Abstract

The tendency of postmodernity emphasizes on linguistic deconstruction and construction rather than being and nature. Deconstructive attitude is very meaningful in order to overcome modernity through critiques on reason and rationality. However, I feel still unsatisfactory. It is the beginning of this paper. Taoism is focused on nature's spontaneity as logic and grammar to interpret everything that is Wu-wei as the void. It pays attention to immanent transformation and change in nature. Robert Corrington's Ecstatic Naturalism, as a son of American naturalism and Continental metaphysics, walks confidently on the path of postmodernity of deconstruction. These two thoughts are not far away and seem to be good friends. They are fundamentally different; one is very old, the other is very new. Nevertheless, they are very common in explaining everything through natural process and avoiding causality and anthropocentrism. They are ecstatic and mystical due to the emphasis of spiritual and ecstatic transformation. On the other hand, there is a decisive difference between Taoism and Ecstatic Naturalism. Taoism is truly based on continuity and the connectedness of all things as an organism. There is always a gap and division within Ecstatic Naturalism which can appear in tension, in qualitative difference. This tension and betweenness make orders and signification possible. These differences and gaps are explained by the source of movement as negativity. However, void and nothingness cannot be reduced to negativity in Taoism. Taoism does not like hunger and drives, which cannot support the movement of Tao. The movement of Tao is based on returning to origin. In Taoism, nothingness and the void are basic foundations of all kinds of production and manifestation of Tao. In the universe, continuity and connectedness are always "already@ without human beings' artificial intervention. Therefore, the focus is on harmony and equilibrium rather than on tension or difference. Hunger and drives are not natural in Taoism. Ecstatic Naturalism seeks to construct a sound metaphysics to cover division and to free it from linguistic bondage. Taoism is still skeptical about language and knowledge, i. e., insofar as they do not embody Tao. Spiritual transformation is natural itself through forgetting of the self as desubstantialization of the self, which is quite different from Ecstatic Naturalism, which affirms the reliving powers in the face of the ontological difference. They take two different roads in a sense. However, from the perspective of a Korean American philosopher, they are not quite different but very close.