Regarding Zi Fei Yu , did Zhuangzi sophistry?

If you regard Keiko, Zifei Fish, and the joy of Anzhi Fish as a question, it is a doubt. I add a complete reasoning to my understanding: as a human being, I can know whether other people are happy or miserable.

By analogy, it is likely that creatures of the same kind can know the feelings of their own kind. So, it's not surprising that a fish is able to know if another fish is happy or not. If you're a fish and you say the fish is happy, I don't have any doubts.

But you're not a fish, so how do you know if they're happy or not? Just as I'm not a fish, I can't tell if the fish is happy or unhappy.

If Keizi's question is like this, then Zhuangzi doesn't have a positive question, he doesn't know how he knows, and it is impossible for anyone to get this question thoroughly. Even if you put the fish as a person, you can't completely understand the question of how one person knows how another person feels, how does a person know how another person feels, and so on. Although we cannot know completely, exactly, and infallibly, we can see whether a person is happy or sad or other inner state by empathy, by looking at facial expressions, body movements, and by language and subsequent behavior.

While these methods are indirect and can be error-prone, they are largely reliable in many cases. By analogy with fish or other animals, most animals do not have similar expressions to humans, and their body movements are not the same as those of humans, so empathy may not work. The methods we use to observe the inner state of our fellow human beings are often unusable when observing other animals, are unreliable, and can hardly be verified by words and subsequent behavior.

So, I don't know how people can know if a fish is happy or not, and by what means can they know if a fish is happy or not. Keiko had good reason to ask Zhuangzi why he had come to such a conclusion. And Zhuangzi could not give a convincing answer.

People look at some animals and think they are happy. This feeling is certainly not unique to Zhuangzi. I'm sure most of us have had this experience.

This feeling of being happy for another creature, but I feel that they are happy, not that they themselves are happy. If Zhuangzi's sentence is understood in this sense, there is no problem. However, the original sentence of Zhuangzi ( 儵鱼鄵運開開 calmly, is the joy of fish) does read like judging the happiness of the fish itself, rather than saying that in my opinion the fish is very happy.

So Keiko's skepticism is justified. You can't judge the happiness of another feeler. Don't talk about fish, it's people, you can't do that.

For example, some people say that students are happy when they read aloud in the classroom, but this is just what you think is happy, and whether these students are really happy or not is not something you can take for granted. <>

Zhuangzi and Huizi are actually talking in two different dimensions, just like looking at a cylinder, the person who looks at the front says it is a rectangle, and the person who looks at it says it is a circle. I think the story of Zi Feiyu particularly reflects the characteristics of Chinese and Western philosophy, Huizi is a view similar to Western philosophy, and Zhuangzi also has very obvious characteristics of Chinese philosophy. At the heart of Western philosophy are the pursuits:

True! So the content of Xizhe's discussion revolves around"The real world"Come. And the core of Chinese philosophy lies in:

Governance"！Chinese philosophy is essentially about politics. The politics here may not be quite the same as the politics we understand, and it is probably the search for a stable and orderly social order in which everyone goes their own way.

Because, the core of Xizhe is"True! "Therefore, metaphysics has always been the core content of Western philosophy, which is to discuss the existence of the objective world, the natural world. The core of Chinese philosophy is:"Governance"For example, the world is under great rule, so moral doctrine has become the most important issue. <>

Zhuangzi did not sophistry, it was Huizi who was sophistry. If you are not a fish, can't you observe the state of the fish? - Zi Feiyu, as a logic, it covers one person is not another, how can different people have the same idea?

Keiko's logic is that the child is not a fish, but does he know the fish? Zhuangzi's first sentence is directed at this logic itself: You are not me, how do you know what I know and what I don't know?

Then, Keiko said that the first logic was used incorrectly, and it should not be said that Zhuangzi did not know. However, at this time, he was sophistry, and took Zhuangzi's rhetorical questioning as Zhuangzi's logic, but in fact, it was still his own logic. - On the front, Zhuangzi said that I have been observing fish for a long time.

So, I know.

Keiko is a secular person, and when he has doubts, he asks "Zi is not a fish, and he knows the joy of fish"; Zhuangzi is a person who cultivates the "Tao", and once turned into a butterfly and dreamed of it, and obtained his way. Therefore, he replied, "The son is not me, and I know that I don't know the joy of fish." Speaking of this matter is to express the mystical true meaning of the "Tao", so common sense is sophistry, and truth is propaganda.

There is no indisputable sophistry about right and wrong, the road leads to all things, infinite can be, rise can fall, and can not be broken until it is all right.

I think it was Zhuangzi who won. When Zhuangzi was debating the equals, he turned to the philosophy of life and advocated self-satisfaction.

