Dao

, Volume 11, Issue 4, pp 497–512 | Cite as

Sleeping Beauty and the Dreaming Butterfly: What Did Zhuangzi Doubt About?

Article

Abstract

The moral commonly drawn from Zhuangzi’s butterfly dream is that there is no distinction between the subjectivity of the dreamer and the awake. It is, however, tenuous to incorporate this insight into an overall view of Zhuangzi, whether as a perspectival relativist, a mystic, or an anti-rationalist, just to name the more popular positions. The parable, despite its brevity and clarity, is difficult because the assertion about metaphysical distinction in the last two lines does not cohere with the preceding text about knowledge. To cope with this problem, there are recent interpretations that advocate textual revision or adumbrate a non-skeptical Zhuangzi. In this article, I shall evaluate these strategies and explain the discrepancy in understanding the butterfly dream. Besides employing the concept of self-locating belief to account for the paradox of waking and not-knowing, I shall also argue for an epistemic grounding of the metaphysical distinction.

Keywords

Zhuangzi Skepticism Knowledge Dream Possible world 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Allinson, Robert. 1988. “A Logical Reconstruction of the Butterfly Dream: The Case for Internal Textual Transformation.” Journal of Chinese Philosophy 15.3: 319–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. _____. 1989. Chuang-Tzu for Spiritual Transformation. New York: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  3. Elga, Adam. 2000. “Self-locating Belief and the Sleeping Beauty Problem.” Analysis 60.2: 143–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Giles, Herbert A. 1926. C huang Tzu: Taoist Philosopher and Chinese Mystic. London: Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
  5. Graham, Angus C. 1989. Disputers of the Tao. Chicago: Open Court.Google Scholar
  6. _____. 2001. C huang Tzu: The Inner Chapters. Indianapolis: Hackett.Google Scholar
  7. Guo, Xiang 郭象, annotator, 2002. Zhunagzi 莊子. Shanghai上海: Shanghai Guji Chubanshe 上海古籍出版社.Google Scholar
  8. Hansen, Chad. 1983. “A Tao of Tao in Chuang-tzu.” In Experimental Essays on Chuang-tzu, edited by Victor H. Mair. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.Google Scholar
  9. Ivanhoe, Philip J. 1993. “Zhuangzi on Skepticism, Skill, and the Ineffable Dao.” Journal of the American Academy of Religion 61.4: 639–654.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kjellberg, Paul & Philip J. Ivanhoe, eds. 1996. Essays on Skepticism, Relativism, and Ethics in the Zhuangzi. New York: SUNY.Google Scholar
  11. Lee, Jung H. 2007. “What Is It Like to Be a Butterfly? A Philosophical Interpretation of Zhuangzi’s Butterfly Dream.” Asian Philosophy 17.2: 185–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Lewis, David. 1979. “Attitude de dicto and Attitude de se.” Philosophical Review 88.4: 513–543.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. _____. 2001a. On the Plurality of Worlds. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  14. _____. 2001b. “Sleeping Beauty: Reply to Elga.” Analysis 61.3: 171–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. McGinn, Colin. 2006. Mindsight: Image, Dream, Meaning. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Möller, Hans-Georg. 1999. “Zhuangzi’s Dream of the Butterfly—A Daoist Interpretation.” Philosophy East and West 49.4: 439–450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Nagel, Thomas. 1974. “What It Is Like to Be a Bat?” Philosophical Review 83.4: 435–450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Stanley, Jason & Timothy Williamson. 2001. “Knowing How.” Journal of Philosophy 98.8: 411–444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Watson, Burton. 1968. The Complete Works of C huang Tzu. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Yang, Xiaomei. 2005. “Great Dream and Great Awakening: Interpreting the Butterfly Dream Story.” Dao: A Journal of Comparative Philosophy 4.2: 253–266.Google Scholar
  21. Ziporyn, Brook. 2003. The Penumbra Unbound: The Neo-Taoist Philosophy of G uo Xiang. New York: SUNY.Google Scholar
  22. _____. 2009. Zhuangzi: The Essential Writings with Selections from Traditional Commentaries. Indianapolis: Hackett.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Kellogg CollegeOxford UniversityOxfordUK

Personalised recommendations