Perspectivism as a Way of Knowing in the Zhuangzi

Abstract

A perspectivist theory is usually taken to mean that (1) our knowledge of the world is inevitably shaped by our particular perspectives, (2) any one of these perspectives is as good as any other, and (3) any claims to objective or authoritative knowledge are consequently without ground. Recent scholarship on Nietzsche, however, has challenged the prevalent view that the philosopher holds (2) and (3), arguing instead that his perspectivism aims at attaining a greater level of objectivity. In this essay, I attempt a structurally similar reinterpretation of Zhuangzi's perspectivism. I argue that while the Chinese thinker sees all knowledge as perspective-dependent, he thinks that some perspectives are broader and more accurate than others. He utilizes shifts in perspective precisely in order to attain these superior perspectives, which constitute what he calls da zhi 大知, or "greater knowledge." Whereas Nietzsche sees his perspectivism as methodologically continuous with the sciences, Zhuangzi's "greater knowledge" has the goal of ensuring our survival and well-being in the everyday world.

The Motherboard of Myriad Things

“…Zhuangzi is notorious for rejecting the existence of absolute truths beyond simple facts about the power of the Dao. Instead, Zhuangzi offers up a perspectivist (Connolly 2011) or relativist (Hansen 2003; approach to thinking about knowledge. However, the practice of wuwei does not require factual knowledge or "knowledge-that", but skills-based knowledge or "knowledge-how".…”

Taking Skepticism Seriously: How the Zhuang-Zi Can Inform Contemporary Epistemology

“…Graham 1983, Eno 1996, Fraser 2009, and Sturgeon 2015; that Zhuang Zi is, e.g., a relativist, pluralist, or perspectivist rather than a skeptic (cf. Hansen 1983, Wong 1984, Mou 2008and 2015a, and Connolly 2011; that Zhuang Zi's skepticism is better construed as, e.g., a recommendation, method, or therapy rather than a thesis (cf. Kjellberg 1996, Ivanhoe 1996, Raphals 1996, Van Norden 1996, and Wong 2005; or that Zhuang Zi does not sincerely advocate radically skeptical positions, despite appearances to the contrary (cf.…”