thread: 2005-06-06 : Happenings
On 2005-06-06, The Metallian wrote:
Brand said: "I think the problem is closer to "those who are willing to learn" and "those who are not""
Hmmmm. Very interesting. I think I agree, though we're still left with the difficult problem of people with different definitions of "learning."
I agree on the "Buddhism is a philosophy, not a religion" thing as well. My wife was raised a Buddhist so I've been exposed to a fair bit of it and it does seem to be a different sort of animal. Maybe it's because (at least in the stuff I've been reading) the desired end result of practice is easily observable? If the idea is to end suffering in life,* it's relatively easy to evaluate whether or not it is working, to put it to the test. Contrast this with the goal of "please God." It's notoriously hard to tell if you did it or not, so any given technique appears equally valid/invalid to the disinterested observer, creating the impression that people choose techniques based on reasons other than "it works/doesn't work," which strikes the disinterested observer as a bit risky when the negative externalities are readily observable.
* - That's the pupose of the forms of Buddhism I've read about, anyway. Other types may have different goals.
