detrimental to the Utopian society since a ruler without much power can’t uphold much of anything.
Analyzing the methods for how a society handles the difficult task of educating its citizens can tell a lot about the society as a whole. Looking specifically at Utopia, every citizen receives an education since it is strongly believed values and dispositions are acquired through education. Every adult has a job, but is most often a laborious job that doesn’t require much intellect to complete; this leaves plenty of time for intellectual pursuits when no work is needed to be completed. “For if you suffer your people to be ill-educated, and their manners to be corrupted from their infancy, and then punish them for those crimes to which their first education disposed them, what else is to be concluded from this, but that you first make thieves and then punish them.” It is believed that if one does not receive a proper education, one will not receive the values and dispositions that makes one a law abiding citizen, which leads to crimes such as thievery. In contrast, the Daoist society looks at education a little differently to say the least. The idea of “Learn by unlearning” is a major part of Daoism which essentially means that one must remove preconceptions from the outside world to live a simpler, more natural life. In lecture, Professor Ni held up a dry-erase marker and asked the students in the classroom “What is this?”, to which everyone answered the obvious choice. What was stopping that marker from being a paperweight? A weapon? A toy? Just because it was originally made with a purpose does not mean that it can only serve a single purpose. This idea is summarized perfecting in chapter fourty seven of the Dao De Jing: “Without going outside, you may know the whole world. Without looking through the window, you may see the ways of heaven. The farther you go, the less you know. Thus the sage knows without travelling; He sees without looking; He works without doing.” In brief, Utopia and the Daoist society drastically different views on education: Utopia would like nothing more than for its citizens to learn as much as possible as opposed to the Daoist society which would like nothing more than for its citizens to remove as many preconceptions from the outside world as possible to live a more natural lifestyle.
Finally, a society’s perspective on war is the final aspect that needs discussing, since much relies on this single fact.
A society’s goals and agendas rely on this major aspect since the answers to many questions can be influenced by this perspective. If a country is lacking resources or desires more land this perspective can play a crucial part in determining whether the society will go to war or will negotiate with neighboring countries for what it needs. Utopia attempts to avoid war as often as possible, since each city is a self-sustained civilization with strong walls and surrounded by farmland. In the event that a war is imminent and is unavoidable, the citizens of Utopia will attempt to use trickery and cunning over brute force. There is an example given that spies would be sent into the towns of the opposing society and propaganda would be started to attempt the townspeople to revolt against their seemingly oppressive rulers. Many would consider these tactics cheap and unfair, but the Utopians consider this the logical approach; why kill hundreds of people in a battle when the death of only a few people can solve the issue? In the event that the Utopians are victorious, they stress not to brag or disrespect the enemy soldiers or land in any way, enough damage has been done already and this much death and destruction is not a cause for celebration: “there is nothing more inglorious than that glory that is gained by war.” Surprisingly, the Daoist society mirrors this perspective almost exactly with maybe a few minor differences. In The Art of War, by Sun Tzu, it is said that “The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting.” This idea mirrors that of the Utopian strategy of using trickery to avoid fighting altogether, since if a battle can be won without the need for the loss of lives that is the most beneficial outcome. In essence, both of these societies share an almost identical perspective on war, most likely attributed to the fact that
end result of war tends to be worse in the end for both sides in contrast to the war never occurring in the first place.
After looking at aspects of society such as the structure of a society’s government, education of its citizens as well the society’s perspective on war, I believe that the Utopia introduced by Sir Thomas More in 1516 is an overall “better” society than the Ideal Daoist society. In terms of government structure, there is a more hierarchical system in place that allows for a sort of “checks and balances” kind of ideology in the event that one person attempts to hold too much power in the society. Even though the ruler of the ideal Daoist society holds little power over the citizens, there is no way of guaranteeing that the ruler won’t abuse his/her power at some point in the future. When it comes to educating the citizens of the society, I believe that learning and understanding the world is a crucial part of personal growth, since Utopian children all receive an education and adults are influenced to pursue intellectual activities during their free-time I think it is the better system. The Daoist idea of “learn by unlearning” could work for individuals practicing Daoism, but an entire society completely shutting out the knowledge of the outside world seems more detrimental than beneficial as a whole. Finally, both of these societies have an equivalent perspective on war, attempting to avoid war at all cost but in the event that a war was unavoidable strategy and cunning would be favored over a brute force battle with the enemy. Therefore, due to the Utopians having an overall more promising structure of government as well as a better system for educating its citizens, Utopia is the stronger “perfect” society in comparison to the ideal Daoist society.
