01.13.12

Mistaken science attacks on buddhism

Posted in General at 1:27 pm by nemo

http://www.amazon.com/review/R2BMPNY5OJF15H/ref=cm_cr_rdp_perm The Bodhisattwa’s Brian, review now updated.
I think scientists are being uncautious in trying to naturalize buddhism. It is based on science metaphysics, not on science empiricism, and this kind of prejudiced attack will backfire and discredit science. I recommend that scientists adopt a neutral stance here, as they would with any phenomenon that is of rare occurrence and whose existence must be known second-hand via reports of second parties. It is, after all, about the same with many natural phenomena where we take the reporter’s word for something. There need be nothing absolute or final in such a tactic: it is simply practical, given the limits of observational actions.
In the same way, the history of buddhism (and Jainism) and the “hindu field” (I won’t say ‘Hinduism’) is often something based on reports at second hand. But that is not really anything like an objection: the reality pointed to is in fact empirical, and points to something that is open to independent verification.

This was from yesterday, but wasn’t published online.
Update: attacking buddhist fundamentals like nirvana and rebirth will rapidly backfire and throw science into discredit. I am puzzled that intelligent commentators like Sam Harris fall into this rut????

Permalink