History, Evolution, and The Darwin Debate

Darwiniana header image 2

Robert Wright and the technocratic destruction of meditation

August 20th, 2009 · 4 Comments

August 19, 2009, 9:30 pm
Self, Meditating

By Robert Wright

As with Karen Armstrong the attempt to discuss religion in Robert Wright gets problematical with Eastern meditative issues, and religions like Buddhism, Hinduism.
I guess I am supposed to applaud this gesture, instead I condemn it as still more crap on religion from Wright.

Give people a break here. We don’t need Darwin fanatics rewriting Buddhism for us (and real Buddhists would never get a hearing in that trashy paper, the Times).
This is part of the technocratic strategy of neutralizing these more subtle Eastern religions that won’t yield to the tactics set against Christians.
One tactic is to commercialize, trivialize meditation and/or to promote its health benefits and/or stress reduction benefits, etc,…

Meanwhile the destruction of the real meditators, the Tibetans, proceeds apace.
That’s not mediation.
Do it in private, Mr. Wright. Spare us the idiot details.
A good cave at Almora, yep, that would be proof of intent.

These hybrids are toxic because the psychology of, say, Buddhism is not compatible with the dogmas of scientism/Darwinism. So a remaindered form is needed, courtesy of jerk offs like Wright (and Karen Armstrong)>

Tags: New Age · Science & Religion

4 responses so far ↓

  • 1 Darwiniana » Should you abandon forthwith ‘meditation’ practices?? // Aug 20, 2009 at 8:41 pm

    […] http://darwiniana.com/2009/08/20/robert-wright-and-the-technocratic-destruction-of-meditation/ The answer to the question is, yes, at once, and don’t look back. The answer to the question is, no: mediate five minutes a month, just to remember, or remember to remember, that mediation is a rumor passed down from antiquity. […]

  • 2 Barbara O'Brien // Aug 21, 2009 at 6:02 am

    You aren’t making sense. What do you mean by “real” Buddhists or “real” meditation? What precisely about Wright’s column bothered you? His post seemed to me to reflect a standard beginner’s experience. Much of what he wrote is not something a person with more spiritual maturity might have written, but we all have to start somewhere. And the same column ran a post by Zen teacher Norman Fischer a few days ago, which puts the lie to your comment that “real Buddhists would never get a hearing in that trashy paper.” (Unless you’ve decided that Zen dharma heirs are not “real Buddhists,” in which case I gently suggest you wouldn’t know a “real Buddhist” if one bit your ass.)

    I read a couple of your posts, and you have a lot of ‘tude and free-floating hostility that seems to be directed at Buddhism or meditation, but you don’t make a reasoned or logical presentation of what the hell is bothering you.

    I suggest that all this spiritual deterioration you think you see is a projection of your own inner reality, and if you want there to be more “real” Buddhism in the world, do try being one yourself. Take care.

  • 3 nemo // Aug 21, 2009 at 1:21 pm

    You comment is incoherent. I am a great admirer of Buddhism, and also a critic of its hidden side.

    The issue with Wright is that he is willing to hybridize ‘meditation’ with views of Darwinism, in the process reinventing Buddhism in a toxic form.
    Basically these people wish to neutralize these religions in the name of science.
    I am glad some Zen Buddhists got a hearing at the Times. No doubt they are well behaved and will compromise on crucial points/

  • 4 Darwiniana » More on buddhism and darwinism // Aug 21, 2009 at 2:20 pm

    […] Comment on Wright post from yesterday: Wriight article […]

Leave a Comment