Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 07-18-2018, 07:51 PM
Machinaforce is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,195

Buddhism is little more than Nihilism


http://choosenot.blogspot.com/2005/1...-buddhist.html http://choosenot.blogspot.com/2008/0...-teaching.html http://choosenot.blogspot.com/2010/0...-you-know.html

Based on the above, and my past experience, I cannot see why anyone would willingly follow such a philosophy. Especially the whole "question everything you know to the point of absurdity" point of view that is taken to daily life. It's like they seek to ruin what is good and what makes life worth living in favor of some escape from this alleged "hell" they say we are in.

Well that and the only reason to buy into it is if reincarnation and the endless cycle of rebirths is real. I think that part might have been made up in order to get people to follow.
  #2  
Old 07-18-2018, 07:58 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 17,483
I'll read further but:
Quote:
For most religious practitioners, 'world' is synonymous with 'creation', and 'world denial' is synonymous with destruction.
gives me pause.

Last edited by CarnalK; 07-18-2018 at 07:58 PM.
  #3  
Old 07-18-2018, 08:06 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 17,483
Quote:
Originally Posted by Machinaforce View Post
Well that and the only reason to buy into it is if reincarnation and the endless cycle of rebirths is real. I think that part might have been made up in order to get people to follow.
Actually, I'm not going to read further. Yes, like most religions/philosophies Buddhism has some awesome little turns of phrase that anyone can appreciate but obviously "buying into it" includes accepting a core tenet. What else do you expect?
  #4  
Old 07-18-2018, 08:49 PM
Machinaforce is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,195
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarnalK View Post
Actually, I'm not going to read further. Yes, like most religions/philosophies Buddhism has some awesome little turns of phrase that anyone can appreciate but obviously "buying into it" includes accepting a core tenet. What else do you expect?
I guess, but the links remind me why I started to dislike buddhism the more that I read into it. TO be honest I don't see how people don't see it as "nihilism" the religion.
  #5  
Old 07-18-2018, 08:51 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 17,483
Why is reincarnation anymore nihilistic than an eternal heaven/hell?
  #6  
Old 07-18-2018, 09:11 PM
Darren Garrison's Avatar
Darren Garrison is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 10,677
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarnalK View Post
I'll read further but:

gives me pause.

I'd read further but this gives me pause.
  #7  
Old 07-18-2018, 09:41 PM
Telemark's Avatar
Telemark is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Yet again, Titletown
Posts: 22,605
Based on previous threads you've started, I suspect you don't understand Nihilism and I know you don't understand Buddhism.
  #8  
Old 07-18-2018, 10:13 PM
Fuzzy Dunlop is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 3,459
Quote:
Originally Posted by Machinaforce View Post
Based on the above, and my past experience, I cannot see why anyone would willingly follow such a philosophy. Especially the whole "question everything you know to the point of absurdity" point of view that is taken to daily life. It's like they seek to ruin what is good and what makes life worth living in favor of some escape from this alleged "hell" they say we are in.
A central tenet of Buddhism is to live mindfully in the present moment. "Escaping from our reality" goes against that practice. Your summary doesn't jive what what Buddhists actually practice.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Machinaforce View Post
Well that and the only reason to buy into it is if reincarnation and the endless cycle of rebirths is real. I think that part might have been made up in order to get people to follow.
You understand the goal is to end the cycle of rebirths, don't you? It is, but it seems at odds with your supposition that rebirth was a recruiting tool.
  #9  
Old 07-19-2018, 05:18 AM
Ulfreida is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: pangolandia
Posts: 3,453
Quote:
Originally Posted by Machinaforce View Post
I guess, but the links remind me why I started to dislike buddhism the more that I read into it. TO be honest I don't see how people don't see it as "nihilism" the religion.
Boy, way to misunderstand. Congratulations.
  #10  
Old 07-19-2018, 09:54 AM
MrDibble's Avatar
MrDibble is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Cape Town, South Africa &
Posts: 25,362
Quote:
Originally Posted by Machinaforce View Post
Well that and the only reason to buy into it is if reincarnation and the endless cycle of rebirths is real.
There are plenty of Buddhists who don't care about that aspect of the religion at all.

