I don't get Buddhism

For intuitive and critical discussions, from spirituality to theological doctrines. Fair warning: because the subject matter is personal, moderation is strict.

Moderator: Dan~

Re: I don't get Buddhism

Postby iambiguous » Thu Sep 10, 2020 8:31 pm

Meno_ wrote:Iambigious said,

No, I do want to. Except...


"Enough said. Just thought I'd ask."


>>>>>>>>>>> ><><>< >>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<>><<>><<>>>>?<>

except-
accept
I do
want to
no
know

Words convey ambiguity,
What does the phrase -no, I do want to, except mean in and out of context?

Like the visualization of the test of -the perception , whether a glass is half full, or, half empty mean?

It's not quite as simple, as it appears.

Enough seen? Thought I'd observe.


Well, that clears nothing up.

Note to others:

What's it clear up for you? :-k
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
And here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=194382
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 37310
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: I don't get Buddhism

Postby felix dakat » Thu Sep 10, 2020 8:44 pm

iambiguous wrote:

Meanwhile, over and again on various posts I have noted the extent to which nihilism can in turn provide comfort and consolation to those who come to embody it. How? By starting with the assumption that in a No God/No Religion world, one does not have to choose between the enlightened/moral things and the benighted/immoral things to do. On the contrary, any and all behaviors can be rationalized such that one's own self-gratification alone can be the deciding factor.


Okay, I missed that you stated that "over and again." Your assessment of course ignores the whole realm of human/mammalian social empathic and compassionate feelings common to all but the sociopath or psychopath. Of course, I expect you will make the perfect the enemy of the good in your quest to deny humanistic values.

iambiguous wrote:But: there's a price to be paid. For me it is a "fractured and fragmented" self getting closer and closer to oblivion.


You have your reward.

iambiguous wrote:Now, watch him a week or a month from now ignore the points I raise here and make the very same ones all over again. Let's look for that, okay?


Why not? You address your points to a third party, the "They" of your own imagination. Take it up with Them.
The purpose of my life would seem to be to express the truth as I discover it, but in such a manner that it is completely devoid of authority. By having no authority, by being seen by all as utterly unreliable, I express the truth and put everyone in a contradictory position where they can only save themselves by making the truth their own.
Soren Kierkegaard– Journals, 432
User avatar
felix dakat
Janitor
 
Posts: 8832
Joined: Tue Dec 05, 2006 7:20 am
Location: east of eden

Re: I don't get Buddhism

Postby Meno_ » Thu Sep 10, 2020 8:51 pm

Iambigious says,

"Now, you will either take the discussion here or you won't. And Wittgenstein may or may not be relevant if you do choose to take it there."

Within context & without, I will and i may, respectively
Meno_
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 7132
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am
Location: Mysterium Tremendum

Re: I don't get Buddhism

Postby iambiguous » Thu Sep 10, 2020 10:04 pm

Meno_ wrote:Iambigious says,

"Now, you will either take the discussion here or you won't. And Wittgenstein may or may not be relevant if you do choose to take it there."

Within context & without, I will and i may, respectively


Not much that doesn't exclude.

Still, let's see what it does exclude in regard to my own challenge to him. :-k
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
And here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=194382
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 37310
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: I don't get Buddhism

Postby Meno_ » Thu Sep 10, 2020 11:25 pm

iambiguous wrote:
Meno_ wrote:Iambigious says,

"Now, you will either take the discussion here or you won't. And Wittgenstein may or may not be relevant if you do choose to take it there."

Within context & without, I will and i may, respectively


Not much that doesn't exclude.

Still, let's see what it does exclude in regard to my own challenge to him. :-k




Agreed, on one premise, that it's challenging to clear up misconceptions.
Meno_
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 7132
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am
Location: Mysterium Tremendum

Re: I don't get Buddhism

Postby iambiguous » Fri Sep 11, 2020 12:13 am

Meno_ wrote:

Agreed, on one premise, that it's challenging to clear up misconceptions.