Haoliang Guanyu, Zhuangzi and Huizi.

The debate involves many issues. It involves a logical issue. Zhuangzi watched the fish and said that the fish swam out leisurely, and Huizi asked:

You are not a fish, how can you know the joy of fish. Logically, Keiko's questioning contains two aspects: first, Zhuangzi and "fish" are not the same kind, how do you know how fish feels; 2. How can the fish that Zhuangzi saw be different individuals from Zhuangzi, different individuals, and different individuals?

Zhuangzi also asked logically, you are not me, how do you know that I don't know the happiness of swimming fish. That is to say, you and I are also different individuals, since we are both different individuals, how can we understand each other? Keiko's is still based on logical reasoning.

I am a different person from you, and of course I don't know about you. But it doesn't mean that you are not a fish in the first place, so you should not know the joy of swimming in fish. Since you're right, I'm right too.

Isn't that all right? Then, Zhuangzi made a discourse change. The "Anzhi" in "Ru An Zhi Yu Le" is in ancient Chinese.

There could have been two explanations: one is how it is possible to know, and the other is where it is known. Zhuangzi then returned to logic: since you know that I know, and you come to ask me, then I know it on the Hao, that is, on the dam.

Haoliang's view of fish is also to illustrate Zhuangzi's thought and philosophy of life. He did appreciate the pleasure of swimming like a fish. He repeatedly wrote about multiplying things to travel with the heart, the heart to play with virtue, the heart to travel in the light, and of course to write about the leisurely travel.

Write self-sufficiently. It illustrates that the criteria for judging things are subjective. Zhuangzi knows the joy of swimming like a fish, and that is the joy of "Zhuangzi" knowing that wingmen swim.

This criterion is Zhuangzi's. Huizi is not a "Zhuangzi", of course, he does not know the joy of fish. The criterion of judgment is subjective, so the truth cannot be proven.

If I argue with you, and you win over me, and I don't win over you, are you really right? Am I really wrong? If I have overcome you and you have not overcome me, am I really right?

Are you really wrong? This involves a view of life. Huizi is not a Zhuangzi, life has its own joys, why should others understand?

Zifei fish, the joy of Anzhi fish.

Isn't it me, and I know the joy of coarse clothes and vegetable food? Why envy the fine clothes and food?

Naturally, Keiko won, and Keiko's last sentence said that we should not argue about this issue, and we are not fish anyway.

Zhuangzi won because Zhuangzi persuaded Keiko. In fact, fish are also very happy, because they can eat whatever they want and sleep whenever they want.

I still think Zhuangzi's dialogue wins, because Zhuangzi has fundamentally pointed out the problem, and you are not a fish, so you won't know what the fish thinks.

Zhuangzi won, which makes more sense. It was not easy for Zhuangzi to win because the opponent was of a very high level. However, because of the advanced level of the opponent, it shows Zhuangzi's grandeur as a great master.

Moreover, the strangeness and twists and turns of the debate ideas, even if we look at it today, Winner may also be a master, not only clear thinking, but also eloquence - not only quibbles.

Major impactsPhilosophy. Zhuangzi inherited and developed Laozi's "Tao of Nature" in philosophical thought.

The ideological viewpoint that makes Taoism.

Truly becoming a school, he himself has become an important representative of Taoism, and is called the "ancestor of Taoism" along with Lao Tzu. Zhuangzi's learning is attributed to Lao Tzu's words, so his books have more than 100,000 words, most of which are allegories.

Such as "The Fisherman" in it

Stealing the foot" and "Xuan Zheng" and other articles are all used to identify Lao Tzu's ideas. He led "noble life" and "for me" to "attaining life" and "forgetting to search for Wu and remembering me", which boiled down to the unity of natural "Tao" and "me". Zhuangzi

Together with "Zhou Yi" and "Lao Tzu", it is called "Sanxuan", and has high research value in philosophy.

From Zhuangzi "Zhuangzi. Autumn Water".

Zhuangzi and Huizi swim on the beam. Zhuangzi said: "Fish travel calmly, is it the joy of fish?"

Keiko said: "Zifei fish, the joy of knowing fish? Zhuangzi said:

The son is not me, and I know that I don't know the joy of fish? Huizi said: "I am not a son, and I don't know a son; Zigu is not a fish, and Zizhi does not know the joy of fish, all of it.

Zhuangzi said: "Please follow the roots." Zi said, 'Ru'an knows the fish and enjoys' clouds, and since you know what I know, you ask me.

I know it. ”

Translation] Zhuangzi and Huizi play together on the bridge in Haoshui. Zhuangzi said: "How leisurely the white fish swims, this is the happiness of the fish."