But sure, 500 million Nihilists - why not?

But you've cleverly seen right through the illusion. First person in 2 500 years to do it. Go you!

Last edited by MrDibble; 07-19-2018 at 09:57 AM.
  #11  
Old 07-19-2018, 10:30 AM
Tom Tildrum is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Falls Church, Va.
Posts: 14,004
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrDibble View Post
There are plenty of Buddhists who don't care about that aspect of the religion at all.

But sure, 500 million Nihilists - why not?

But you've cleverly seen right through the illusion. First person in 2 500 years to do it. Go you!
Well put, and worth stickying for just about every thread about Christianity on the Dope as well.
  #12  
Old 07-19-2018, 10:45 AM
elbows is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: London, Ontario
Posts: 14,287
Your repeated broadcasting of your unvarnished ignorance of the real precepts of Buddhism, is staggering.

But this Buddhist recognizes it’s pointless to engage with your level of purposeful misunderstanding of key words and phrases, insisting on your misinformed usage as being valid.

So, merrily on, disdain away what you so clearly do not comprehend.
  #13  
Old 07-19-2018, 11:24 AM
Jonathan Chance is offline
Domo Arigato Mister Moderato
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: On the run with Kilroy
Posts: 22,686
Now, now. That's not the way.

Better to accept his ignorance at face value and realize it doesn't diminish us. Perhaps he can learn.

Or, in short, machinaforce, you clearly don't understand buddhism, or, indeed, religion as a whole in any aspect. But you can educate yourself should you wish to do so.
  #14  
Old 07-19-2018, 11:25 AM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 17,483
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrDibble View Post
There are plenty of Buddhists who don't care about that aspect of the religion at all.

But sure, 500 million Nihilists - why not?

But you've cleverly seen right through the illusion. First person in 2 500 years to do it. Go you!
While I know anybody can call themselves whatever they want to, I personally don't buy that someone who rejects a core part of a religion is actually of that religion. On the other hand, Buddhism really wasn't intended to be a religion so much as a practice so I guess pizza parlor buddhism is a little more legit.
  #15  
Old 07-19-2018, 11:44 AM
Jonathan Chance is offline
Domo Arigato Mister Moderato
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: On the run with Kilroy
Posts: 22,686
You say that in a world for so many protestant denominations? Splitting over precepts is exactly what people DO.
  #16  
Old 07-19-2018, 12:03 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 17,483
Have these Protestant denominations rejected the ten commandments or that Jesus is our saviour? The endless cycle of rebirth is the reason for Buddhism to exist. If you reject that, you just think mindfulness is good- you're not a Buddhist imho. But like I said, I am fully aware people can call themselves whatever they want.
  #17  
Old 07-19-2018, 12:13 PM
aldiboronti is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Troynovant
Posts: 8,167
I recall having a thing for Taoism in the 60s. That seemed pretty nihilistic looking back. My native skepticism won out in the end though and I decided that all religions have a huge nothingness at their center. How could they not?
  #18  
Old 07-19-2018, 12:14 PM
Inner Stickler's Avatar
Inner Stickler is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 14,926
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarnalK View Post
I guess pizza parlor buddhism is a little more legit.
Is that when you get one with everything?
  #19  
Old 07-19-2018, 12:15 PM
Jonathan Chance is offline
Domo Arigato Mister Moderato
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: On the run with Kilroy
Posts: 22,686
Depending on definition, you could say that Jehovah's Witnesses don't meet the definition of believing Jesus to be God. Ditto for the Mormons. There are others, most of which have been labelled heretical, but who still say they're christian and follow Christ's teachings.
  #20  
Old 07-19-2018, 12:27 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 17,483
Right. People can call themselves whatever they want- I am talking about what I personally can swallow. Are Jews for Jesus actually jewish? Not to me they aren't.
  #21  
Old 07-19-2018, 12:27 PM
DavidwithanR is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 3,995
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarnalK View Post
While I know anybody can call themselves whatever they want to, I personally don't buy that someone who rejects a core part of a religion is actually of that religion. On the other hand, Buddhism really wasn't intended to be a religion so much as a practice so I guess pizza parlor buddhism is a little more legit.
Meh. All of everyone's religion is pizza-parlor religion. ALL. Without exception. Some people have (perhaps unwittingly) had St Paul or St Augustine or John Calvin or whoever go to the pizza parlor and order on their behalf, so they might tend to blithely assume that THEIR religion is unadulterated, straight from the source, yada yada. It isn't. Reading the Bible is already in the pizza parlor. Paul (who never met or saw Jesus) took his outsider's impression of what Jesus might have said and might have done, added a great deal of his own material, changed the message to appeal more easily to non-Jewish people, and invented the beginning of what we now regard as Christianity.