I double dare you to note a particular context relating to the main components of Buddhism relating to your own personal conceptions regarding the existential relationship between morality here and now and immortality there and then. Allowing you to clear up misconceptions that relate to both premises and conclusions as the exchange unfolds.

People do still double dare each other, right? :wink:
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
And here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=194382
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 37310
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: I don't get Buddhism

Postby Meno_ » Fri Sep 11, 2020 1:25 am

iambiguous wrote:
Meno_ wrote:

Agreed, on one premise, that it's challenging to clear up misconceptions.


I double dare you to note a particular context relating to the main components of Buddhism relating to your own personal conceptions regarding the existential relationship between morality here and now and immortality there and then. Allowing you to clear up misconceptions that relate to both premises and conclusions as the exchange unfolds.

People do still double dare each other, right? :wink:




Double dare did not occur to me, not even a single one, as You bring it up. It appears to a show and tell type devolution into a truth and dare kind of debatable issue.

If that, then some rules of engagement must be prefaced and I dont think that this may ne appropriate or not. If You go along with such a scheme, rather then an informal , mutual discussion , then that should be made clear.
Meno_
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 7132
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am
Location: Mysterium Tremendum

Re: I don't get Buddhism

Postby iambiguous » Fri Sep 11, 2020 1:53 am

Meno_ wrote:


Double dare did not occur to me, not even a single one, as You bring it up. It appears to a show and tell type devolution into a truth and dare kind of debatable issue.

If that, then some rules of engagement must be prefaced and I dont think that this may ne appropriate or not. If You go along with such a scheme, rather then an informal , mutual discussion , then that should be made clear.


Well, it that case, I double dare anyone else here to explain what they think it is possible that you mean.

Extra credit if they can tie this into what they think I don't get that Curly doesn't get that I don't get about Buddhism and everything else. :wink:
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
And here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=194382
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 37310
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: I don't get Buddhism

Postby Meno_ » Fri Sep 11, 2020 3:16 am

iambiguous wrote:
Meno_ wrote:


Double dare did not occur to me, not even a single one, as You bring it up. It appears to a show and tell type devolution into a truth and dare kind of debatable issue.

If that, then some rules of engagement must be prefaced and I dont think that this may ne appropriate or not. If You go along with such a scheme, rather then an informal , mutual discussion , then that should be made clear.


Well, it that case, I double dare anyone else here to explain what they think it is possible that you mean.

Extra credit if they can tie this into what they think I don't get that Curly doesn't get that I don't get about Buddhism and everything else. :wink:



This should not be a combat type situation excluding one point of view from the other , with a jury forming a conclusion regarding a winner and a looser, but a joint effort to avoid the fractures and possible oblivion.

Does not conflict resolution entail the type of things Buddhism suggests? It is adverse to matters of ego. Rather the opposite matters, that of finding balance with disattachment old such actions.

It attains a simple quietness , a Zen-hush, where grievences are not fueled by denied fears.
Last edited by Meno_ on Fri Sep 11, 2020 9:14 am, edited 1 time in total.
Meno_
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 7132
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am
Location: Mysterium Tremendum

Re: I don't get Buddhism

Postby Karpel Tunnel » Fri Sep 11, 2020 5:18 am

A number of posts back Iambiguous challenges me and Felix to demonstrate a number of things. A reader joining the thread in the middle might think this reasonable and of course would not realize that these arguments

1) have been countered and responded to many times before in this and other threads
2) they misrepresent the positions of others.

A fuller explanation can be found here....

https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop ... 0#p2775560

Iamb acts as if points have not been responded to or conveniently has no memory of this.
Karpel Tunnel
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3261
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2018 12:26 pm

Re: I don't get Buddhism

Postby iambiguous » Fri Sep 11, 2020 10:23 pm

felix dakat wrote:
iambiguous wrote:
Meanwhile, over and again on various posts I have noted the extent to which nihilism can in turn provide comfort and consolation to those who come to embody it. How? By starting with the assumption that in a No God/No Religion world, one does not have to choose between the enlightened/moral things and the benighted/immoral things to do. On the contrary, any and all behaviors can be rationalized such that one's own self-gratification alone can be the deciding factor.