Keiko said, "You are not a fish, how do you know the happiness of fish?" Zhuangzi said:

You're not me, how do you know I don't know the joy of fish? Keiko said, "I am not you, and I do not know you; You are not a fish either, and you don't know the joy of fish, and you are completely sure.

Zhuangzi said, "Let's follow the previous words." What you just said 'you know the happiness of fish from **) means that you already know that I know the happiness of fish and ask me, and I know that fish are happy on the bridge in Haoshui.

It shows that you should not always look at others with your own eyes, and there is also the meaning of "do not do to others what you would not do to yourself". The rhetoric of the two men's argument was sophistry.

Keiko is argumentative and analytical. There is a cognitive attitude towards things that are fundamentally oriented, focusing on knowledge; Zhuangzi argues wisely and re-appreciates. The understanding of the outside world has an attitude of appreciation, and the subjective affection is exerted on external objects to produce empathy and empathy.

Zhuangzi and Huizi, due to the difference in personality, lead to different basic positions, which in turn lead to two opposing lines of thought: one is transcendent from the object, but returns to the thing itself to appreciate its beauty; One is towards solipsism, i.e., that everyone will not know the state of mind of a third person in any way.

The debate between the two is not on the same level, and Zhuangzi's understanding of the outside world is often with an attitude of appreciation. He often exerts his subjective affection on external objects, and Zhuangzi believes that the "happiness" of fish is actually the projection and externalization of his pleasant state of mind. Keiko is different, he only stands from the standpoint of analysis, and analyzes the reality in the sense of reason.

Therefore, it is natural for him to doubt the so-called "truth" of Zhuangzi.

This sentence is asked of Zhuangzi. Meaning: You are not a fish, how do you know that fish are happy?

Zhuangzi's is: "The son is not me, how do you know that I don't know the joy of fish?" ”

This means that you can't be too subjective in guessing what others think, or making arrangements for others without permission.

Seriously, we don't have the right to think about what others should and shouldn't do.

Zhuangzi and Huizi swim on the beam. Zhuangzi said: "Fish travel calmly, is it the joy of fish?"

Keiko said: "Zifei fish, the joy of knowing fish? Zhuangzi said:

The son is not me, and I know that I don't know the joy of fish? Huizi said: "I am not a son, and I don't know a son; Zigu is not a fish, and Zizhi does not know the joy of fish, all of it.

Zhuangzi said: "Please follow the roots." Zi said, 'Ru'an knows the joy of fish' clouds, and since he knows what I know and asks me, I know it on the water.

I don't know what you mean by "similar", it's not an idiom, it's just a sentence in classical Chinese, which is often used, we can say that we quote famous quotes, or we can say that it has become a colloquialism.

If there are some philosophical, inspirational and other literary sentences or multi-word idioms, you can find some, such as:

The sea is tolerant of all rivers, and tolerance is great; The wall is thousands of feet, and there is no desire to be rigid.

The mountain rain is coming, the wind is full of buildings, desire: it is going to be. The metaphor of the situation will have signs and atmosphere on the eve of a major change.

Hundred-legged insects, dead but not stiff Hundred-legged: The name of the insect, also known as Malu or horseworm, has twelve links, and can still wriggle after being cut off. It is a metaphor for the powerful family, although it has declined, but because of its great power and strong foundation, it will not be completely bankrupt.

Don't be happy with things, don't be sad with yourself.

The road is long, and I will go up and down to seek.

Zi is not a fish, and the joy of knowing the fish" originally had a triple meaning, which could have been simply understood as the inability to communicate with each other, and there was no way to communicate feelings with each other, just because the green vegetables and radishes were good, and it was difficult to force them, of course, that is, the fish had the joy of the fish, and you had your sorrow.

The ancients used homophonic words when they said this, so it became "Zi Fei Yu, Yan Zhi Yu Joy", the meaning is very plain, people's hearts are separated from the belly, a spring bad person has a person's wish, you can't fully understand, so, your sorrow, your joy belong to yourself, and others can't take it away.

Zhuangzi and Huizi swim on the beam.

Zhuangzi said: "Perch swims calmly, which is the joy of fish." ”

Huizi said: "Zi is not a fish, how do you know the joy of destroying the clan fish?" ”

Zhuangzi said: "The son is not me, and I don't know the joy of fish?" ”

Huizi said: "I am not a son, and I don't know a son; Zigu is not a fish, and Zizhi does not know the joy of fish, all of it. ”

Zhuangzi said: "Please follow the roots." Zi said, 'Ru'an knows the fish and enjoys' clouds, and since you know what I know, you ask me. I know it. ”