Musical aside: This would be very similar to considering Adam Lambert's the ultimate all-time authoritative version of the music and legacy of Queen - IF Queen had never made any recordings, so that Lambert never had a chance to hear what Freddie Mercury sounded like, and had to just guess; and IF the Adam Lambert version of the band toured only in the smaller venues in Russia, and changed the songs and the set lists to be more popular with rural Russians, by giving them a Russian folk-style interpretation. Can you imagine the recordings from the Chelyabinsk concert of that weird alternative-universe Adam Lambert version of Queen (the one where he never actually knew what Freddie Mercury sounded like, and had changed the songs to be more popular in Russia) being the only Queen recordings anyone listens to, two thousand years from now - the canonical version?

If you're a Christian, then unless you started your life as an observant Jew, and unless you (literally, not spiritually) met Jesus and heard directly from him exactly what he wanted to say, then congratulations, you are a "pizza parlor Christian" just as much as anyone who might be accused of the same. The fact that some people aren't satisfied with St Paul's pizza-parlor religion, and want to change up their order a bit, is merely what has been done forever.
  #22  
Old 07-19-2018, 12:28 PM
Yodalicious is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 1,350
Buddhism, like literally every religion, is interpreted by many different people, many different ways.
  #23  
Old 07-19-2018, 05:42 PM
Darren Garrison's Avatar
Darren Garrison is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 10,677
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarnalK View Post
Have these Protestant denominations rejected the ten commandments or that Jesus is our saviour?

There is this really douchy guy I knew in college who went on to found his own cultish megachurch franchise who famously (okay, "famously" within limited circles) rejected the 10 commandments.



(He was eventually kicked out of his own church for alcoholism and unspecified mistreatmemt of his wife, who divorced him. He is currently working on founding his second megachurch empire, so he has his own personal schisim.)
  #24  
Old 07-19-2018, 10:55 PM
Machinaforce is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,195
Quote:
Originally Posted by elbows View Post
Your repeated broadcasting of your unvarnished ignorance of the real precepts of Buddhism, is staggering.

But this Buddhist recognizes itís pointless to engage with your level of purposeful misunderstanding of key words and phrases, insisting on your misinformed usage as being valid.

So, merrily on, disdain away what you so clearly do not comprehend.
Considering that is all you ever say on these matters I;m willing to guess you know nothing. You have not cited any specific points to illustrate where I am wrong.
  #25  
Old 07-19-2018, 11:01 PM
Machinaforce is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,195
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuzzy Dunlop View Post
A central tenet of Buddhism is to live mindfully in the present moment. "Escaping from our reality" goes against that practice. Your summary doesn't jive what what Buddhists actually practice.


You understand the goal is to end the cycle of rebirths, don't you? It is, but it seems at odds with your supposition that rebirth was a recruiting tool.
That's the arm chair buddhist. The main aim is to escape the cycle of death and rebirth because apparently it's a trap full of pleasures that don't fully satisfy.

What I am saying is that they paint a negative picture of existence and seek to escape the cycle of it. Of course the expedient method is suicide, so I think to prevent that the concept of rebirth was put it (since it would render it moot).

