This article is about the Daoism that's implicit in the Dao De Jing, and I talk about the incoherence of a Daoist ideology, so you're not disagreeing with me there.

You're assuming the monistic sense of naturalism that I question in the concluding section. We're natural in one sense, but anti-natural in another. Luckily, "natural" has many senses in English, so that's alright.

Metaphysically, we're natural, but psychologically, socially, and existentially we're anti-natural. That doesn't entail that our anti-natural, civilizational ventures are fated to last forever. Of course, humanism might be tragically heroic, at best, in that we might destroy ourselves in our attempt to progress.

Daoists then could have the last laugh--except that Daoism, as I showed, is incoherent since it's undermined by Leo Strauss's point about the politics of ancient elitism.