dreamdimensions (October 15, 2008 at 9:55 am)

run your fingers through a pool of water and you'll understandI've said too much!

spot0914 (October 13, 2008 at 5:19 am)

Well, I guess all of those Buddhist scientists just don't have to be confused about Bose-Einstein condensation anymore. What a relief. I was looking for a more in depth explanation of this, though... *Goes off to peruse videos.*

mucker00 (October 7, 2008 at 2:42 am)

mohammed suffered delusions brought about by a mild form of epilepsy. rolling around manic speech frothing at the mouth.back then it was seen as divine,why wont people wake up and except that there is no god of any creed!!!!!!!

ij8740 (September 4, 2008 at 12:16 pm)

Dont talk junk Buddhism is always right

simex909 (August 19, 2008 at 11:59 pm)

The idea that people in ancient times were idiots, and that any discovery they made was simply dumb luck, has been proven wrong time and time again. You may not understand how a mendicant could arrive at such a non-intuitive conclusion, but how could you understand it when you dismiss it out of hand? Read the accounts of the Buddha, the train of thought is right there in the text, there is no magic or faith involved.

simex909 (August 19, 2008 at 11:20 pm)

Buddhism also says that the universe is in a state of constant change, and that anything that can be apprehended by the senses is transient. Would you agree that this is true? Buddha didn't just wildly speculate that this was true, and then, coincidentally, it turned out to be true. He simply made an observation. I'm sure he would have loved to have corroborated this empirically, but how could he? This is precisely why Buddhism encourages you to test it, because they DON'T assume they are right.

simex909 (August 19, 2008 at 11:08 pm)

If empirical evidence supports a theory, it supports the theory. Why get bogged down in the politics of categories? Imagine if the guys who found the cosmic background radiation said, "Nope, it's not cosmic background radiation, it's called subtle fuzzies. Stop appropriating our discoveries!" You use "ancient ideologies" as an epithet, as if they're obviously wrong. Modernity does not equate to truth. You don't need anything but your mind to contemplate reality.

simex909 (August 19, 2008 at 10:56 pm)

Advaita, Buddhism, Taoism, etc. These are living philosophies. There is no central authority telling people what is true, there are simply people exploring reality and positing theories. These philosophies use something like the scientific method, but the questions asked demand that they deal with personal experience. Maybe you don't believe personal experience is valid evidence, and it's certainly not as compelling as empirical evidence, but some things can only be approached this way.

mavaddat (August 19, 2008 at 10:41 pm)

What makes you think I am making a dichotomy between philosophy and science? All I am saying is that we should not have beliefs about the world that are independent of any evidence for (or against) those beliefs. I'm not opposed to abstract ideas or beliefs.

mavaddat (August 19, 2008 at 10:39 pm)

I'm not saying that there is any subverting of science. What I am opposed to is people appropriating science and scientific terminology to further ancient ideologies (that could not have known anything aboutscience). I appreciate your understanding of Buddhism, but I don't think the correlation is meaningful. What would be interesting is if people gained a scientific understanding THROUGH Buddhism, instead of appropriating what has already been discovered in retrospect.