The whole religion falls apart without rebirth and karma.
  #26  
Old 07-20-2018, 08:04 AM
Human Action is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 7,241
Quote:
Originally Posted by Machinaforce View Post
That's the arm chair buddhist. The main aim is to escape the cycle of death and rebirth because apparently it's a trap full of pleasures that don't fully satisfy.

What I am saying is that they paint a negative picture of existence and seek to escape the cycle of it. Of course the expedient method is suicide, so I think to prevent that the concept of rebirth was put it (since it would render it moot).

The whole religion falls apart without rebirth and karma.
The idea of the karma is totally incompatible with nihilism. Therefore, Buddhism is in no way nihilistic.
  #27  
Old 07-20-2018, 08:36 AM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 17,483
Upādāna [...]an important Buddhist concept referring to "attachment, clinging, grasping":
Quote:
The Abhidhamma[8] and its commentaries[9] provide the following definitions for these four clinging types:

> sense-pleasure clinging: repeated craving of worldly things.
> wrong-view clinging: such as eternalism (e.g., "The world and self are eternal") or nihilism.[10]
> rites-and-rituals clinging: believing that rites alone could directly lead to liberation, typified in the texts by the rites and rituals of "ox practice" and "dog practice."[11]
> self-doctrine clinging: self-identification with self-less entities (e.g., illustrated by MN 44,[12] and further discussed in the skandha and anatta articles).
My bold.
  #28  
Old 07-20-2018, 09:50 AM
MrDibble's Avatar
MrDibble is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Cape Town, South Africa &
Posts: 25,362
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarnalK View Post
While I know anybody can call themselves whatever they want to, I personally don't buy that someone who rejects a core part of a religion is actually of that religion.
I didn't say they reject that part, I said they don't care about it - it's not a focus of their religious practice.

And Buddhism is the only religion, AFAIK, whose founder said
don’t go by reports, by legends, by traditions, by scripture, by logical conjecture, by inference, by analogies, by agreement through pondering views, by probability, or by the thought, ‘This contemplative is our teacher.’ When you know for yourselves that, ‘These qualities are skillful; these qualities are blameless; these qualities are praised by the wise; these qualities, when adopted & carried out, lead to welfare & to happiness’ — then you should enter & remain in them"
That's to say - not dogma, but not radical skepticism neither. And, in contrast to Christianity - no infallible scripture.

I realise the irony of quoting Buddhist scripture to make that point

Last edited by MrDibble; 07-20-2018 at 09:53 AM.
  #29  
Old 07-20-2018, 10:21 AM
Half Man Half Wit's Avatar
Half Man Half Wit is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 6,747
Buddhism is, in fact, opposed to nihilism. Madhyamaka, in particular, is an explicit rejection of both essentialism and nihilism, providing the 'Middle Way' between the two. While things (including people) don't have any intrinsic, fundamental nature (svabhava), it doesn't therefore follow that they have no nature at all---that's not what the ideas of emptiness and no-self mean.

Buddhism recognizes the paradoxical nature of the notion of substance, which is foundational to many traditions in western philosophy. It's supposed to be something capable of standing on its own, of having its properties just by itself, the ultimate show stopper: it is what it is, because it is. One aspect of Buddhist philosophy is that this doesn't make terribly much sense, which is why it denies the presence of such an absolute and intrinsic nature of things. But that doesn't lead to nihilism.

A better (though still somewhat incomplete) view is something akin to relationalism: the metaphor of the net of Indra is often used to elucidate this concept. Picture a net with a jewel at each vertex, such that each reflects all the others. The idea is now that this reflection fully exhausts the nature of each jewel: there is no further 'inner nature', only the ways in which the jewels relate to each other, and each has its properties due to these relations (this is the idea of dependent origination).

