Nietzsche and Taoism on Human and Non-Human Nature

Traditional western philosophy asserts a mechanistic view of nature, observing nature as a systematic process functioning according to laws of physics, a process that is held as separate from human activity. The separation is between all non-human nature and the nature of the human being, which is perceived as closer to a spirit-world, or God, and therefore above all non-human nature, which is thought of as devoid of any spirit, and determined to operate in conjunction with scientific processes. This position contrasts with the traditional view of Eastern philosophy, particularly the Chinese worldview of holistic nature free of a specific creator. In this view, nature is seen as a self-generating life process from which human beings are not separate. The ancient Chinese philosophy of Taoism sees the human being as inherently connected to the natural world, possessing no higher position in the order of nature. Western views hold the natural environment as there for humanity to alter to its own interests, in alignment with the Christian belief that the world was created for the benefit of man’s ends, a side which is to be pitted against the religious message which teaches man not to be selfish, but serve for a higher purpose. Yet, one prominent Western thinker who rebelled against this traditional position was Friedrich Nietzsche, the 19^th century German philosopher who felt that man had become weak from losing his connection with nature.

Nietzsche identifies humans as the sickest of all animals. Through the process of civilization, humans have become over-cultured and decadent to the degree that they have moved away from their natural state of being. In this sense, humans are the most domesticated of all animals, and through this domestication, humanity as a species has undergone a retardation of their natural, primordial instinct. The denigrated human body, having become weakened and overly dependent on the conveniences of civilization, is no longer fit for existence in its primitive origin. Humans have become soft, timid, and afraid of peril, as they have lost touch with those faculties once relied upon to survive in wild nature. "We belong to an age whose culture is in danger of perishing through the means of culture." Humans no longer have to hunt for food in the wild, where danger is encountered as a necessary aspect of existence. Mankind has no substantial reason to be feral in the cultured, civilized world, where all necessities for survival are provided for in safe processes and easy packages, involving no real sense of adventure or primal instinct. It must be noted, however, that Nietzsche rated highly the pioneering spirit which was exhibited by explorers and scientists, but he disdained the majority of people who simply enjoy the fruits hard-won by these few strong individuals.

For humanity to become reacquainted with these lost faculties of the natural state of existence, Nietzsche suggests a return to dangerous living to rediscover the truth of our nature. "Error has transformed animals into men; is truth perhaps capable of changing man back into an animal?" Humanity can awaken and sharpen its senses and instinct by returning to nature, where these senses must be relied upon for survival. Humans have become too comfortable in the life of the civilized. Away with comfort!, says Nietzsche. Mankind should never become complacent with existence and dependent on social systems for the satisfaction of its ends. A life of this kind reduces man to a state of impotence. The cultured life makes man unambitious, no longer interested or perhaps even capable of reaching greatness, now only having to be functional and do as little as possible to satisfy interests. Humanity must revert back to its original state of instinct to evaluate the condition of the cultured individual. (It must be said that while in Nietzsche’s view it is desirable, he is himself full of illusion if he thinks people can rise up and reverse the course of history. Rather, he has individuals overcome the resentment toward this earthly life, and affirm life with its imperfection. This is not asking for too much.) In the cultured state, there is little that recalls man’s thoughts to the primal state from which he came. Civilization has separated man from the wild animals, and shields him from the harsh elements of nature. Only by going back to this natural state can man truly rediscover what has been lost through this domestication. Civilization kills nobility and promotes laziness and weakness. Through the large number of the domesticated, a herd-morality is born which operates in opposition of natural reality as it exalts the weak and unconfident, and condemns everything strong, beautiful, and honorable. Nietzsche calls for an aristocracy of self-sufficiency, a departure from democratic domestication and a return to independence.

Nietzsche called for a philosophy of value creation, or transvaluation, in which, after having explored the questions of mankind’s where and why, the values of the past are evaluated/destroyed with a "philosophical hammer". The task for such a philosophy is to use knowledge as a means towards the creation of values arising from a will to truth and power. This creation of values is a way to freedom from the slave morality which has spread itself through Christian ideals and gradually become the standard by which "good" and "bad" are judged. This philosophical endeavor is the path to that independence which has been lost in man through the herd-morality of the domesticated. Man as creator of values is liberated from the chains of moral slavery, able now to rediscover his natural truth and reawaken his long-slumbering primal instincts.

