History, Evolution, and The Darwin Debate

Darwiniana header image 2

Commentary on Flanagan’s book on buddhism

December 31st, 2011 · 1 Comment

Comment from Richard on Flanagan’s book on buddhism

Richard said,
December 30, 2011 at 10:20 pm · It’s a strange historical moment. People who are ignorant of the religion and meditation are attempting to rewrite it (third-rate philosophers and technicians of Iron Cage “intelligence” such as Sam Harris). In the end, the dharma (note that I didn’t say “Buddhism”) gets the last laugh as the historical machine claims its victims of mechanized consciousness.

nemo said,

December 31, 2011 at 11:51 am · It is good you have returned as I try to discuss this book. We have had this discussion before, as you recall, but I hadn’t connected with Flanagan’s book. I have tried persistently to forestall new age postmodern ideologies using spiritual themes as anti-modernism, but the attack on buddhism such as we see (entirely unnecessary) is a false secularism that ironically yields to semi-buddhist legacies (I won’t say ‘buddhism’ as such). There is no contradiction with modernity. As I pointed out many times here the framework of Schopenhauer tries to put these questions in a modern context with ‘transcendental idealism’, recognized by that philosopher to be explicitly close to what he called Upanishadism (he uses the term via a now archaic Persian/Latin translation ‘oupnekat’)

Tags: General