Please wait a minute...

Frontiers of Philosophy in China

Front. Philos. China    2017, Vol. 12 Issue (3) : 340-357
Orginal Article
The Philosophy of “Naturalness” in the Laozi and Its Value For Contemporary Society
ZHANG Weiwen()
School of Philosophy, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China
Download: PDF(329 KB)  
Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks

This article aims to show that the concept of “naturalness” in the Laozi is able to provide cultural guidance concerning values for contemporary social development. Specifically, the Laozi’s concept of “naturalness”— manifested in the text’s exhortation to “honor the dao and exalt the de” and its statement that “the dao models itself on naturalness”—has profound ontological, political and social implications concerning “naturalness” that are strongly expressed through a variety of propositions including “achieving all through non-action” and “downsizing the state and simplifying the people.” With respect to the question about individuals living a life of appropriateness and establishing their destiny, the Laozi emphasizes such cultivation methods as “sticking to simplicity and authenticity” and “watching in quietude and observing in depth,” which are also infused with the conception of “naturalness,” which stresses the notion that understanding the harmony between man and nature can provide useful lessons for the development of contemporary human society.

Keywords Laozi      nature      philosophy      value     
Issue Date: 06 November 2017
 Cite this article:   
ZHANG Weiwen. The Philosophy of “Naturalness” in the Laozi and Its Value For Contemporary Society[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2017, 12(3): 340-357.
E-mail this article
E-mail Alert
Articles by authors
ZHANG Weiwen
Related articles from Frontiers Journals
[1] Filippo Costantini. Structuring Reality: The Metaphysics of Harmony in Zhang Zai’s Zhengmeng Philosophical System[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2020, 15(2): 223-241.
[2] Sarah Craddock, John Preston. Roles and Representations of Women in Early Chinese Philosophy: A Survey[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2020, 15(2): 198-222.
[3] Francesco Orilia. Castañeda’s Moral Theory and Globalization[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2020, 15(1): 122-142.
[4] Jacklyn A. Cleofas. An Understanding of Character from Holistic Thinking: What Asian Psychology Teaches Us about the Debate on Situationism[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2019, 14(3): 384-405.
[5] Henrique Schneider. Tricking or Benefitting the People? Guanzi on Objective Government and Subjective Preferences[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2019, 14(3): 363-383.
[6] HUANG Zhipeng. Encounter between Soul and Human Nature: An Examination of Xia Dachang’s “Xingshuo”[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2019, 14(2): 264-283.
[7] Rina Marie Camus. “Athl-Ethics”: Virtue Training in Mencius and Aristotle[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2019, 14(1): 152-170.
[8] Karyn Lai. Emotional Attachment and Its Limits: Mengzi, Gaozi and the Guodian Discussions[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2019, 14(1): 132-151.
[9] Michael Erler. Role as Norm, Role and Norm: Homer’s Hero, Hesiod’s Just City, and Plato’s Kallipolis[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2019, 14(1): 14-28.
[10] WU Xiangdong. Chinese Philosophy of Value over the Past Four Decades[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2018, 13(4): 651-661.
[11] LI Cunshan. Forty Years’ Study of Chinese Philosophy[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2018, 13(4): 634-650.
[12] Tung Tin Wong. He Lin and German Philosophy in the Zhanguoce School: An Idealist Philosopher on History and Cultural Reform[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2018, 13(4): 616-633.
[13] SUN Zhengyu. Chinese Marxist Philosophy Since Reform and Opening-Up[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2018, 13(3): 430-448.
[14] Paul Thagard. Mind, Consciousness, and Free Will[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2018, 13(3): 377-393.
[15] DONG Lihe, JIN Qianwen. The Study of Western Postmodern Philosophy of History in China in the Four Decades of Reform and Opening Up[J]. Front. Philos. China, 2018, 13(2): 254-264.
Full text