This paper discusses the viewpoints of Philo and Zhuangzi. Philo, first of all, argues that a powerful or infinite Being cannot be assumed on the basis of concrete, demonstrable and measurable evidence alone. He can be perceived only by the (willing) intellect, according to him. With his faculties and natural powers, man cannot have such knowledge and, therefore, cannot make a stable stand on the matter. Zhuangzi is just as skeptical and believes that what we experience in this world depends on our view or perspective. (If we follow his thinking, a criminal may be praised for his act.) If Hume limits all evidence of fact to what a person experiences in his lifetime, Zhuangzi reduces that limit even more to the person's evaluation of his own experience. No one can argue with that person on his choices, no matter how destructive these choices are. Morality becomes completely relative and subordinated to one's caprice or shallow self-conceit.