Okay, I missed that you stated that "over and again." Your assessment of course ignores the whole realm of human/mammalian social empathic and compassionate feelings common to all but the sociopath or psychopath. Of course, I expect you will make the perfect the enemy of the good in your quest to deny humanistic values.


Forget my assessment and your assessment here. Both are intellectual contraptions sustaining a "point of view" in a world of words.

Let's focus in instead on a particular set of circumstances in which both of us explore our respective moral philosophies, given the manner in which we come to choose specific behaviors based on the assumptions we make about the existential relationship between morality and immortality. As that comes to pertain to the actual rewards and punishments we have experienced in our life. You can choose it or we can decide together. Based on issues that are of particular importance to us.

And, if there are any Buddhists here among us, they can contribute given their own frame of mind.

iambiguous wrote:But: there's a price to be paid. For me it is a "fractured and fragmented" self getting closer and closer to oblivion.


felix dakat wrote: You have your reward.


Yes, but my point is that, given my own subjective perspective rooted in dasein, the punishment far and away outweighs the rewards. Why? Because I am no longer able to be in sync with the real me in sync with the right thing to do. Instead, I am drawn and quartered time and time and time again when confronting conflicting goods. And there is still oblivion awaiting me around the corner.

How about yourself? Where does the part about reward and punishment fit into your own experiences when confronting conflicting goods?

And, again, why don't you and Karpel Tunnel explore each other's moral/spiritual philosophies in regard to rewards and punishments on both sides of the grave. If nothing else it can be an object lesson in how not to be a troll in threads of this sort.
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
And here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=194382
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 37310
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: I don't get Buddhism

Postby iambiguous » Fri Sep 11, 2020 10:45 pm

Curly wrote:A number of posts back Iambiguous challenges me and Felix to demonstrate a number of things. A reader joining the thread in the middle might think this reasonable and of course would not realize that these arguments

1) have been countered and responded to many times before in this and other threads
2) they misrepresent the positions of others.

A fuller explanation can be found here....

https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop ... 0#p2775560

Iamb acts as if points have not been responded to or conveniently has no memory of this.


Basically, I noted how, just as with most of us, KT and Felix have probably spent some time pondering the distinction between right and wrong behavior on this side of the grave; and in how the conclusions we come to in regard to that have implications for what we imagine the fate of "I" to be on the other side of it.

And that there are hundreds and hundreds of religious/spiritual paths out there, all of which basically argue that their own path is the one true path.

So I noted this:

And, again, with so much at stake, should they not themselves be out there going down the list of all major and minor religious denominations? Personally checking them out one by one to see if perhaps there is a better, more demonstrable path to embody as mere mortals in regard to their own life and death?


Now, Curly responds to that in the post above by noting he is only interested in "what one is drawn to". As though this is not in turn embedded in the life that he has lived, the embodiment of "I" as an existential contraption rooted in dasein. Like somehow in regard to religion, he is different from all the rest of us.

Besides, just because he is not "drawn" to certain denominations doesn't mean that this excludes them from in fact being the "one true path"?

Right?

So, once again, here is the list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_r ... traditions

And, by all means, let him keep us informed as to his progress.

Felix too.
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
And here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=194382
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 37310
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: I don't get Buddhism

Postby phyllo » Sat Sep 12, 2020 12:31 am

You said that you are somehow bothered by thoughts of a meaningless life that ends in oblivion.And you are somehow bothered by thoughts of being fractured and fragmented.

People suggested that you try Buddhism or mediation to help with those issues.

If you don't want to try it, then don't. Look for some other solution. Talk to other people who may have different ideas. Or don't.

Nobody is forcing you to do anything. It doesn't matter to us whether you solve your problems or not.

You said that you are interested in Buddhism.

KT has both practical and theoretical knowledge of Buddhism. Yet you mostly ignore what he has to say about it.

You said that you want to discuss Buddhism with real Buddhists. Yet you don't seem to be going to Buddhist internet sites to talk to them. You can Google it. And I already provided links in this thread.

It really looks like you're not very interested in Buddhism.