It's a complex and subtle concept, and can be hard to grasp, but it's worlds away from nihilism. This mostly concerns ontology, but it extends towards a rejection of moral nihilism, as well: because things have no inner nature, but are what they are by virtue of their relatedness, you and me are ultimately not really two separate things (non-duality); hurting you makes thus as much sense as hurting myself. Indeed, the fact that Buddhist tradition derives value-statements from metaphysics is one of its most fascinating aspects, since it seems to run counter to principles like the fact-value distinction in western philosophy. There's more to it, of course, but I can't remotely do it justice, both because I don't want this to turn into an essay, and because I simply haven't penetrated the matter deeply enough.
  #30  
Old 07-20-2018, 10:31 AM
susan's Avatar
susan is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Coastal USA
Posts: 9,389
Who do you mean when you say "they"? Because several people in this thread are "they" and see it differently.
  #31  
Old 07-21-2018, 03:27 PM
Machinaforce is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,195
Quote:
Originally Posted by Half Man Half Wit View Post
Buddhism is, in fact, opposed to nihilism. Madhyamaka, in particular, is an explicit rejection of both essentialism and nihilism, providing the 'Middle Way' between the two. While things (including people) don't have any intrinsic, fundamental nature (svabhava), it doesn't therefore follow that they have no nature at all---that's not what the ideas of emptiness and no-self mean.

Buddhism recognizes the paradoxical nature of the notion of substance, which is foundational to many traditions in western philosophy. It's supposed to be something capable of standing on its own, of having its properties just by itself, the ultimate show stopper: it is what it is, because it is. One aspect of Buddhist philosophy is that this doesn't make terribly much sense, which is why it denies the presence of such an absolute and intrinsic nature of things. But that doesn't lead to nihilism.

A better (though still somewhat incomplete) view is something akin to relationalism: the metaphor of the net of Indra is often used to elucidate this concept. Picture a net with a jewel at each vertex, such that each reflects all the others. The idea is now that this reflection fully exhausts the nature of each jewel: there is no further 'inner nature', only the ways in which the jewels relate to each other, and each has its properties due to these relations (this is the idea of dependent origination).

It's a complex and subtle concept, and can be hard to grasp, but it's worlds away from nihilism. This mostly concerns ontology, but it extends towards a rejection of moral nihilism, as well: because things have no inner nature, but are what they are by virtue of their relatedness, you and me are ultimately not really two separate things (non-duality); hurting you makes thus as much sense as hurting myself. Indeed, the fact that Buddhist tradition derives value-statements from metaphysics is one of its most fascinating aspects, since it seems to run counter to principles like the fact-value distinction in western philosophy. There's more to it, of course, but I can't remotely do it justice, both because I don't want this to turn into an essay, and because I simply haven't penetrated the matter deeply enough.
Well what they seem to mistake with nonduality is that there is no right or wrong with that worldview. They canít really make moral or ethical claims if things are empty in their own nature. To me it just sounds like a dodge to not say itís nihilism. Nihilism is that things donít have inherent meaning or significance and neither does our attempts at it. Itís subjective.

Not to mention that the analogy of hurting someone else doesnít make sense. If I hurt you I feel no pain but if I hurt myself I feel pain. Not really sure where the ďmakes no sense part comes inĒ. I think it helps to know that this was created in a different time and that it likely doesnít keep well despite what some might say. Hurting you isnít hurting me. Thatís kind of a point against their nondualism.
  #32  
Old 07-21-2018, 05:49 PM
Machinaforce is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,195
And I believe in the first link it refers to our daily mundane lives as something that is an illusion in that Buddhism isn’t life denying because what is happening is that our lives are an illusion because it’s transitory and impermanent
  #33  
Old 07-21-2018, 06:27 PM
outlierrn is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: republic of california
Posts: 5,647
Isn't nihilism just another way of saying everyman for himself?
__________________
Just another outlying data point on the bell curve of life
  #34  
Old 07-22-2018, 05:50 AM
Half Man Half Wit's Avatar
Half Man Half Wit is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 6,747
Quote:
Originally Posted by Machinaforce View Post
Well what they seem to mistake with nonduality is that there is no right or wrong with that worldview.
Of course there is. This isn't a relativist view---indeed, it was conceived to counter wrong views about the world.

