Wayfarer

Yes, I know it's a very non PC idea.

I read the section of Simon Conway Morris' book on the 'protein hyperspace' - some years ago, I admit, and my recollection is hazy. But the gist as I ...

:up:

I think his book highlights some of the issues of ‘cultural appropriation’ around Buddhism and modernity. I had read quite a bit of the Making of Budd...

another important book in this area is Evan Thomson Why I am not a Buddhist. He's co-author of the Embodied Mind, mentioned above, and also subject of...

But they nevertheless retain their identity. Creatures don't change their species, notwithstanding some of the astounding transformations that occur i...

I don't know, but I don't see why they shouldn't. Some might also leave Buddhism altogether, or convert to another religion. Batchelor, to his credit,...

These are difficult questions, they're only easy for those who see them in black-and-white terms - either straightforward believers or out-and-out sce...

I think the gist is, that Stephen Batchelor and Robert Wright have to 'tiptoe' because they're both purportedly teaching Buddhist principles but are n...

Definitely worth the read. He discusses Batchelor too. Wish I could write like that (or, like that.) Buddhism nevertheless embodies a profound metaphy...

It is a matter of fact that Buddhism incorporates those elements. They're obviously impossible to reconcile with what is normally called 'realism' hen...

Which is the tendency of everything to become less organised. And evolution goes against that. A good start would be a culture based on something othe...

In the context in which those texts are memorised and handed down, the monastic orders, and some of the laity, devote themselves to realising just the...

So do you think it's plausible to argue that all organism are intelligent, at least in some basic or fundamental respect? Not rationally intelligent l...

Only insofar as 'natural law' is concieved in a very narrow and physicalist way. Physical reductionism of course wishes to reduce everything to physic...

It was in response to the question of the plausibility of abiogenesis. It seems obvious to many people that abiogenesis must have occured, by process ...

When you use the term 'entirely physical', what does that really mean? Does it mean 'explicable in terms of physics'? The problem is that concept of w...

More that they're not applicable on that scale. There are things beyond logic, but we need to know logic in order to understand that. :up: It's an hyp...

The classical view, reflected somewhat in Kant, is that whilst perception is sensory, reason is not, in that reason inheres in the ability of intellec...

Thanks. Been a lot of water under the bridge since I posted this thread but I still think I'm on to something. The basic issue I see is that the rules...

The problem is, it has been shown by quantum physics that entities can be entangled at arbitrarily great distances from each other. The physical order...

The problem you're grappling with is intrinsic to the modern formulation of science itself. It starts with the posit that only what can be mathematica...

It’s just that it’s not relevant to the (admittedly esoteric) point. It’s not as if Buddhism posits any sort of imperishable object. If there is such ...

You’re talking about objects.

'Outside of time' is not the same as 'of endless duration'.

I am sure they are diverse. It wasn't intended to stereotype pygmies. It was an anecdotea about a particular individual from a particular environment....

Interesting story from my university days. I think it might have been in cognitive science, or possibly anthropology. It concerned some anthropologist...

The reason that this is not logical is that it presumes 'we know how things are'. But, being mortal, I contend that we don't know this. We only ever k...

'First there is a field. Then there is no field. Then there is.' Zen saying (paraphrased for context). There is the 'realist' view, that things just a...

You should consider if that might be something like a self-fulfilling prophecy, or self-reinforcing, at any rate. I think the problem you're having, i...

'Christianity has always been a religion seeking a metaphysic, in contrast to Buddhism which is a metaphysic generating a religion' ~ Alfred North Whi...

Buddhism is pretty explicit about that, and romantic poetry, it ain't.

:up:

Pre-determined is not the same as determined. My point, exactly. He has to use the term 'dasein' because 'existence' doesn't convey the correct meanin...

That is the secular Buddhist view, which is perfectly fine as far as it goes. But there are verses like this: 'The deathless' is an apt synonym for 'e...

So Heidegger was a determinist?

So, are there beings other than human beings whose existence can be described in terms of 'dasein'?

a further note from the Wiki entry on Dasein: I note the 'sink into despair and resignation' option is quite a popular choice, however. :wink:

I don't think so. (Although maybe there's an echo of 'fallen' there.) The Wiki entry says 'Dasein (German pronunciation: ) (sometimes spelled as Da-se...

He was nevertheless obliged to call it out. Because, I contend, culture and philosophy had lost sight of the meaning of being.

Two traditional epiphets of the Buddha are 'lokuttara' - which means 'world-transcending' - and 'lokuviddu' - which means 'knower of worlds' i.e. know...

I know, I know. The Australian government in particular is a display of pusillanimous double-talk and backwards-looking hypocrisy.

Sure. But my point is that it was necessary for him to introduce such a term, to distinguish the meaning of being for the human from mere existence, i...

:up: Well said.

I agree with this from the OP: Which is similar to the point I've been trying to make. But the way that I put it is that secular-scientific thought te...

+1 :100: That's something like what Kuhn meant by the incommensurability of paradigms.

You'd be amazed how many people act like this is not so. The extreme case, which is useful for its clarity, is eliminative materialism, which explicit...

'Blind spot?!? What Blind Spot? I don't see any goddamm blind spot' :grimace:

I understand that perfectly well, but I think it's a fault with the modern usage of the word. I think there's a legitimate and fundamental distinction...

I think that's true across a much wider spectrum than simply positivism.