Common Misconceptions about Daoism
Misconceptions concerning Daoism are ongoing and too numerous to document. Most of
these misconceptions have their origins in conventional Chinese prejudices concerning
Daoism, Orientalist constructions, missionary sensibilities, Abrahamic assumptions
about the nature of the sacred, and the appropriative agendas of New Age discourse
communities. The most prominent misconceptions include the following:
- That there is an "original," "pure" Daoism called "philosophical Daoism"
- That there is a later, "degenerate" Daoism called "religious Daoism"
- That the Chinese daojia 道家 (lit., Family of the Dao) and daojiao 道教 (lit., Teachings
of the Dao) correspond to the Western constructions of philosophical Daoism and religious
Daoism
- That Laozi is the "founder" of Daoism
- That the Daode jing 道德經 is the "Daoist bible"
- That Daoism begins with the Tianshi 天師 (Celestial Masters) movement
- That to be a Daoist one must venerate Zhang Daoling 張道陵
- That Daoism is a single, unified tradition
- That Daoism is non-theistic
- That Daoist identity is something that one wears on the outside
- That all Daoists are "nature-lovers"
- That to be a Daoist one must know Chinese language
- That Chineseness is equivalent to authenticity
- That the Daoist practice of non-action (wuwei 無為) leads to apathy, inertia, and
atrophy
- That the Daoist notion of suchness (ziran 自然) corresponds to reproducing habituation
- That there can be a form of Daoism that is disembodied, non-communal, and placeless
- That one can be part of a tradition without respect for that tradition
- That Daoism is about a New Age or Neo-Hippie idea of "going with the flow"
- That Taiji quan 太極拳 (T'ai-chi ch’üan), Qigong 氣功 (Ch'i-kung), Fengshui 風水, or Traditional
Chinese Medicine (TCM) are originally or inherently Daoist
- That "Daoism" exists