This fundamental connection between man and nature is at the core of the Chinese philosophical tradition of Taoism, which views human civilization as an artificial construct the system of which is founded on principles unreflective of the reality of nature. Taoism, as well as Nietzsche, sees nature as possessing its own design by which its processes, or operational functions, are governed, and connect this with the human body, which is seen in this sense as a smaller representation of the universe. Nietzsche felt that a removal of human-oriented values was required before we can decipher nature’s "text". Nature has its own "body language" by which it expresses itself, and the Taoist belief states that by understanding nature’s "body language", man can gain a more intimate understanding of his own nature. Nature, both human and non-human, speaks its own language. Human nature, in its original form, unaltered by artificial civilization, is linked with the nature of the entire universe (governed by Tao), and it is through the recognition of this connection that man discovers this link. Nature serves as teacher, as it raises man’s awareness of his nature as being inseparable from the nature of the universe, but also that this universal nature is unsympathetic to human concern, as its functionary process is without consciousness, and its ultimate aim is to maintain itself even at the expense of individuals.

This view is in contrast with the Eurocentric position, which Taoism may see as "insane" in that it depotentiates nature by eliminating nature’s power through mechanistic means, or rather, taking advantage of nature’s mechanistic power. The "sane" view of Taoism grants nature a dignity and purpose in itself by letting nature run its course without unnecessary interference from man. "Whoever does anything to it will ruin it; whoever lays hold of it will lose it. Therefore the sage, because he does nothing, never ruins anything; and, because he does not lay hold of anything, loses nothing." Nature in the Taoist view is seen as having its own worth beyond the value that man places on it, and is granted the uninterrupted process it requires to fulfill its natural course. The Eurocentric view of nature, that it is something to be altered for the benefit of humanity, extends this interruptive idea to that of man. Through the system of civilization, the nature of man is interrupted by the same mechanistic processes used to disturb non-human nature. The nature of man has become disconnected from that of the natural world (human Tao disconnected from heaven’s Tao), and has shifted to meet the demands of mechanistic society, which is founded on laws that are alien to the natural order of the universe.

Graham Parkes, in his essay "Human/Nature in Nietzsche and Taoism", points out that for early Taoist thinkers the question of how one should come to understand nature is not simply an abstract philosophical one, but "an existential one that bears directly on the problem of how to live one’s life in the most fulfilling way." This again illustrates the difference between the Eastern view of nature and that of Western views. Taoism teaches that one should simply act in harmony with nature. Certainly, to live a happy life was the motive, and in order to do so harmony with nature was considered to be the recipe. Lao Tzu was for good government which makes people happy by "governing the least". But as Parkes states, this simple idea is challenging for the human being because of its estrangement from nature as well as that of its own nature, through the natural human inclination towards formulation which leads into the dangers of having one’s experience of the world distorted.

Taoism views spontaneity as the principle of action, meaning that actions are not initiated by external forces but by innate tendencies which produce natural occurrences. The spontaneous operation of the Tao, the life-providing source of all things, should serve as a model for all human behavior, and thus all human action should be spontaneous rather than coerced from outside sources, as is the common course in civilization. To establish a harmonious connection with nature is to act in accordance with the true nature of oneself, ( yet not of the human being, which contains contrary desires) reflecting the ways of nature’s action, moved by inner inclinations natural to the course towards its aims. One must be aware of and attuned to one’s inner essence, and identify this process as the natural course of all things.

This spontaneity, however, is a principle of action within non-human nature primarily because the actions are purely instinctive. There is no rational consideration or deliberation in non-human nature. The human being is a rational creature by its very nature, making the idea of spontaneous action as a model for human behavior seem contradictory. Fear of consequences is not a feature of non-human natural activity, yet the human being must take into careful consideration, particularly when a wise decision is required in a given situation, the consequences of actions. But to suggest that the Taoist view of spontaneity as a model for human behavior is suggesting that humans must deny the rational capacity is to misunderstand the simplicity of Taoism through the mistake of reading too literally into the expression. The Taoist idea of spontaneity as a model for human behavior means that human beings should strive to behave in such a way that is in accordance with the essence of their being, understood as connected with the natural world.