is depicted as the “perfect” society in their respective regions in the world, but that begs the question from an objective point of view, which is better? Even though the society depicted in Sir Thomas More’s Utopia as well as the Ideal Daoist society introduced by Lao Tzu and Chuang Tzu are supposed to be considered “perfect” societies, I believe that Utopia would be be better overall in terms of government structure, education of its’ citizens, and it’s perspective of war. First, analyzing the structure of each society’s government structure produces some interesting distinctions. Looking at the Utopia of Sir Thomas More’s fictional novel, there is a hierarchy of a title known as a phylarch. Each household contains multiple families, and one person in each household is appointed as a phylarch. Every ten phylarchs are overseen by a senior phylarch, and these senior phylarchs are overseen by the chief executive. This system allows for each household to be represented in the government even though not every citizen gets a direct vote. This holds familiar similarities to the representative democracy system that is present in the United States; however, there are obviously numerous differences that make each system fundamentally different. Comparing the phylarch system of Utopia to the government structure of the ideal Daoist society, there are more striking differences to consider. For starters, there are as few laws as possible, this is to simplify the governing power and give citizens the freedom to live a more natural life. There is also no hierarchical ranking of positions in the government since there is only one ruler. This ruler holds very limited power over the society’s citizens, and doesn’t rule by fear. From the Dao De Jing, Lao Tzu explains the perfect ruler by stating “A leader is best, When people barely know he exists. Of a good leader, who talks little, When his work is done, his aim fulfilled, They will say, ‘We did this ourselves.’” Under these circumstances, in a society with few laws and with a strong emphasis on its citizens living a more natural life, a ruler with little power makes sense; but this would be detrimental to the Utopian society since a ruler without much power can’t uphold much of anything.
Analyzing the methods for how a society handles the difficult task of educating its citizens can tell a lot about the society as a whole. Looking specifically at Utopia, every citizen receives an education since it is strongly believed values and dispositions are acquired through education. Every adult has a job, but is most often a laborious job that doesn’t require much intellect to complete; this leaves plenty of time for intellectual pursuits when no work is needed to be completed. “For if you suffer your people to be ill-educated, and their manners to be corrupted from their infancy, and then punish them for those crimes to which their first education disposed them, what else is to be concluded from this, but that you first make thieves and then punish them.” It is believed that if one does not receive a proper education, one will not receive the values and dispositions that makes one a law abiding citizen, which leads to crimes such as thievery. In contrast, the Daoist society looks at education a little differently to say the least. The idea of “Learn by unlearning” is a major part of Daoism which essentially means that one must remove preconceptions from the outside world to live a simpler, more natural life. In lecture, Professor Ni held up a dry-erase marker and asked the students in the classroom “What is this?”, to which everyone answered the obvious choice. What was stopping that marker from being a paperweight? A weapon? A toy? Just because it was originally made with a purpose does not mean that it can only serve a single purpose. This idea is summarized perfecting in chapter fourty seven of the Dao De Jing: “Without going outside, you may know the whole world. Without looking through the window, you may see the ways of heaven. The farther you go, the less you know. Thus the sage knows without travelling; He sees without looking; He works without doing.” In brief, Utopia and the Daoist society drastically different views on education: Utopia would like nothing more than for its citizens to learn as much as possible as opposed to the Daoist society which would like nothing more than for its citizens to remove as many preconceptions from the outside world as possible to live a more natural lifestyle.
Finally, a society’s perspective on war is the final aspect that needs discussing, since much relies on this single fact.
A society’s goals and agendas rely on this major aspect since the answers to many questions can be influenced by this perspective. If a country is lacking resources or desires more land this perspective can play a crucial part in determining whether the society will go to war or will negotiate with neighboring countries for what it needs. Utopia attempts to avoid war as often as possible, since each city is a self-sustained civilization with strong walls and surrounded by farmland. In the event that a war is imminent and is unavoidable, the citizens of Utopia will attempt to use trickery and cunning over brute force. There is an example given that spies would be sent into the towns of the opposing society and propaganda would be started to attempt the townspeople to revolt against their seemingly oppressive rulers. Many would consider these tactics cheap and unfair, but the Utopians consider this the logical approach; why kill hundreds of people in a battle when the death of only a few people can solve the issue? In the event that the Utopians are victorious, they stress not to brag or disrespect the enemy soldiers or land in any way, enough damage has been done already and this much death and destruction is not a cause for celebration: “there is nothing more inglorious than that glory that is gained by war.” Surprisingly, the Daoist society mirrors this perspective almost exactly with maybe a few minor differences. In The Art of War, by Sun Tzu, it is said that “The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting.” This idea mirrors that of the Utopian strategy of using trickery to avoid fighting altogether, since if a battle can be won without the need for the loss of lives that is the most beneficial outcome. In essence, both of these societies share an almost identical perspective on war, most likely attributed to the fact that
end result of war tends to be worse in the end for both sides in contrast to the war never occurring in the first place.
After looking at aspects of society such as the structure of a society’s government, education of its citizens as well the society’s perspective on war, I believe that the Utopia introduced by Sir Thomas More in 1516 is an overall “better” society than the Ideal Daoist society. In terms of government structure, there is a more hierarchical system in place that allows for a sort of “checks and balances” kind of ideology in the event that one person attempts to hold too much power in the society. Even though the ruler of the ideal Daoist society holds little power over the citizens, there is no way of guaranteeing that the ruler won’t abuse his/her power at some point in the future. When it comes to educating the citizens of the society, I believe that learning and understanding the world is a crucial part of personal growth, since Utopian children all receive an education and adults are influenced to pursue intellectual activities during their free-time I think it is the better system. The Daoist idea of “learn by unlearning” could work for individuals practicing Daoism, but an entire society completely shutting out the knowledge of the outside world seems more detrimental than beneficial as a whole. Finally, both of these societies have an equivalent perspective on war, attempting to avoid war at all cost but in the event that a war was unavoidable strategy and cunning would be favored over a brute force battle with the enemy. Therefore, due to the Utopians having an overall more promising structure of government as well as a better system for educating its citizens, Utopia is the stronger “perfect” society in comparison to the ideal Daoist society.