The Tao that can be spoken is not the real Tao.
I disagree with Lao Tzu on most points, but I must admit that this line from the Tao Te Ching is quite profound. It encapsulates a paradox -— it suggests Truth cannot be expressed in words, but rather realized. Credits to Lao Tzu for making the attempt, though.
Can Truth truly be spoken? And if so, how? What does it even mean to “speak” the Truth? Speaking is basically the process of trying to convey one’s perception of something -— a fact, an event, an insight to another person. It’s an attempt to translate internal understanding into language that someone else can comprehend.
Let’s take Alice and Bob as an example. Both are fluent in English, and Alice has just realized a profound Truth that she wants to share with Bob. Alice first builds her perspective based on her life experiences and understanding of the world. She then tries to articulate that Truth into words and communicates it to Bob. Bob listens, processes Alice’s words, and attempts to relate them to his own understanding, shaped by his life experiences. He might say, “Makes sense,” but Alice has no real way of knowing if Bob has grasped the exact Truth she intended to convey. It’s as if Truth passes through a funnel of steps -— each of which is probabilistic. There’s Alice’s interpretation of the Truth, her ability to express it in a language, Bob’s life experiences, and so on. Any misalignment at any step -— a misinterpretation, a gap in life experiences -— can distort the message. This is true of all communication. Our arguments, even the most well-formed, are built on our understanding of universe and language - both are incomplete for sure.
At this point, you might argue, “But what about simple truths? Isn’t something like 1+1 = 2 undeniable?” It’s true in theory, but try explaining it to a three-year-old who hasn’t yet learned basic arithmetic. You can’t just tell them the truth; you need to guide them to understand it themselves. They’ll need time to comprehend, experiment, imagine, and experiment again before they might finally grasp the concept -— or they might never fully get it. Simply stating the truth isn’t enough. This also holds for those who still believe the Earth is flat. Despite overwhelming scientific evidence and clear explanations, they remain unconvinced. The issue isn’t just a lack of intelligence; it’s about realizing and internalizing truth, which isn’t always straightforward.
I may come across as a skeptic, but I do believe that communication is one of the most powerful tools we have for expressing Truth. It’s likely a key reason humans have risen to become the apex predators on Earth. It’s just not enough, and probably overrated AF. Simply speaking the Truth doesn’t guarantee it will be understood or accepted. In the end, Truth has to be experienced and realized on a personal level.
This limitation is especially evident in emotional conflicts. These occur in all types of relationships, but especially between parents and children, where the generational gap often complicates communication. In such cases, we struggle to articulate our feelings, and frustration often leads to raised voices, arguments, or silence. We try to resolve emotional conflicts with reason and words, but they frequently fall short. Alice might express her emotions to Bob, but Bob interprets her words through his own emotional filters. As a result, they often misunderstand each other. While this might be controversial, I believe emotional conflicts are rarely fully resolved. They can be managed, perhaps even forgotten, but true resolution is rare.
“Emotional wars cannot be fought with weapons of reason.”
By contrast, in the workplace -— particularly in engineering -— conveying Truth becomes somewhat easier. There is often shared context, structured thinking, and clear documentation that help individuals align their understanding over time. Engineers don’t just speak the Truth - they work their way through frameworks, methodologies, and problem-solving processes that gradually lead to a shared realization of the Truth. This collaborative effort helps bridge gaps in understanding and reduces ambiguity. This idea of shared realization extends beyond engineering -— it’s equally relevant to effective leadership. The most terrible managers that I’ve seen and heard are those who simply speak mundane shit and expect things to happen. Good leaders on the other hands inspire their teams. But what does it mean to inspire? Inspiration isn’t about delivering motivational speeches or merely outlining a plan -— I think inspiration is all about leading others to a realization. Good leaders don’t trivialize their vision by simply articulating it. Instead, they create a sense of purpose by helping their teams imagine a future state, pushing them to confront their own doubts, explore possibilities, and, ultimately, arrive at a shared understanding or solution. This process is what true inspiration is: it’s not just speaking—it’s guiding others toward a deeper realization of what can be achieved, making them see the potential rather than just hearing about it.
So, in the end, maybe Lao Tzu had a point. We can talk about Truth all we want, but it’s something you have to feel for yourself. Who knows, maybe one day -— when we’re communicating through super-intelligent machines -— we’ll finally find a common ground of knowledge, understanding, and communication. Maybe then we’ll get closer to actually speaking the Truth. Until that day, though, we’re just playing an endless game of broken telephone, hoping someone on the other end gets it.