2 ms·

If it's a framework then it will be able to be applied in several contexts. Hence, there are a set of questions that help show it is a framework. It doesn't hav

If it's a framework then it will be able to be applied in several contexts. Hence, there are a set of questions that help show it is a framework. It doesn't have to be useful for atheists but it would go a long way to showing it's a framework and not a religion. I'd be more than happy to go through all of those questions for Buddhism (or Prince2 or Rails or any framework), it would be easy. I can't see how it would be done for Christianity, nor for any formulation of Jesus' teachings, but if you know how, you should!

zepto 7y ago
What are the several contexts in which the framework of Buddhism can be applied? (I’m not asking you to answer your questions, since they don’t establish this.)
- brigandish 7y ago
  The problem domain is that of happiness/suffering, and how to obtain/lessen it. Anywhere that is a goal it can be applied. It has been applied to each of the Buddhisms (see edit note), which is why they're called Buddhism. You could apply it to a school or business if you wished, or a family, or yourself. The problem domain for Ruby on Rails is how to build websites. That's why websites built using Rails are referred to as a Rails site. The problem domain of Prince2 is how to manage a project. It's why projects which apply it are called Prince2 projects, or Prince2 organisations if they apply it more widely. What's the problem domain for Jesus' teachings? Where has it been applied? Edit: Because of the misnomer (people calling things Buddhism that aren't) it makes my initial phrasing seem circular. The Buddhisms are each their own religion which then applied Buddhism, which is why they're now know as Buddhism. So, Bon, the Tibetan shamanic religion is now known as Tibetan Buddhism.
  - zepto 7y ago
    The problem domain for Jesus teachings is ethical action and how to encourage it. It has been applied to each of the forms of Christianity as well as in many secular societies that eschew the religious components. You could apply it to a school or business if you wished, or a family or yourself. The various Christianitys just like the Buddhisms incorporate many of the beliefs and customs that existed before Christ and the Buddha’s teachings respectively were incorporated.
    - brigandish 7y ago
      Kudos for the effort. Unfortunately, category error is littered throughout. > The problem domain for Jesus teachings is ethical action and how to encourage it. If it did have a problem domain it would be how to get into Heaven and not into Hell. Ethical action would be the way in which that is achieved. It does not, however, have a problem domain because without Christianity there is no problem to be solved. It is not a framework and is not expounded as a framework (this is an incredibly important point). > It has been applied to each of the forms of Christianity The different forms of Christianity are called sects because they share a doctrine. A doctrine that is supplied as dogma, I might add. Again, an important point. Christianity has not been "applied" to the various forms of Christianity because they did not exist prior to being applied to. For example, you could not apply Google to Yahoo because Google is not a framework. > as well as in many secular societies Secular societies cannot, by definition, implement Christianity. > You could apply it to a school or business if you wished, or a family or yourself. You could not apply Weight Watchers to a school or business or a family or individual. You could apply its principles or methods. Weight Watchers is not a framework, neither is Christianity. Weight Watchers could produce a framework for losing weight but that would not make one thing the other, nor in the same category. > The various Christianitys Sect is the correct word. > just like the Buddhisms An implementation of Buddhism is not a sect. There are sects within religions that have applied Buddhism. Hence, your comparison is yet another category error and false equivalence. > incorporate many of the beliefs and customs that existed before Christ and the Buddha’s teachings respectively were incorporated. Rails incorporates many of the beliefs and customs of web developers and frameworks that existed before it was born, as does Twitter. That does not make Rails a company or a website or a micro-blogging service, and neither does it make Twitter a web framework nor a piece of software. Distinguishing differences like these can be difficult, especially if you're not acquainted with the basic history of Asian religion, like Bon, or the many schools of Indian thought, Daoism etc (the History of Philosophy podcast[1] is an excellent resource for learning about them), or are not familiar with the many frameworks used by programmers and project managers and the like. Hacker News is a great place to get these kind of insights though so you're in the right place. [1] https://historyofphilosophy.net/ https://historyofphilosophy.net/
      - 7y ago

zepto 7y ago

What are the several contexts in which the framework of Buddhism can be applied? (I’m not asking you to answer your questions, since they don’t establish this.)

brigandish 7y ago
The problem domain is that of happiness/suffering, and how to obtain/lessen it. Anywhere that is a goal it can be applied. It has been applied to each of the Buddhisms (see edit note), which is why they're called Buddhism. You could apply it to a school or business if you wished, or a family, or yourself. The problem domain for Ruby on Rails is how to build websites. That's why websites built using Rails are referred to as a Rails site. The problem domain of Prince2 is how to manage a project. It's why projects which apply it are called Prince2 projects, or Prince2 organisations if they apply it more widely. What's the problem domain for Jesus' teachings? Where has it been applied? Edit: Because of the misnomer (people calling things Buddhism that aren't) it makes my initial phrasing seem circular. The Buddhisms are each their own religion which then applied Buddhism, which is why they're now know as Buddhism. So, Bon, the Tibetan shamanic religion is now known as Tibetan Buddhism.
- zepto 7y ago
  The problem domain for Jesus teachings is ethical action and how to encourage it. It has been applied to each of the forms of Christianity as well as in many secular societies that eschew the religious components. You could apply it to a school or business if you wished, or a family or yourself. The various Christianitys just like the Buddhisms incorporate many of the beliefs and customs that existed before Christ and the Buddha’s teachings respectively were incorporated.
  - brigandish 7y ago
    Kudos for the effort. Unfortunately, category error is littered throughout. > The problem domain for Jesus teachings is ethical action and how to encourage it. If it did have a problem domain it would be how to get into Heaven and not into Hell. Ethical action would be the way in which that is achieved. It does not, however, have a problem domain because without Christianity there is no problem to be solved. It is not a framework and is not expounded as a framework (this is an incredibly important point). > It has been applied to each of the forms of Christianity The different forms of Christianity are called sects because they share a doctrine. A doctrine that is supplied as dogma, I might add. Again, an important point. Christianity has not been "applied" to the various forms of Christianity because they did not exist prior to being applied to. For example, you could not apply Google to Yahoo because Google is not a framework. > as well as in many secular societies Secular societies cannot, by definition, implement Christianity. > You could apply it to a school or business if you wished, or a family or yourself. You could not apply Weight Watchers to a school or business or a family or individual. You could apply its principles or methods. Weight Watchers is not a framework, neither is Christianity. Weight Watchers could produce a framework for losing weight but that would not make one thing the other, nor in the same category. > The various Christianitys Sect is the correct word. > just like the Buddhisms An implementation of Buddhism is not a sect. There are sects within religions that have applied Buddhism. Hence, your comparison is yet another category error and false equivalence. > incorporate many of the beliefs and customs that existed before Christ and the Buddha’s teachings respectively were incorporated. Rails incorporates many of the beliefs and customs of web developers and frameworks that existed before it was born, as does Twitter. That does not make Rails a company or a website or a micro-blogging service, and neither does it make Twitter a web framework nor a piece of software. Distinguishing differences like these can be difficult, especially if you're not acquainted with the basic history of Asian religion, like Bon, or the many schools of Indian thought, Daoism etc (the History of Philosophy podcast[1] is an excellent resource for learning about them), or are not familiar with the many frameworks used by programmers and project managers and the like. Hacker News is a great place to get these kind of insights though so you're in the right place. [1] https://historyofphilosophy.net/ https://historyofphilosophy.net/
    - 7y ago