Hi, welcome to the forum
I respect your wish not to debate, but rather simply to seek knowledge, and consider it an honourable motive. I have some questions for you, and while they might seem as if attempting to instigating a debate, please consider them as merely seeking knowledge, and not seeking debate.
1) According to Tao Te Ching:
To conduct one's life according to the Tao,
is to conduct one's life without regrets;
to realize that potential within oneself
which is of benefit to all.
Regarding the part about no regrets, it seems you can interpret that in two (perhaps even more) ways. Either as a don't feel bad about what you've done, or don't do anything which you'll end up feeling bad for. The second part of the sentence, benefit for all, suggest the second interpretation is most probable. Is my deduction correct?
2) You wrote in your personal profile that you are considering enlisting in the US army. Can I deduce from that that you truly believe enlisting in the US army would "benefit all" including Iraqi and Afghan people which you might get send to? I mean the presence and actions of the US in those places has been so far highly controversial. I'm just curious how you see those things. Also from Tao Te Ching:
When leading by the way of the Tao,
abominate the use of force,
for it causes resistance, and loss of strength,
showing the Tao has not been followed well.
Achieve results but not through violence,
for it is against the natural way,
and damages both others' and one's own true self.
The harvest is destroyed in the wake of a great war,
and weeds grow in the fields in the wake of the army.
And:
Weapons of war are instruments of fear,
and are not favoured by the wise,
who use them only when there is no choice,
for peace and stillness are dear to their hearts,
and victory causes them no rejoicing.
3)again according to Tao Te Ching
Nature acts without intent,
so cannot be described
as acting with benevolence,
nor malevolence to any thing.
In this respect, the Tao is just the same,
though in reality it should be said
that nature follows the rule of Tao.
Therefore, even when he seems to act
in manner kind or benevolent,
the sage is not acting with such intent,
for in conscious matters such as these,
he is amoral and indifferent.
So we should act spontaneous on our nature while disregarding our sense of morality? How can you reach
"that potential within oneself which is of benefit to all" like that? Isn't in our nature both the potential for evil as for good? Don't we need morality to choose which potential to follow, which part of our nature to indulge to?
4)Again from Tao Te Ching:
Through sight, the colours may be seen,
but too much colour blinds us.
Apprehending the tones of sound,
too much sound might make us deaf,
and too much flavour deadens taste.
When hunting for sport, and chasing for pleasure,
the mind easily becomes perplexed.
He who collects treasures for himself
more easily becomes anxious.
The wise person fulfills his needs,
rather than sensory temptations.
How can we tell the difference of our needs and our sensory temptations if we ignore our sense of morality?
