Now I am beginning to think I´ve thrown myself in the deep deep end.

I know when I was being tutored by a magnificent Classical Chinese Scholar (who did he rural duty during Mao´s era), we went character by character. And with each character, there are stories contained within each of them. He could reference so many stories and means just through one character alone.

So now, I´ve reach utter despair, thinking what have I got myself into?

The characters are like the characters in a movie, and like the characters we each play in each interaction we have with the world. They are empty of a separate self. They draw their meanings afresh from each interaction in which they find themselves. We must tolerate and admire these inexhaustible meanings, but not be fooled that there is a Character hiding beneath the character. Otherwise you tie yourself in a not 不.

Hi Ronán Michael Conroy you´re absolutely right about, you could go through many loops and somehow may never arrive at a "true" or definitive set of meanings.

In some ways, this reminds of Derrida´s Deconstruction. So that´s where I´ll kick off here:

How might a STRUCTURALIST begin to UNPACK Zhuangzi?

The passages about fish, hare, and swallow, as well as the traps used to catch them, can be seen as metaphorical expressions that touch upon the dynamics of representation and the nature of language.

In linguistic terms, the signifier is the word or symbol used to convey meaning, and the signified is the concept or idea it represents. The Zhuangzi text seems to suggest that once the fish, hare, or swallow is obtained (the signified is grasped), the attention shifts away from the trap or means used to capture them (the signifier).

This could be interpreted as highlighting the potential for a disconnect or asymmetry between language (the signifier) and the actual objects or concepts it represents (the signified). Once we grasp the meaning or idea, we might overlook the linguistic tools or symbols that were initially employed.

What might Ferdinand de Saussure say?

Ferdinand de Saussure, a Swiss linguist, is known for his structuralist approach to linguistics. His ideas, presented in his work "Course in General Linguistics," have significantly influenced the study of semiotics and structuralism. If we apply Saussurean principles to the provided text from Zhuangzi, several aspects can be considered:

What might Derrida say?

Applying Jacques Derrida's deconstructive approach to the provided text from Zhuangzi involves examining the complexities of language, meaning, and representation. Derrida's ideas can be applied in several ways:

What might Heidegger say?

Martin Heidegger, a German philosopher, is known for his existential phenomenology and ontological hermeneutics. Applying Heidegger's perspective to the provided text from Zhuangzi involves considering themes such as being, language, and the nature of reality. Here are some aspects Heidegger might explore:

Martin Heidegger's concept of "enframing" is introduced in his later works, particularly in "The Question Concerning Technology." Enframing (Gestell in German) refers to a way of understanding and engaging with the world, particularly in the context of modern technology. If we apply Heidegger's concept of enframing to the provided text from Zhuangzi, we can explore how the act of trapping and possession might be understood:

What might Foucault say?

Michel Foucault, a French philosopher and social theorist, is known for his work on power, knowledge, and the mechanisms of social control. Applying Foucault's perspective to the provided text from Zhuangzi could involve considering the ways in which power and knowledge are intertwined. Here are some aspects Foucault might explore:

In a Buddhist framework, the Diamond sutra has a telling formulation:

“In a place where there are signs, in that place there is deception."

The teaching on signlessness is that we should let go of the idea of a thing in the world that is, for example, a cloud (our teacher's example). The cloud comes into being when conditions are just so and the water vapour condenses. Then it falls, and the sky clears. But the cloud is not gone. The water has become rain when conditions were right, and then a puddle, and then a river, and so on. The cloud is not a thing, but a way of thinking about the world. The only place the cloud existed was in our heads!

Thich Nhat Hanh is (Thay) fond of quoting Lavoisier : "nothing is created, nothing is destroyed, everything changes."

I read Zhuang as telling is to let go of the idea that something is lost. You are looking for the cloud that was in the sky. Thay says look down, it's in your teacup.

That´s interesting Ronán Michael Conroy , let me ask you something about being a surgeon. When you open/ cut a body up, do you see where might the meridians are?

Ronán Michael Conroy I like your introduction:

The research equivalent of the country doctor – everything and anything can walk through my door looking for help with design, analysis or interpretation. Never a dull moment.

It reminds me of John Berger´s book:

https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/show/52943

The blurb says: He (the country doctor) is not only the dispenser of cures but the repository of memories.

What seems to be lost these days is CARE. Do you have something to say about CARE? It used to be doctors caring for the sick...

And yet CARE is the last frontier for Human-Centric work in the onslaught of of AI.

Tieu-Tieu Le Phung – the Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland is a medical and health sciences university. So I am not a surgeon, and not even a medical doctor. I'm a doctor of science.

Meridians are a way of representing our bodies to ourselves, like 'hand'. From the neurological point of view, the hand does not end at the wrist. The nerves for the thumb extend into the wrist. While we think of the body like one of those diagrams you see in the butcher's shop with a cow divided by dotted lines, nature knows nothing of this. Our brain ends in a part that is half nerve tissue half glandular tissue, which possesses the properties of both nerve and endocrine organ.

As the teaching of signlessness says, and the good doctor Saussure would no doubt concur, we are mistaken if we look outside ourselves for the objects of our mind.

Ronán Michael Conroy how do you reconcile your belief with Scientific Positivism?

Tieu-Tieu Le Phung I do not have beliefs, and certainly don't want any! I go with the motto of science: data trumps theories. And scientific positivism is just another theory of what science is, or rather how science works. I love the way that scientists in their day-to-day work, ignore it.

Ronán Michael Conroy now we´re having a very Zhuangzi´s conversation. Much like the slogan from a classic Aussie ad: The Drink you have When you're NOT HAVING A DRINK.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3qf4yUMxnjw