Quote:
They canít really make moral or ethical claims if things are empty in their own nature.
This just doesn't follow. Again, while nothing has a fundamental, essential nature, that doesn't mean that anything goes---far from it.

Quote:
To me it just sounds like a dodge to not say itís nihilism. Nihilism is that things donít have inherent meaning or significance and neither does our attempts at it. Itís subjective.
Which is a claim Buddhism explicitly rejects. There's a very deep, well-developed moral philosophy attached to it, but of course it's easier not to engage with it and reject it out of hand.

Quote:
Not to mention that the analogy of hurting someone else doesnít make sense. If I hurt you I feel no pain but if I hurt myself I feel pain. Not really sure where the ďmakes no sense part comes inĒ.
Go back to the metaphor of Indra's net: each jewel is what it is because of all the others. So I am what I am, at least in part, because of you. Hurting you thus reflects directly onto myself, and diminishes me. As I said, it's complex and subtle, and richly repays open-minded engagement---but of course, you can also just flatly reject it and cling to your misguided ideas.
  #35  
Old 07-22-2018, 06:06 PM
Machinaforce is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,195
Quote:
Originally Posted by Half Man Half Wit View Post
Of course there is. This isn't a relativist view---indeed, it was conceived to counter wrong views about the world.


This just doesn't follow. Again, while nothing has a fundamental, essential nature, that doesn't mean that anything goes---far from it.


Which is a claim Buddhism explicitly rejects. There's a very deep, well-developed moral philosophy attached to it, but of course it's easier not to engage with it and reject it out of hand.


Go back to the metaphor of Indra's net: each jewel is what it is because of all the others. So I am what I am, at least in part, because of you. Hurting you thus reflects directly onto myself, and diminishes me. As I said, it's complex and subtle, and richly repays open-minded engagement---but of course, you can also just flatly reject it and cling to your misguided ideas.
My ideas aren't misguided but rather show the flaws in their philosophy.

If there is no inherent good or bad, any morality is based (essentially) on subjectivity. Buddhism for some reason seems to think there are "good" and "bad" actions or karma, when really it's just based on perspective. Ultimately we cannot say why something is good.

Indra's net is full of holes. hurting you diminishes me in no way whatsoever, you can even use psychopaths as an example. They literally don't suffer from hurting others. They might have gotten that way through past experience, or genetics, in that case the Net might work. But in the case of them hurting others, they aren't diminished in any way. Not to mention that is a claim they cannot prove. PLus the whole reflection bit does lose out when you have to find the origin of everything which would then result in infinite regress. It's the same problem people have when they cite God as the uncaused cause.

For a religion that advocates questioning they dont do it enough to themselves.
  #36  
Old 07-22-2018, 06:26 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 17,483
I'm not going to defend Buddhism as true but your understanding is so blatantly superficial that your criticisms can be pretty safely ignored. Sorry, man. It's baffling too because you are so obviously into existential shit but you have put no effort into understanding something that seems up your alley.like seriouy, it doesn't question itself enough? Can you name another religion that would say "If you meet the Buddha on the road, kill him"?

Last edited by CarnalK; 07-22-2018 at 06:31 PM.
  #37  
Old 07-22-2018, 06:40 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 17,483
And your proclamations are blatantly wrong even by normal real world reasoning. If a psychopath harms someone, he opens himself up to revenge and the justice system. If he does something low grade, he is still lowering himself in other people's view and reduces his chances of social advancement. Even if he doesn't suffer emotionally. Even if you ignore karma.

I really can't understand how someone so into this stuff would think such superficial arguments are useful.

Last edited by CarnalK; 07-22-2018 at 06:42 PM.
  #38  
Old 07-22-2018, 06:55 PM
Acsenray is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 35,589
How can a philosophy whose prime goal is to eliminate suffering be nihilistic? Add to that things like ahimsa—don't cause others to suffer. How do you know that suffering is going on? You look at the evidence. If it seems like you're causing suffering, then stop doing that. How can that be nihilistic? That's clearly stating a moral value. Nihilism denies any moral values, it denies that life has no meaning.

