7 ms·

correct me if i'm wrong but i find a lot of buddhism makes at least some sense in fields of highly advanced technology (like quantum physics). of course there'

correct me if i'm wrong but i find a lot of buddhism makes at least some sense in fields of highly advanced technology (like quantum physics). of course there's the obvious counterargument that any prediction or claim that's vague to an extent makes sense in a wide range of settings.

FooHentai 7y ago
In the same way other religions made a lot more sense when our scientific understanding of the world around us was less developed. Religion serves, in a large part, to answer questions for which there's not yet a formal answer. But that's more about getting the monkey off your back than it is accuracy. You can find comfort from following that path, but you won't get correctness or the ability to develop towards further more detailed discoveries.
- tomasdore 7y ago
  Your second paragraph perhaps needs more justification? Religion seems to PUT questions: 1. Physical-world questions, the classic being, "if God is good and omnipotent, why does suffering exist?" 2. Moral-world questions, such as "who is my neighbour?", (and what are my duties towards my neighbour?). In your phrasing, we'd say that atheism 'serves to answer questions', by answering only: 1. All is randomness, we're here because we're here, etc. 2. None, unless you choose some duty, up to you, etc. These could hardly involve less thinking (for 1) or subsequent moral effort (for 2), so it's easy to see how 'you can find comfort from following that path'. Perhaps this explains their appeal!
  - evgen 7y ago
    I think the appeal comes from being able to accept reality without needing to hide behind a child’s fairy tale and to know that leading a moral life does not require the fear of an invisible sky god, but can arise from simply accepting that others around you are actually human beings deserving of the same respect and consideration that you yourself seek. This approach does lack the shallow judgements and easy rule following of a theistic life, but some find that objective reality forces them to walk a harder path.
    - tomasdore 7y ago
      I agree that fear of an invisible sky god is not required. But wrestling with the questions I listed may still be required. Caution: this may not lead you to 'shallow judgements' nor provide 'easy rule following'. YMMV - or, efforts may predict results. Just as there may be 'jobseekers' who have hardly sought, so there may be 'seekers of the truth' who, upon finding that the supreme divinity wasn't physically manifesting on their first command, then decided that the system was bogus, and shut the shop down from then on. But we can still have dogs, which will at least come over on command. (Is this why it's 'god' spelled backwards?...the secret's in the runes?). And dogs are love. Whereas if one took a different attitude, saying that God > job (crazy, I know, in capitalism), then possibly a similar amount of effort might be expected. Then if a little seeking is permitted, it becomes only a question of trying different entrances. I hear good things about Kierkegaard (e.g. 'Works of love'); but no doubt there are many entrances.
    - unkulunkulu 7y ago
      This thread starts out with buddhism, I’m not really knowledgeable in it, but from what I gathered it is far less about rule following and fear than for example christianity and more about guidance in the moral questions you mention that an atheist should “figure out”, cultural objects also seem to display respect and gratitude for an old leader rather than fear of some omnipotent figure.
      - cwzwarich 7y ago
        > from what I gathered it is far less about rule following and fear than for example christianity That probably depends on which sect of Christianity you're talking about. Protestants generally believe that one's actions do not actually cause one to be saved; instead it is faith in Jesus alone that provides salvation. This bothered people for the obvious reasons, with various attempts to walk back the extreme antinomian interpretation, e.g. "one's actions demonstrate that he has faith in salvation". On the other hand, in Buddhism the escape from samsara is fundamentally tied to one's actions, not simply one's thoughts or beliefs.
        7y ago
- otabdeveloper2 7y ago
  Science is a method, that is, a tool. As any tool, its applicability is limited.
gdubs 7y ago
The Dalai Lama has a book called, “The Universe in A Single Atom”. He’s incredibly interested in science, quantum physics in particular, and in the book he explores the intersection between those ideas and the ideas of various Buddhist thinkers throughout history. It’s really good.

FooHentai 7y ago

In the same way other religions made a lot more sense when our scientific understanding of the world around us was less developed. Religion serves, in a large part, to answer questions for which there's not yet a formal answer. But that's more about getting the monkey off your back than it is accuracy. You can find comfort from following that path, but you won't get correctness or the ability to develop towards further more detailed discoveries.

tomasdore 7y ago
Your second paragraph perhaps needs more justification? Religion seems to PUT questions: 1. Physical-world questions, the classic being, "if God is good and omnipotent, why does suffering exist?" 2. Moral-world questions, such as "who is my neighbour?", (and what are my duties towards my neighbour?). In your phrasing, we'd say that atheism 'serves to answer questions', by answering only: 1. All is randomness, we're here because we're here, etc. 2. None, unless you choose some duty, up to you, etc. These could hardly involve less thinking (for 1) or subsequent moral effort (for 2), so it's easy to see how 'you can find comfort from following that path'. Perhaps this explains their appeal!
- evgen 7y ago
  I think the appeal comes from being able to accept reality without needing to hide behind a child’s fairy tale and to know that leading a moral life does not require the fear of an invisible sky god, but can arise from simply accepting that others around you are actually human beings deserving of the same respect and consideration that you yourself seek. This approach does lack the shallow judgements and easy rule following of a theistic life, but some find that objective reality forces them to walk a harder path.
  - tomasdore 7y ago
    I agree that fear of an invisible sky god is not required. But wrestling with the questions I listed may still be required. Caution: this may not lead you to 'shallow judgements' nor provide 'easy rule following'. YMMV - or, efforts may predict results. Just as there may be 'jobseekers' who have hardly sought, so there may be 'seekers of the truth' who, upon finding that the supreme divinity wasn't physically manifesting on their first command, then decided that the system was bogus, and shut the shop down from then on. But we can still have dogs, which will at least come over on command. (Is this why it's 'god' spelled backwards?...the secret's in the runes?). And dogs are love. Whereas if one took a different attitude, saying that God > job (crazy, I know, in capitalism), then possibly a similar amount of effort might be expected. Then if a little seeking is permitted, it becomes only a question of trying different entrances. I hear good things about Kierkegaard (e.g. 'Works of love'); but no doubt there are many entrances.
  - unkulunkulu 7y ago
    This thread starts out with buddhism, I’m not really knowledgeable in it, but from what I gathered it is far less about rule following and fear than for example christianity and more about guidance in the moral questions you mention that an atheist should “figure out”, cultural objects also seem to display respect and gratitude for an old leader rather than fear of some omnipotent figure.
    - cwzwarich 7y ago
      > from what I gathered it is far less about rule following and fear than for example christianity That probably depends on which sect of Christianity you're talking about. Protestants generally believe that one's actions do not actually cause one to be saved; instead it is faith in Jesus alone that provides salvation. This bothered people for the obvious reasons, with various attempts to walk back the extreme antinomian interpretation, e.g. "one's actions demonstrate that he has faith in salvation". On the other hand, in Buddhism the escape from samsara is fundamentally tied to one's actions, not simply one's thoughts or beliefs.
      - 7y ago
otabdeveloper2 7y ago
Science is a method, that is, a tool. As any tool, its applicability is limited.

gdubs 7y ago

The Dalai Lama has a book called, “The Universe in A Single Atom”. He’s incredibly interested in science, quantum physics in particular, and in the book he explores the intersection between those ideas and the ideas of various Buddhist thinkers throughout history. It’s really good.