Taoist philosopher Lao Tzu, whose work Tao Te Ching is the primary text of Taoism, opposed Confucianism, which was the dominant view of his time. He saw the humanism within Confucian worldview as an overstressing of the cumbersome rules and regulations of human society, observing that governments can learn from Tao, and base its system according to nature’s ways. Lao Tzu favored a small government headed by a ruler who refrained from abuse through power, and instead would subtly work with the people to assist in the changing of their manners. The Taoist ruler is unobtrusive, surreptitious, subtle, and blends with his people rather than ruling them from afar. Nature shows man the way, and man applies what he has learned from nature to the endeavors of humanity.

Though he read some Buddhist literature, Nietzsche never spoke of Taoism, and it is reasonably safe to assume that he did not possess any knowledge of its existence. Yet, Nietzsche and Taoism share many of the same ideas regarding human nature. Central to this similarity is an anti-humanistic view. Nietzsche and Taoism agree that the major problem responsible for the corruption of the relationship between humanity and nature is anthropocentricity, a view which holds the human being as higher than nature, and therefore holding rights to alter the natural world towards human interests. Such a view as this not only severs the connection between mankind and non-human nature, but also denies that there exists such a connection. Through this anthropocentric approach to the world, man organizes nature to suit his needs and desires, constructing civilizations built upon foundations opposed to the reality of nature, and thus becomes everything that Nietzsche despised: weak and comfortable from having shed the natural instincts once required for survival in favor of a cultured existence dependent upon others, while losing independence of strength and aspiration which could advance humanity beyond itself. More specifically, Nietzsche says that man never is interested in the truth of things, but only in how to make oneself safe in living with or among those thing. Science and technology are thus not invented to know truth, but to secure our life by contriving safety nets with theories, laws and objective truths, which are all perspectivally biased to serve our wishful thinking.

In both Nietzsche and Taoism, the idea of nature as non-human is expressed. According to both sources, nature is higher than humanity, and has no concern for human interests. Lao Tzu did not share the Confucian belief that Heaven had "human-heartedness". To Lao Tzu, "heaven", or nature in itself, is indifferent and impartial to humanity. To think of nature as having "human-heartedness" undermines nature’s substance by granting humanity an unnatural significance in natural reality. Nature is higher than man, as it performs its functions much more efficiently. In this way, nature is truly virtuous, and man should model his actions, societies, and governments on the ways of nature. Nature is not burdened with human rationality and human emotion, thus it can carry out its process free from fear and inhibitions. Nietzsche says nature has a far greater "Reason" than man-made reason. A proof of nature’s more efficient reason is our Body , which regulates itself and often behaves in a contrary way to our Mind. Our mind, for example, may find certain food enjoyable, then overeat it, but the body rebels against it and tries to keep itself healthy. The body knows more about the body’s own health than our thinking, including the medical advice of many doctors. Man, crippled by concern for consequences, can never attain the excellence of function like nature. However, mankind should strive towards this excellence in all endeavors in order to live, as much as is possible, in harmony with nature. Man must depend on nature. He needs nature in order to survive. But nature does not need man. Nature would, in fact, be better off without man.

Among the similarities between Nietzsche and Taoism regarding human nature, there are differences as well. The most obvious and striking difference is in Nietzsche’s celebration of tragedy and heroism. Nietzsche’s philosophy is fueled by ascendency of mankind towards a state beyond itself. This ascendency necessarily involves a heroism and courage in the face of existence, to which an eternal "Yes!" is the response of the heroic spirit. This overcoming is a triumphant attitude which Nietzsche praised in his view of life willing itself to power. This triumphant heroism, as well as Nietzsche’s theory of tragedy in the struggle between Apollonian and Dionysian elements of humanity, in which the primordial impulses warred with the wisdom of restraint in an eternal struggle for domination of the human condition, are alien concepts to Taoism, which is far more passive in its teaching of subtlety and non-action. There is found no advancing towards a higher state of being within Taoism, only a humbling stance of mankind modeling itself after nature’s ways for a harmonious life in accordance with the reality of nature. Parkes identifies that Nietzsche "is more extreme than the Taoists because he has the pressure of a longer historical tradition behind him...". There is a potent sense of urgency in Nietzsche’s writings that carries with it a passionate desperation, as if he could feel catastrophe awaiting on the horizon. Nothing of this kind is encountered in Taoist teachings. Nevertheless, both Nietzsche and Taoism, unknown to each and arising from different cultural circumstances, share such a degree of fundamental views on human nature that it brings the traditional divide on this issue between Western and Eastern philosophy into question by penetrating deeply into the heart of the natural world and the soul of man to transcend cultural limitations and discover a universal truth of the connection between human and non-human nature.

11/04/07