Considerations of How to Remove Problems of Cultural Fetishism from Daoism in the West:

Considerations of How to Remove Problems of Cultural Fetishism from Daoism in the West:

This article is somewhat of a divergence from my usual translation and commentary work in order to discuss a topic which I think is very important to those of us studying Daoist thought from a European perspective.
That topic is the issue of the ongoing cultural essentialism surrounding the study of Daoism in the west.
Essentialism refers to a form of reductive reasoning which implies that a topic may be defined by its function. In the Social Sciences, the concept of Essentialism is often applied to ideas about the fixed nature of race, culture, sex and so on. In regard to Daoist studies, there are three major forms of Essentialist thought, which can be broadly categorized using the rubric of three categories of Daoist ideas. They are:

– Philosophical Essentialism: The philosophical Essentialist argument seems to have been first posited by Karl Jung and then later by the likes of Allan Watts. It suggests that the real essence of Daoism is to be found in its ideas which might be broadly categorized under the banner of philosophy, rather than religion. People who follow the Philosophically Essentialist view of Daoism are often under the incorrect impression that Daoism mainly occurred during the short period of development toward the end of the Zhou Dynasty (aprox 500 BC) and that all ideas following the works of Laozi, Zhuangzi and Liezi are not Daoist in nature, but rather, fraudulent religious concepts which simply advertised themselves as Daoism in order to capitalize on the popularity of the Daoist philosophers of antiquity.
Generally speaking, these groups of people could mainly be classified as those who are influenced by the writings of Allan Watts in the post Hippie era.
It is common for people who hold these opinions to also practice Asian Martial arts or other similar pseudo-esoteric lifestyle practices.

– Mystical Essentialism: This group makes a markedly different reading of Daoist documents and tends to view Daoist ideas through the lens of a foggy notion of Oriental mysticism mixed with Western Occultism. This group is also highly susceptible to Orientalist Fetishism and seems to spawn out of the New Age movement of the 1980s and although being a relatively non invasive group (especially when compared to the other two Essentialist Classes) in regard to their use to propaganda to promote their world view, do publish with greater frequency than the Philosophical Essentialist group. These groups of people may or may not have real connections with the religious Daoist community, and often practice esoteric arts such as Qi Gong and various forms of meditation, although it must be stressed that the extent English language writings from this group on these subjects are rarely sophisticated or accurate. This group is also related to the business of spirituality and there are varying levels of authenticity and popularity from teacher to teacher and group to group. These groups can range in knowledge anywhere from having an understanding of the core concepts of the Daoist schools they are affiliated with, to having no understanding of authentic Daoism and simply branding their own invented practices as being of the Daoist tradition. This particular movement in Essentialist Daoism is highly susceptible to spiritual Capitalists from the Orient, and bombastic martial arts teachers from the Americas and Europe, but also has certain core groups of more honest and dedicated people who are trying to understand the particular aspects of Daoism that they are studying.

– Academic Religious Essentialism: This group is contained within the academy and often also consists of members of the larger religious Daoist community. People who belong to this group posit that the only way to understand Daoism is through the lens of its religious tradition and that other views to Daoism are invented modern forms of culture, mainly stemming from the United States.
This particular world view of Daoism is both successful and disturbing, in that while being very successful in creating a large and very accurate body of work on Daoist thought, it capitalizes on the misbegotten notion that Daoist thinking existed in a monastic bubble during Chinese history and misses much of the larger cultural development of Daoist ideas which occurred in the extremely complex cultural framework of Chinese literary and bureaucratic society. This particular group snubs its nose at the Philosophical Essentialists, and views them as being misinformed, while both tacitly welcoming and ridiculing members of the Mystical Essentialist group (the view is that Mystical Essentialists are quaint, but a common practice is for these groups to be in contact with each other on internet forums, popular publications and so on).

Each of these groups has certain problems associated with them and it seems fair to suggest that the problems are mainly to do with selective reasoning. That is, each group chooses to include items from Daoism (and western literature) which are useful to their message, while excluding concepts which are not useful.
It is very important here to make the caveat that there is also a large and flourishing community of people who do not fall prey to Essentialist conceptualizations of Daoism, and make an honest and open enquiry into the nature of traditional Daoist literature, customs, and practices which are both extant and extinct in modern times. These groups of academics, lay people, and members of the Daoist clergy are not united by any substrate, but rather belong to diverse groups and hold diverse views, but views which can mostly be typified as being open minded and curious in contrast to the decided views of the three groups I have defined here as being Essentialist in nature. Holding an Essentialist world view about a cultural force as large as Daoism and not being open to the possibilities of narrative variance within the much more grand narrative context of Daoism in Chinese history and modernity ought be be viewed as Fetishistic and generally opposed to the goals of enquiry, which are to posit questions which allow us to delve more deeply into the subject in order to discover more accurately what it actually is.

So what can be done to remedy Essentialist and Fetishistic views in Western interpretations of Daoism?

In short, there is no remedy for Essentialism and there is no way to prevent people from taking on either irrationally reductive, or Orientalist world views in their approach to Daoist studies. It is perhaps a universal desire of all people to fancy themselves as being privy to uncommon knowledge, and as a result, in group, out group dynamics are maintained through the creation of False Alternatives.
What we should do instead, as interested, sceptical, and open minded people is to avoid personally falling victim to Essentialist world views in our research of Daoist topics, while at the same time developing a broad enough knowledge of the scriptural, historical, and practical development of Daoism that we are able to separate the wheat from the Chaff and promote a broad and comprehensive understanding of this wonderful tradition through publication, inter-group interaction, and ongoing discussion in order that we may fill up the current gaps which allow Essentialist attitudes to flourish with a strong body of knowledge from many sources which may serve to challenge the already existing Essentialist Axioms of Daoism in the West.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *