Andrew Sullivan has two posts today on Chuang Tzu.  He uses them to suggests some parallels between Chuang Tzu and Michael Oakeshott, the British conservative political philosopher who is Sullivan's inspiration. 

Sullivan picks up on Chuang Tzu's skepticism regarding the capacities of human knowledge and links this to Oakeshott's critique of rationalism:

The gift of unknowing – what Oakeshott would try to capture in his
theory of aesthetics as well as of practical life – is perhaps best put
in this classic Chuang Tzu tale that was central to Oakeshott's
understanding of how human beings actually do what we do, and live how
we live, irrespective of modern rationalism's claim to have captured
all human knowledge in theory…

The story referred to is that of Duke Huan and the wheelwright (chapter 13, number 10).

I think this is a fair claim: the two streams of thought – Taoism and a certain British conservatism – do share a skeptical stance.  But, of course, Taoism goes deeper.  Chuang Tzu not only questions the extent to which humans can create rationalist theories that "have captured all human knowledge…"; he also questions whether language itself is capable of corresponding to the complexities of Way.  I suspect that Chuang Tzu's rejection of analytic distinctions might unsettle even the most skeptical Tory.

Chuang Tzu would also go further on political issues, questioning the efficacy of any attempt at political leadership, good or bad:

If springs dry up, leaving fish stranded together on dry ground, they may keep each other moist with misty breath and frothy spit – but that's nothing like forgetting each other in the depths of rivers and lakes.  We can praise Emperor Yao and condemn Chieh the tyrant – but that's nothing like forgetting them both and dwelling in the transformations of Tao.  (chapter 6)

Would Oakeshott be willing to disengage from politics as Chuang Tzu suggests above?

Sullivan also mentions Thomas Merton, the Trappist monk who penned his own rough versions of selected Chuang Tzu passages.  The thing I like about Merton is his intellectual and religious humility.  He does not attempt to find a Christian God in Chuang Tzu.  Sullivan quotes a reviewer quoting my favorite line out of Merton's book, where he says that he was not writing a book: "…in which Christian rabbits will suddenly
appear by magic out of a Taoist hat.”  Merton goes on to write: “I simply like Chuang Tzu because he is what he
is and I feel no need to justify this liking to myself or anyone else.”   A certain acceptance and tolerance there…

And, on another topic dear to Sullivan's heart, if he were to look further he would find in ancient Chinese philosophy arguments sympathetic to gay marriage…