Hacker News Reader

Comment by curo | Hacker News Reader

I guess science has always been this contemptuous of both its ancestors and the religious.

> The Buddhist finds his answer in a toleration for what he may neither understand nor alter.

Huh? There is a rich spectrum of buddhist philosophy (Theravada, Mahayana, Zen, Tibetan) and all profess to demonstrate the ways of perceiving and understanding truth and pre-conceptual reality of this world. Straw man here?

> When we try to conceive of the state of mind of primitive man, the first thing that occurs to us is the bewilderment and terror he must have felt in the presence of the powers of nature.

Have a physicist and a "primitive man" face the powers of nature and see who's more comfortable with their surroundings.

View on HN

> I guess science has always been this contemptuous of both its ancestors and the religious.

> > The Buddhist finds his answer in a toleration for what he may neither understand nor alter.

Let's be charitable; this is not contempt, it is merely shallow knowledge. In 1936, educated westerners had heard the praises of Buddhism but had little access to sophisticated teaching.

Buddhism really does teach us to accept the world as it is, and that the world as it is goes beyond the reach of propositional knowledge. So it is understandable that someone with a hazy (but not wrong) impression of that call it "toleration for what he may neither understand nor alter".

I find Buddhism too complex to grok. Whatever arrives as popular Buddhism in the west seems to be distorted info that doesn’t even scratch the surface. Scientists who talk about Buddhism will only get credibility in my eyes if they apply the same investigativeness towards Buddhism as they love science. Two places they would need to look at is its diversity and their willingness to engage in scientific conversation. The Dalai Lama seems to engage in it, not sure to what extent that counts as Buddhism but it is something.

—- not an expert on Buddhism or physics

It's a misconception to view Buddhism like some sort of mental puzzle. There is plenty of free material online. Just start.

http://www.vipassana.com/meditation/mindfulness_in_plain_eng...

I have never heard any of those Buddhist philosophies speaking of truth like you seem to imply. They don't mean truth in the way Aristotle thinks about it.

How do you mean?

I mean Buddhist do not believe in truth as some narrative.

What do Buddhists believe?

Philosophically they aren't concerned with truth. They are concerned with the ultimate truth which can't be reached through theorizing. They have no problem with conventional western based truth it's just not the bedrock.

Or put another way. Buddhist would say you can't know the truth but you can be it.

> Have a physicist and a "primitive man" face the powers of nature and see who's more comfortable with their surroundings.

What’s the old joke? How many physicists does it take to change a lightbulb?

none: they consider the light negligible against the sun's.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com