And in case you are tempted to suggest that I should research the hundreds of religions and spiritual paths that you keep linking ... don't bother.

I'm perfectly content to live a meaningless life that ends in oblivion.
phyllo
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 12023
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 1:41 am

Re: I don't get Buddhism

Postby iambiguous » Sat Sep 12, 2020 1:27 am

phyllo wrote:
And in case you are tempted to suggest that I should research the hundreds of religions and spiritual paths that you keep linking ... don't bother.

I'm perfectly content to live a meaningless life that ends in oblivion.


And this then is clearly the bottom line. If you have come to conclude that you are living a meaningless life that will end some day in oblivion...and that you are perfectly content with it? Well, in this case, you only have to contend with that part of my own frame of mind suggesting that, given new experiences in your life, out in a world teeming with contingency, chance and change, you may well come to think and to feel otherwise. You may come [as some do] to dread it.

Right?

My point is only that this sort of thinking seems more the embodiment of an existential contraption rooted in dasein than an objective truth rooted in a philosophical assessment able to establish how one ought to feel about life and death as a rational human being.

Then the religious objectivists among us attach that to one or another God or denomination, and insist their own path is the one true path.

Buddhists, for example.
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
And here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=194382
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 37310
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: I don't get Buddhism

Postby felix dakat » Sat Sep 12, 2020 7:45 pm

phyllo wrote:You said that you are somehow bothered by thoughts of a meaningless life that ends in oblivion.And you are somehow bothered by thoughts of being fractured and fragmented.

People suggested that you try Buddhism or mediation to help with those issues.

If you don't want to try it, then don't. Look for some other solution. Talk to other people who may have different ideas. Or don't.

Nobody is forcing you to do anything. It doesn't matter to us whether you solve your problems or not.

You said that you are interested in Buddhism.

KT has both practical and theoretical knowledge of Buddhism. Yet you mostly ignore what he has to say about it.

You said that you want to discuss Buddhism with real Buddhists. Yet you don't seem to be going to Buddhist internet sites to talk to them. You can Google it. And I already provided links in this thread.

It really looks like you're not very interested in Buddhism.

And in case you are tempted to suggest that I should research the hundreds of religions and spiritual paths that you keep linking ... don't bother.

I'm perfectly content to live a meaningless life that ends in oblivion.


To write a meaningful post like the one above contradicts its own conclusion that life is meaningless. It's a kind of extended self negating tautology.
The purpose of my life would seem to be to express the truth as I discover it, but in such a manner that it is completely devoid of authority. By having no authority, by being seen by all as utterly unreliable, I express the truth and put everyone in a contradictory position where they can only save themselves by making the truth their own.
Soren Kierkegaard– Journals, 432
User avatar
felix dakat
Janitor
 
Posts: 8832
Joined: Tue Dec 05, 2006 7:20 am
Location: east of eden

Re: I don't get Buddhism

Postby iambiguous » Sat Sep 12, 2020 8:02 pm

Buddhist Retreat
Why I gave up on finding my religion.
By JOHN HORGAN at Slate Magazine

Conclusion

All religions, including Buddhism, stem from our narcissistic wish to believe that the universe was created for our benefit, as a stage for our spiritual quests. In contrast, science tells us that we are incidental, accidental.


That's number three for me. The first two revolve around morality and immortality. Only God or a No God religious path can provide us with a sanctioned way "from on high" in which to differentiate our behaviors as right or wrong when confronted with conflicting goods. And only God or a No God religious path can provide us with a sanctioned way "from on high" in which to believe that death is only the beginning of our sojourn into eternity itself.

On the other hand, it is also far-fetched in my view to suppose that science has pinned down that in fact we are "incidental, accidental". There may not be much in the way of evidence that our souls are intertwined in a spiritual quest for the final explanation, but who is kidding whom in regard to the gap between, say, what science knows now about that and what it will know even just a hundred years from now. The very existence of existence itself is a profound mystery. And I challenge any scientist to demonstrate otherwise.

So to conclude that...

Far from being the raison d’être of the universe, we appeared through sheer happenstance, and we could vanish in the same way. This is not a comforting viewpoint, but science, unlike religion, seeks truth regardless of how it makes us feel.