Buddha explicitly rejected nihilism. WTF are you talking about?
  #39  
Old 07-22-2018, 08:53 PM
Measure for Measure's Avatar
Measure for Measure is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 14,165

Up Downist


hijack!
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarnalK View Post
While I know anybody can call themselves whatever they want to, I personally don't buy that someone who rejects a core part of a religion is actually of that religion. On the other hand, Buddhism really wasn't intended to be a religion so much as a practice so I guess pizza parlor buddhism is a little more legit.
I think it depends upon your lens. Sociologically, it sounds legit to me self-identify as a Christian Unitarian even if you don't believe in either the Trinity or divinity of Jesus. In terms of original doctrine, it's a stretch. But as noted, in terms of original doctrine, lots of Christian beliefs are a stretch, starting with the Pauline tradition.

As for Jews for Jesus, that goes beyond stretch and into the territory of misrepresentation. I can buy a JfJ organization in theory, I'm just dubious about the actual one.

Anyway, to the distinction between self-identification and doctrine, I wanted to add the distinction between a doctrinal perspective and a sociological one.

However. Even from a doctrinal perspective, it's seems legit to me to present yourself as believing "Adjective-religion", eg Unitarian Christian, Secular Buddhist, or even something eyebrow raising like "Non-theistic Christian". It has the advantage of clarity after all. Maybe I should say at least somewhat legit.
  #40  
Old 07-22-2018, 09:05 PM
Measure for Measure's Avatar
Measure for Measure is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 14,165
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarnalK View Post
While I know anybody can call themselves whatever they want to, I personally don't buy that someone who rejects a core part of a religion is actually of that religion.
Ok. But how do you refer to practicing Buddhists such as Robert Wright, who take a pass on the reincarnation concept? There are a fair number of them after all.
  #41  
Old 07-23-2018, 12:08 AM
Half Man Half Wit's Avatar
Half Man Half Wit is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 6,747
Quote:
Originally Posted by Machinaforce View Post
My ideas aren't misguided but rather show the flaws in their philosophy.
Well then by all means, don't let the facts get in your way.
  #42  
Old 07-23-2018, 07:52 PM
Machinaforce is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,195
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarnalK View Post
And your proclamations are blatantly wrong even by normal real world reasoning. If a psychopath harms someone, he opens himself up to revenge and the justice system. If he does something low grade, he is still lowering himself in other people's view and reduces his chances of social advancement. Even if he doesn't suffer emotionally. Even if you ignore karma.

I really can't understand how someone so into this stuff would think such superficial arguments are useful.
You clearly don't understand the mental view of psychopaths then. In your case it would just be others view of him, but he himself is not diminished in any way. They are fine with it.
  #43  
Old 07-23-2018, 08:08 PM
Acsenray is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 35,589
Quote:
Originally Posted by Machinaforce View Post
My ideas aren't misguided but rather show the flaws in their philosophy.

If there is no inherent good or bad, any morality is based (essentially) on subjectivity. Buddhism for some reason seems to think there are "good" and "bad" actions or karma, when really it's just based on perspective. Ultimately we cannot say why something is good.

Indra's net is full of holes. hurting you diminishes me in no way whatsoever, you can even use psychopaths as an example. They literally don't suffer from hurting others. They might have gotten that way through past experience, or genetics, in that case the Net might work. But in the case of them hurting others, they aren't diminished in any way. Not to mention that is a claim they cannot prove. PLus the whole reflection bit does lose out when you have to find the origin of everything which would then result in infinite regress. It's the same problem people have when they cite God as the uncaused cause.

