Philosophical Reflections on Zhuangzi and Huizi s Debate on Fish

Adversity... The understanding is slightly different from upstairs.

In the first half, Keiko thinks that true knowledge cannot be obtained without personal experience.

The second half is different, Zhuangzi is using a seemingly quibbling method to refute Huizi, who put forward agnosticism, what he says is, you are not me, how do you know that I will not understand the joy of fish like you The truth contained in it is that since you think that you cannot obtain true knowledge without experiencing it yourself, then is this judgment true knowledge? As an individual who cannot understand the feelings of everyone, no one can make a judgment for everyone, so this judgment is false.

There is a modern version of the same quibble, someone says that there is no absolute, and another person asks if this sentence is absolute, so the former falls into a situation of self-contradiction.

Keiko continued, "That's right! I'm not you, so there's no way I'm going to know what you're thinking; You're not a fish either, so it's impossible to know what a fish thinks! ”

Zhuangzi retorted: "You ask me, 'How do you know that fish are happy?'" Don't you already know what I'm thinking? If you can know what I think, I can also know what the fish think! ”

This story illustrates that it is not easy to know what is in the hearts of others, but it is not absolutely impossible. It is possible to analyze other people's thoughts through their words and actions.

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 and Huizi see the world and things in different ways. Keizi was a logician, while Zhuangzi was a philosopher. Keiko looks at and analyzes this problem from the perspective of reason, chasing after things, from the perspective of people, using the inference of knowledge, he cares about his own thoughts, and the problems in his eyes are rational.

And Zhuangzi is a poet, he will use poetry to analyze such things, melt into things, dissect this fact from the perspective of heaven, with the artistic conception of non-knowledge, in his heart, everything in the world should be beautiful. There is a wealth of aesthetic thinking in Zhuangzi's philosophy.

In the debate, there is an important proposition, which is also an argument, and that is "knowing". Keiko believes that Zhuangzi and fish are two different individuals, how can you know the happiness of fish? Zhuangzi thinks that it is precisely because I am wandering by the river and on the bridge of the river that "I" feel very "calm", and here, I feel infinite happiness.

So I think that the fish are happy, the birds are happy, and the green mountains and green waters are all happy. He set out with this kind of poetry, to infect the surroundings, to observe the beauty of the surroundings, and to melt himself into such an artistic conception. He can experience that the fish must be happy at this time, as it is now"Me"The mood is all happy, maybe the fish is not happy at this time, but he doesn't care.

Keiko is different, he believes that everything is separate, and perhaps there is a connection between people and things in some sense. But that relationship is based on knowledge, not that they are connected in the first place. Keiko looks at all things, people are outside all things, reason can conquer the world, and the world is the object of reason.

What is the difference between Zi and Zhuangzi in the debate and entertainment, this should be some of their different views, so they are different in their own ideas, so there should be a certain difference.

Keiko and Zhuangzi are fundamentally different in their views on debating entertainment, one of them is an agnostic point of view and the other is an agnostic point of view.

When Huizi and Zhuangzi debated entertainment, they were actually talking about a kind of subjective consciousness in their hearts.

The angle of debate between these two people, one is materialism, and the other is idealism, such as Zhuangzi's "Zi is not a fish, and the joy of an fish".

There should be a lot of different points of view in this kind of debate.

Zi Fei Yu from Zhuangzi Zhuangzi. Autumn Water".

Zhuangzi and Huizi swim on the Haoliang (1). Zhuangzi said: "Fish travel calmly (2), 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 original (3)." 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.

Other meanings: Zi is not a fish, but knows the joy of fish" This sentence originally had a threefold meaning.

It could have been simply understood that the aliens could not communicate with each other, and there was no way to communicate feelings with each other, just because the greens and radishes had their own advantages, and it was difficult to force them, of course, that is, the fish had the joy of the fish, and you had your sorrows.

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 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.

"Zi Fei Yu Yan knows the joy of fish", the debate between Zhuangzi and Hui Shi.

Zhuangzi and Huizi swim on the beam. Zhuangzi said: "Perch swims calmly, which is 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. ”

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

Keiko said, "You are not a fish, how do you know that a fish is happy?" Zhuangzi said:

You're not me, how do you know that I don't know that fish are happy? Keiko said, "I am not you, so I don't know what you think; You are not a fish in the first place, you don't know the joy of fish, that's completely certain.

Zhuangzi said, "Allow me to start with the original topic. You say, 'You know the joy of fish from **,' and so on, and since you already know that I know the joy of fish, but you ask me, so I said I knew it on the bridge in the water. ”

The meaning is simple. You're not a fish. How do you know what the fish thinks?