5 ms·

> like how mindfulness increases selfishness in those who think that their existence is independent from the existence of others ... If one was really being mi

> like how mindfulness increases selfishness in those who think that their existence is independent from the existence of others ... If one was really being mindful, they'd eventually see that the existence of their "self" is only possible in relation to others existing. So there's the self and the other, but in essence, one. And that's one of the reasons the golden rule makes so much sense. So I wouldn't blame mindfulness for any side effects. Negative side effects are the result of the ego/self creeping back into the picture.

Comevius 5y ago
The problem might not be with mindfulness, but with our self-centered culture, which causes this secularized mindfulness to be a snake oil with a few personal benefits at best. It's more of a self-discipline or concentration tool when you strip it from it's culture, which used to involve ethics as I understand.
- astrange 5y ago
  The original purpose of vipassana (mindfulness meditation) is to realize that selves don’t exist and disconnect you from your emotions, so you’re ready to leave the world behind and do monk stuff. The fact that it works for secular mindfulness is surprising and doesn’t really have any theory behind it. It doesn’t involve ethics though. Buddhism didn’t come with those; they borrowed standard Western ones as part of a marketing campaign to make you think the Dalai Lama is just the most ethical guy ever.
nitrogen 5y ago
If one was really being mindful There's a sort of No True Scotsman fallacy combined with confirmation bias that comes into play with other spiritual practices with which I am experienced. For example, "If your prayers aren't getting answered, you aren't fasting enough and praying hard enough, or you are praying for the wrong thing." This is an easy trap to fall into with anything that generally works for some people but not others, and it's important to remember that there are other dimensions beside "really" or "enough", plus general randomness, that affect whether a practice/belief/etc is good for a person and successful.

Comevius 5y ago

The problem might not be with mindfulness, but with our self-centered culture, which causes this secularized mindfulness to be a snake oil with a few personal benefits at best. It's more of a self-discipline or concentration tool when you strip it from it's culture, which used to involve ethics as I understand.

astrange 5y ago
The original purpose of vipassana (mindfulness meditation) is to realize that selves don’t exist and disconnect you from your emotions, so you’re ready to leave the world behind and do monk stuff. The fact that it works for secular mindfulness is surprising and doesn’t really have any theory behind it. It doesn’t involve ethics though. Buddhism didn’t come with those; they borrowed standard Western ones as part of a marketing campaign to make you think the Dalai Lama is just the most ethical guy ever.

nitrogen 5y ago

If one was really being mindful There's a sort of No True Scotsman fallacy combined with confirmation bias that comes into play with other spiritual practices with which I am experienced. For example, "If your prayers aren't getting answered, you aren't fasting enough and praying hard enough, or you are praying for the wrong thing." This is an easy trap to fall into with anything that generally works for some people but not others, and it's important to remember that there are other dimensions beside "really" or "enough", plus general randomness, that affect whether a practice/belief/etc is good for a person and successful.