For a religion that advocates questioning they dont do it enough to themselves.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Machinaforce View Post
You clearly don't understand the mental view of psychopaths then. In your case it would just be others view of him, but he himself is not diminished in any way. They are fine with it.
Buddhism itself defines good and bad for the purposes of Buddhism. It doesn't so far as I can tell expect that unreformed psychopaths are going to find it an attractive or useful philosophy. Buddhism is ultimately about self-improvement. It doesn't offer a comprehensive program for reforming everyone around you.
  #44  
Old 07-23-2018, 08:12 PM
Acsenray is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 35,589
Anyway, how is any of that relevant to your claim of nihilism?
  #45  
Old 07-23-2018, 08:43 PM
Machinaforce is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,195
Quote:
Originally Posted by Measure for Measure View Post
Ok. But how do you refer to practicing Buddhists such as Robert Wright, who take a pass on the reincarnation concept? There are a fair number of them after all.
Doesn't really address the moral question (no buddhist does).

Also too much woo with regards to "consciousness and transformation". I think they also automatically assume that one would lead to another (ie, the dissolving of the self would make you a better person). Truth is that it doesn't. Me being aware of others does not mean I care about them. Not to mention our moral code is based on there being "other people". If everything is just one "ocean" then there goes empathy, love, compassion. Sure you have peace, but that might not be good for humans. Suffering motivates us to take action. It seems to me that the more this practice goes on the more trouble humans are in.

Ultimately it isn't Buddhism but just the watered down bits. The links in my first post get at what it really is.
  #46  
Old 07-23-2018, 08:46 PM
Machinaforce is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,195
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acsenray View Post
Anyway, how is any of that relevant to your claim of nihilism?
Because of things being inherently empty and nihilism says there is no inherent meaning in life. Buddhism does a good job of making present existence seem undesirable so as to motivate one to not be reborn into it. If you take out reincarnation or karma then you don't have buddhism, and those who say otherwise are likely lying.

The irony of saying that Buddhism is "self-improvement" is that the state they seek (nonduality) involves there being no such thing as better or worse. SO they are a bit of a hypocrite in preaching improvement (which is another subjective word, one could argue that following the philosophy would lead to the end of humans).
  #47  
Old 07-23-2018, 09:20 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 17,483
Quote:
Originally Posted by Machinaforce View Post
You clearly don't understand the mental view of psychopaths then. In your case it would just be others view of him, but he himself is not diminished in any way. They are fine with it.
Why are you ignoring my plain English? He is diminished in concrete ways, as I said, despite his feelings and despite the concept of karma. Buddhism doesn't hold itself as a moral code, despite it being looked at that way by many. It's more like a way to swim in a current even if some of its rules line up with some moral codes.
  #48  
Old 07-24-2018, 07:09 PM
Machinaforce is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,195
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarnalK View Post
Why are you ignoring my plain English? He is diminished in concrete ways, as I said, despite his feelings and despite the concept of karma. Buddhism doesn't hold itself as a moral code, despite it being looked at that way by many. It's more like a way to swim in a current even if some of its rules line up with some moral codes.
He is not diminished in concrete ways, I'm sorry. As I have said, you don't get the mind of a psychopath. Perhaps from your perspective you might think so, but not to them. That's really all that matters. Especially if one goes down in infamy then they are really not diminished. It's a matter of perspective and what matters is their own.

Sorry, but Buddhism is wrong on that one. Also their version of "swimming in a current" can be callous without morality to guide it, and the philosophy sort of works against any solid version of good or bad. If people seriously followed it then the results would likely not bode well for humans since (according to the link) we would be trading away what helped us survive.
  #49  
Old 07-24-2018, 08:50 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 17,483
It's fine if Buddhism doesn't appeal to you but you really shpuld stop declaring you've spotted all these inconsistencies and lack of introspection. You are clearly working with superficial knowledge and close to no understanding.
  #50  
Old 07-25-2018, 10:10 PM
Machinaforce is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,195
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarnalK View Post
It's fine if Buddhism doesn't appeal to you but you really shpuld stop declaring you've spotted all these inconsistencies and lack of introspection. You are clearly working with superficial knowledge and close to no understanding.
People keep saying that but have nothing to show for it.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:55 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017