Nice work. I've been dwelling with this for 2 days now. It works as a good introduction to both Heidegger and Taoism, but it also gently urges the reader to take them seriously and to make space amd step back.
The acting without acting is the hardest thing for me to understand and enact. Going with the flow yet also willing where to go is a difficult balance to maintain.
Thanks, William. If you want to explore further, this paper by Eric Nelson on the links between Heidegger and Taoism is useful: https://philpapers.org/archive/NELFPC.pdf
This is a great quick-ish overview of some dense Heidegger-ese.
I can't speak to how much Taoism and Eastern thinking in general influenced him or on what timeline, though I'd be surprised to see that influence prior to his "Turning" around 1930. That's when it apparently clicked with him that the clearing is _intrinsically hidden_, with all the paradoxes and contradictions implied. The works after that move away from the more Aristotelian-flavored work of the 1920s into the historical and mystical poetic concerns of the later works. It wouldn't surprise me if Eastern influence nudged him in that direction, given what he says about physis and aletheia by the mid 30s, in e.g. Introduction to Metaphysics
He was definitely influenced by eastern thought well before then, even well before he wrote Being and Time which came out in 1927. For example, it’s been said that Heidegger's concept of Dasein was inspired by Okakura Kakuzo's concept of das-in-der-Welt-sein (being in the world) which is in The Book of Tea. Apparently Heidegger was given a copy in 1919 by one of his students.
That doesn't surprise me. I always think of early Heidegger as under the influence of Christianity and the medieval scholastics, but it's evident he was a wide-ranging thinker since the beginning.
The bridge between Heidegger and Taoism is, I think, Meister Eckhart. Heidegger engaged with Eckhart from fairly early in his career. 'Gelassenheit' is an Eckhartian coinage. Similar to wu-wei is Eckhart's 'life lived without why'. It is worth looking into, if you haven't already. For example, "Eckhart, Heidegger, and the Imperative of Releasement" by Ian Alexander Moore.
Otherwise, yes, to this line of thinking! Thank you!
Thanks Jack. I’ve never done a full deep dive into Meister Eckhart. Just a surface reading mainly via Schopenhauer and Erich Fromm. The bridge between H and the Tao makes sense as I’ve seen him compared to some aspects of Buddhism too. I will check out Moore’s book, thanks for the recommendation.
Thanks Charlotte. Lovely to hear it was useful (although Heidegger would be rolling in his grave saying just let it be, it doesn’t need to be useful!).
Your essay shows how both Heidegger and Taoism circle the same structural truth: that life becomes intelligible when we stop forcing it and let it disclose itself. Instinct provides fixed responses; narrative supports a more flexible pattern that expands responses to logic, allowing the identity to maintain its independence. Wu wei and Gelassenheit both when that internal narrative loosens enough for the experience to arrive as a whole.
My book tries to enact that model. Instead of forcing the argument forward, the structure lets the ideas emerge in the same way Heidegger describes: a narrative that gathers rather than grabs. Your essay shows how deeply that mode of attention runs across traditions — the way, the clearing, the fourfold, ziran — all pointing to the same shift from control to participation. It’s a relief to see the resonance laid out this clearly.
Thank you!
Nice work. I've been dwelling with this for 2 days now. It works as a good introduction to both Heidegger and Taoism, but it also gently urges the reader to take them seriously and to make space amd step back.
The acting without acting is the hardest thing for me to understand and enact. Going with the flow yet also willing where to go is a difficult balance to maintain.
I have thought about Thomas Kuhn as another Taoist philosopher that you might find interesting. https://substack.com/@williambausman719579/p-180302194
People have made many comparisons between Heidegger and Kuhn but I never knew Heidegger well enough to have an opinion.
Thanks, William. If you want to explore further, this paper by Eric Nelson on the links between Heidegger and Taoism is useful: https://philpapers.org/archive/NELFPC.pdf
This is a great quick-ish overview of some dense Heidegger-ese.
I can't speak to how much Taoism and Eastern thinking in general influenced him or on what timeline, though I'd be surprised to see that influence prior to his "Turning" around 1930. That's when it apparently clicked with him that the clearing is _intrinsically hidden_, with all the paradoxes and contradictions implied. The works after that move away from the more Aristotelian-flavored work of the 1920s into the historical and mystical poetic concerns of the later works. It wouldn't surprise me if Eastern influence nudged him in that direction, given what he says about physis and aletheia by the mid 30s, in e.g. Introduction to Metaphysics
He was definitely influenced by eastern thought well before then, even well before he wrote Being and Time which came out in 1927. For example, it’s been said that Heidegger's concept of Dasein was inspired by Okakura Kakuzo's concept of das-in-der-Welt-sein (being in the world) which is in The Book of Tea. Apparently Heidegger was given a copy in 1919 by one of his students.
That doesn't surprise me. I always think of early Heidegger as under the influence of Christianity and the medieval scholastics, but it's evident he was a wide-ranging thinker since the beginning.
The bridge between Heidegger and Taoism is, I think, Meister Eckhart. Heidegger engaged with Eckhart from fairly early in his career. 'Gelassenheit' is an Eckhartian coinage. Similar to wu-wei is Eckhart's 'life lived without why'. It is worth looking into, if you haven't already. For example, "Eckhart, Heidegger, and the Imperative of Releasement" by Ian Alexander Moore.
Otherwise, yes, to this line of thinking! Thank you!
Thanks Jack. I’ve never done a full deep dive into Meister Eckhart. Just a surface reading mainly via Schopenhauer and Erich Fromm. The bridge between H and the Tao makes sense as I’ve seen him compared to some aspects of Buddhism too. I will check out Moore’s book, thanks for the recommendation.
Thank you for your excellent article!
And in case you or anyone is interested, here is one of Eckhart’s more famous sermons:
https://www.stillnessspeaks.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/MeisterEckhartThePoorMan.pdf
This is absolutely brilliant! Thank you for this analytical take 👏
Thanks Charlotte. Lovely to hear it was useful (although Heidegger would be rolling in his grave saying just let it be, it doesn’t need to be useful!).
Your essay shows how both Heidegger and Taoism circle the same structural truth: that life becomes intelligible when we stop forcing it and let it disclose itself. Instinct provides fixed responses; narrative supports a more flexible pattern that expands responses to logic, allowing the identity to maintain its independence. Wu wei and Gelassenheit both when that internal narrative loosens enough for the experience to arrive as a whole.
My book tries to enact that model. Instead of forcing the argument forward, the structure lets the ideas emerge in the same way Heidegger describes: a narrative that gathers rather than grabs. Your essay shows how deeply that mode of attention runs across traditions — the way, the clearing, the fourfold, ziran — all pointing to the same shift from control to participation. It’s a relief to see the resonance laid out this clearly.