...is to presume considerably more than we can given the gap between "I" and "all there is". On the other hand, look at all that I presume here in regard to human interactions in the is/ought world. Dasein, conflicting goods, political economy. But I would never be foolish enough to presume that I actually am closer to whatever that "final explanation" might possibly be than others here.

Buddhism raises radical questions about our inner and outer reality, but it is finally not radical enough to accommodate science’s disturbing perspective. The remaining question is whether any form of spirituality can.


On the contrary, that is only one of many "remaining questions" in regard to "I" in the vastness of what may well be a multi-verse. What always astonishes me is how men and women can latch on fervently to actual denominations like Buddhism and convince themselves that they really are on the One True Path. Until I remind myself that I once did so myself. And more than once.

And, again, the reason for this isn't hard to come up with: What. Is. At. Stake.

Here and now, there and then.

Yet even this presumes human autonomy.
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
And here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=194382
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 37310
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: I don't get Buddhism -unification

Postby Meno_ » Sat Sep 12, 2020 9:45 pm

I is conceivable that the post cyborg man will be able to relinquish his dual machine/ human autominous nature and become the superman on way to even exceeding that ad infinitum.


If so, the Buddha will be able to transcend the differential temporal relative and here and now from the static eternal
Meno_
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 7132
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am
Location: Mysterium Tremendum

Re: I don't get Buddhism -unification

Postby iambiguous » Sat Sep 12, 2020 10:04 pm

Meno_ wrote: I is conceivable that the post cyborg man will be able to relinquish his dual machine/ human autominous nature and become the superman on way to even exceeding that ad infinitum.


Maybe. But not much isn't "conceivable", right?

In fact, it is conceivable that some day I might even understand what this...

Meno_ wrote: If so, the Buddha will be able to transcend the differential temporal relative and here and now from the static eternal


...means.

How about, to the best of your ability, you imagine yourself trying to explain it to a Buddhist insofar as it might possibly relate to reincarnation and Nirvana.

As that relates to the behaviors you choose on this side of the grave given a particular situation.
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
And here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=194382
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 37310
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: I don't get Buddhism

Postby felix dakat » Sat Sep 12, 2020 10:36 pm

"Science tells us" says John Horgan. Horgan's Science talks to him! It's his God. It tells him that he's incidental -- an accident. And unlike Iambiguous, who acknowledges that he may be wrong, Horgan knows what his God, Science, is telling him applies universally to everyone. Nihilism and Promethean shame are on the shadow side of the God of modern scientism.
The purpose of my life would seem to be to express the truth as I discover it, but in such a manner that it is completely devoid of authority. By having no authority, by being seen by all as utterly unreliable, I express the truth and put everyone in a contradictory position where they can only save themselves by making the truth their own.
Soren Kierkegaard– Journals, 432
User avatar
felix dakat
Janitor
 
Posts: 8832
Joined: Tue Dec 05, 2006 7:20 am
Location: east of eden

Re: I don't get Buddhism

Postby iambiguous » Sun Sep 13, 2020 2:40 am

felix dakat wrote:"Science tells us" says John Horgan. Horgan's Science talks to him! It's his God. It tells him that he's incidental -- an accident. And unlike Iambiguous, who acknowledges that he may be wrong, Horgan knows what his God, Science, is telling him applies universally to everyone. Nihilism and Promethean shame are on the shadow side of the God of modern scientism.


Yes, some approach science without taking into account the gap that does still exist between "the scientific method" and a definitive understanding of existence itself. We don't even know for sure whether science has the capability of closing that gap. Anymore than we know for sure that philosophy does.

But at least science does employ a "scientific method" in order to grapple with nature in as rigorous and as objective a manner as possible.

It doesn't throw around words like enlightenment and karma and reincarnation and Nirvana with but a minimal of hard evidence to sustain a belief in them. It doesn't create a spiritual "scripture" that the faithful are obliged to follow all the way to the grave.

And I've yet to hear from Buddhists able to explain how a No God religion can bring about any of what they profess to believe about the universe after we are all dead and gone as but "mere mortals".

