Dao as a Unified Composition or Plurality: A Nihilism Perspective

Dao (2023) 22:381–395 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11712-023-09891-x Dao as a Unified Composition or Plurality: A Nihilism Perspective Rafal Banka1 Accepted: 30 May 2023 / Published online: 27 June 2023 © The Author(s) 2023 Abstract This article departs from a mereological conceptualization of the Daoist metaphysical system in the Daodejing 道德經. I discuss what parthood status applies to dao 道. Whereas it is quite intuitive that you 有—the region of concrete objects—has parthood relationships and compositions (entities made from parts), the other, undifferentiated region, dao, poses a considerable problem. This problem can be characterized in the following way: (a) dao cannot be characterized as a particular composition, which entails that it does not include parts. However, (b) dao underpins compositions in you, which entails that it contains compositions or at least parts that make compositions in you. This generates a problem of how compositions are possible with an undifferentiated ontological foundation. I focus on one possible approach to this problem––mereological nihilism, according to which no composition is possible. Assuming nihilism entails dao composed of mereological simples––fundamental entities, which are not parts. Keywords Daoist metaphysics · Mereology · Composition · Mereological nihilism 1 Introduction This article analyzes dao 道 from the angle of mereology––the study of relationships between parts and the wholes that are made from them. My discussion is based on a mereological interpretation of the relation between dao and you 有 that constitutes a pivotal role in, if not a foundation of, the Daoist metaphysics in the Daodejing 道德經. In my article, Banka 2018, I propose to conceptualize dao and you as two metaphysical regions––of unrestricted and restricted composition respectively. What differentiates these two regions is how parts combine into wholes. According to unrestricted composition, for any two entities there is a composition, of which * Rafal Banka 1 Faculty of Philosophy, University of Oxford, Radcliffe Observatory Quarter 555, Woodstock Road, Oxford OX2 6GG, UK 13 Vol.:(0123456789) 382 Rafal Banka these entities are parts. Restricted composition is determined by specific rules, for instance, physical adherence, forming a system, or even forming life.1 Roughly speaking, composition rules can be understood as arrangements of parts. I claim that interrelation between these two regions can be conceptualized as an overlap, which consists in sharing parts in the way that the whole of you overlaps at least a portion of dao.2 The aim of proposing this particular conceptualization is to further explore the Daoist metaphysical system by means of formal tools and provide integration between Daoist and Western contemporary metaphysics, especially on the analytic front. In this article, I focus on what parthood status applies to the dao region. Whereas it is quite intuitive that you—otherwise the region of things or what we usually refer to as concrete objects—has parthood relationships and compositions (which include objects mapped by language, but not only),3 the other region, dao, poses a considerable problem. This problem can be mereologically characterized in the following way: (a) dao cannot be characterized in terms of a particular composition (or compositions), which entails that it does not include parts. However, (b) dao necessarily underpins any composition in you, which entails that it is either a composition (or compositions) or at least contains parts that make compositions in you. Considering that (a) and (b) in the Daoist metaphysical system should have a monistic interpretation, the following problem arises: how are compositions possible with an undifferentiated ontological foundation? As already mentioned, I conceptualize dao in terms of unrestricted composition. In unrestricted composition, there can be an infinite number of composition rules. On the contrary, you is the region of restricted composition, where the composition is determined in accordance with a composition rule (or some finite composition rules). Compositions in you are part of dao. Considering the ontological dependence of you from dao, this overlap consists in you entirely overlapping a portion of dao. In other words, any part of a composition in you is also part of dao. However, it can be argued that despite this parthood relationship with you, dao still remains indescribable in terms of composition determined by a particular composition rule. This generates alternative interpretations of dao, which even 1 For instance, the Solar System is a composition according to the rule of forming a system, but not physical adherence, whereas an analog watch movement complies with both composition rules. Forming life as a composition rule is proposed by Peter van Inwagen (van Inwagen 1990: 81–97). 2 For details, see Banka 2018, 2022. 3 Roughly speaking, language covers what we usually conceptualize as objects. However, in you, there are or can be compositions which exist beyond language by virtue of being counterintuitive, for instance, a composition made from the oldest tree in Italy and the pencil that I am holding now. 13 Dao as a Unified Composition or Plurality: A Nihilism Perspective 383 involve questioning its status of composition. This problem hinges upon determining whether it holds that both in you and dao there are parts, and if this is the case, whether parthood in the two regions is of the same type. In this article, I tackle one such possible explanatory variant––mereological nihilism, according to which no composition is possible. Nihilism is formulated in the following way: Pxy ↔ x = y 4 It can be seen that in nihilism parthood collapses into identity (Varzi 2019) and does not leave space for compositions of more than one part. On assuming nihilism, dao is composed of simples––ultimate entities that are not parts themselves, and that cannot be subdivided into parts. This bears consequences for you, which requires parthood for its compositions. The question of parthood status in dao has at least a threefold implication for the Daoist metaphysical system in the Daodejing. First, from an inventory perspective, it allows the structure of the metaphysical region of dao to be understood: whether it is characterizable by unity, plurality, or some hybrid form of these two. Second, parthood status in dao is a cornerstone for describing the relationship between dao and you. Assuming that the you region is characterizable by composition, one would expect that the relationship with the dao region is of parthood character, and therefore it presupposes parthood in dao. However, one cannot dismiss the possibility that the difference between the two realms may consist in some parthood status differences, including the very existence of parts. Third, entertaining a case in which the dao region has no parts implies very important consequences for you. Considerin (...truncated)