Chapter 38 of Laozi’s Tao Te Ching contains this passage: 上德不德，是以有德；下德不失德，是以无德 (“the highest virtue does not lose virtue, and that is why it has virtue; the lower virtue does not let virtue go, and that is why it has no virtue”). The sentence is thoroughly contradictory — so how exactly should it be understood?
Take Lao Luo’s life story, though, and it becomes rather easy to grasp.
Luo Yonghao is exactly this kind of walking contradiction.
Does Luo Yonghao have sentiment?
Yes, absolutely. And at any moment he wants to make clear that he has it.
Does Lao Luo have talent?
He does. The industrial design of Smartisan phones is there for all to see — I’ve used two Nut-series phones myself — and Smartisan OS’s interaction design is outstanding too.
But why has Lao Luo ended up where he is now? Because he cares too much about his own image.
And it is precisely this habit — always advertising your own sentiment, building a persona for yourself — that produces “no virtue.”
“上德不德，是以有德” — to benefit the collective, sometimes you have to sacrifice the interests of particular individuals. But if you always cast yourself as a moral model, you have to harm others in order to protect your own image. In truth, you already have no virtue.
Does Lao Luo have verbal virtue?
No! There’s no doubt about that.
Whether it’s a genuinely unrestrained temperament, or, as he says, a way to save on advertising costs, Lao Luo has no verbal virtue.
Also an idealist myself, my attitude toward Lao Luo is equally contradictory. I hope he succeeds, because the products he makes really do show thoughtfulness and a keen understanding of human nature and user experience. But sometimes I also hope he fails — if a man with such an unfiltered mouth, a man so utterly lacking in decency, were to succeed, would there be any justice in the world? Does talent entitle you to do whatever you please? Does personal moral cultivation mean nothing?
Back in university, when I was thinking about the question of hope, I hit on a truth: light does not vanish; even darkness must beautify itself as light so that people will believe in it. That insight gave me the conviction that the future holds hope. I believe reality works this way, and therefore believe everything will be better in the future. It lets the seed of light carry on — like Lao Luo: though he has not succeeded, his idealistic conviction will influence many people. And the influence is positive and constructive.
Lao Luo is too fixated on morality, so he always places himself on a moral high ground, looking down on the people whose phones are priced at XX99, looking down on the people obsessed with benchmark rankings, looking down on the people who produce no major innovations.
Much of what he does is meant to demonstrate his own “lack of vulgarity,” his refusal to “compromise.” He disdains to do what others have already done. So Smartisan OS is always missing some “ordinary” features that every other vendor has and everybody needs. Because there’s nothing novel in them, he doesn’t do them.
Like a brash, arrogant youngster who aims high and delivers little, always shouting, “I’m going to change the world — how could I do such small things!” Full of ideals, and full of self-regard.
当仁不让 — if a thing ought to be done and I am able to do it, then I will not decline it.
And Lao Luo? He has that sense of mission too, wanting to lead the phone industry forward. But at the same time he turns around and steps on every phone maker, disparaging them one by one. Does that look like a man with leadership ability? This is a man who leans on his talent and looks down on everyone. A man trying to prove himself, not one who genuinely holds the public in his heart.
He arrives at his own conclusion — I’m the only smart one, everyone else is a big idiot. And everything he does is meant to prove that he is right.
He thinks he understands people’s hearts. He believes that as long as he advertises his own morality and sentiment (and genuinely lives up to them), plus real innovation, people will support him, back him, and then buy, buy, buy. He will beat his peers, acquire Apple…
Like a good man who believes that if he just keeps being nice to everyone, good fortune will come to him.
Like people who believe that releasing animals into the wild is accumulating merit and virtue, and that a good reward will surely follow.
This is a kind of naivety, and also a kind of foolishness.
Human nature is not that simple; it turns toward good and also toward self-interest.
Reality is complicated too. Just as reality itself turned out — Apple was not acquired; Nut was.
Lao Luo isn’t bad; he is naive, deluded, still in unopened chaos.
He stands a level below the realm of the highest virtue.
In the War of Resistance against Japan, when fighting the Japanese devils, is it better to sacrifice yourself to heaven to beg for blessings, or to go to the battlefield and kill the devils? The former takes no life; the latter leaves your hands drenched in blood. But clearly, the former doesn’t achieve the goal.
This article isn’t really about Lao Luo. It’s about the Tao Te Ching, and I hope it prompts some thought about this site’s subtitle.
Nor is this article a critique of Lao Luo. “Lose the Way, and then virtue; lose virtue, and then benevolence; lose benevolence, and then righteousness; lose righteousness, and then propriety” — compared with those who are neither benevolent nor righteous, the lower virtue still ranks quite high.