How is that not just blind faith?
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
And here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=194382
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 37310
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: I don't get Buddhism

Postby Meno_ » Sun Sep 13, 2020 4:40 am

I feel some irony there, or, even a hidden ambiguity, but I just can't place it.
Meno_
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 7132
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am
Location: Mysterium Tremendum

Re: I don't get Buddhism

Postby Karpel Tunnel » Sun Sep 13, 2020 6:47 am

felix dakat wrote:"Science tells us" says John Horgan. Horgan's Science talks to him! It's his God. It tells him that he's incidental -- an accident. And unlike Iambiguous, who acknowledges that he may be wrong, Horgan knows what his God, Science, is telling him applies universally to everyone. Nihilism and Promethean shame are on the shadow side of the God of modern scientism.

It's a category error to draw the conclusion from science that we are incidental, since that contains a value judgment.

happening as a minor accompaniment to something else.
"for the fieldworker who deals with real problems, paperwork is incidental"
It's tucked into that word 'minor' and being used inside the judging mind of a creature.

Science's epistemology (or really '..gies') include detachment (which Buddhism does also). That often leads to metaphysical and social conclusions as assumptions in any methodology will. Great tools need not be great attitudes.

I suppose this, in part, is why my epistemology (or, REALLY, '...gies') is eclectic. Of course I think EVERYONE has a bunch of epistemologies, but few seem to admit this, at least in philosophy forums.
Karpel Tunnel
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3261
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2018 12:26 pm

Re: I don't get Buddhism

Postby Meno_ » Sun Sep 13, 2020 12:06 pm

If understood correcty, does such concern really matter at the level of intension, whether or not it is minor or major significance, since it may be real or unreal as far as it's value is concerned?

Buddhism is an overt sharing after all whether singularly - autonomiously achieved or dogmatically by way of the real effect of Buddha.

Epistomology will not prejoritively decide that.?

The inner conscious sanctum must de-differentiate from it's counterpart , the practice of it, the moment of realization.

This is purely on hunch, even if in the right direction., but anyhow, some concern this as suspect, even dangerous terrain.( as far as attitudes go)
Meno_
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 7132
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am
Location: Mysterium Tremendum

Re: I don't get Buddhism

Postby phyllo » Sun Sep 13, 2020 12:53 pm

General observation, not addressing anyone in particular ...

I think that the major problem with John Horgan's quote is that he draws conclusions which are not in the science.

Let's say that humans are "incidental,accidental". That does not mean that enlightenment, Nirvana, rebirth (and other aspects of Buddhism and religion) do not happen/exist. Science does not say that these things can't exist. They may also be "an accident". The "spiritual quest" may not have been created for us ... The "spirit quest" is simply here just as we are simply here.
phyllo
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 12023
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 1:41 am

Re: I don't get Buddhism

Postby Karpel Tunnel » Sun Sep 13, 2020 1:32 pm

Meno_ wrote:If understood correcty, does such concern really matter at the level of intension, whether or not it is minor or major significance, since it may be real or unreal as far as it's value is concerned?
I'm gonna be guessing what you mean and responding, so shot in the dark. I think it depends, yes, on the person, scientist or layperson. Obviously many scientists and pretty much all the great ones were theists, that is, up until the 20th century and some theist still can be found even in Nobel Prizes winners. For example. IOW even theism is not necessarily incompatible with being expert in scientific methodology and epistemology.

Buddhism is an overt sharing after all whether singularly - autonomiously achieved or dogmatically by way of the real effect of Buddha.

Epistomology will not prejoritively decide that.?
Epistemology and methodology do give rise to how one experiences the world and feels about it. And the latter also givers rise to the former. They are intercausal. This means that certain attitudes are more likely to be found in people who, at least claim to, have a certain epistemology. Within science this can be exacerbated by particular models or meta-models, like see all matter as essentiall chemical machines. Note: that is not the only way to view stuff from a scientific perspective.
Karpel Tunnel
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3261
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2018 12:26 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Religion and Spirituality



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users