• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Buddhists 'really are happier'

Tsukasa Buddha said:
Now, here is when it gets interesting. Normally when a person says that believing in a Christian God makes them happier, the proper response would be that that has nothing to do with whether the belief is true or not. However, the Buddha taught only suffering and the end of suffering, so would evidence showing Buddhists to be happier be considered evidence for the veracity of Buddhism?
Click to expand...


He taught the existance of suffering, the causes for it, the way to rid oneself from suffering, and the way to do it. There are four noble truths, not only the first two.
 
Last edited:
Tsukasa Buddha said:
However, the Buddha taught only suffering and the end of suffering, so would evidence showing Buddhists to be happier be considered evidence for the veracity of Buddhism?
Click to expand...

If there is evidence that Buddhism makes certain people happier than certain other people, well that's fine. This has no bearing whatsoever on the veracity of Buddhism. If an idea makes you feel happier, it doesn't necessarily mean that the idea is true.
 
Michael C said:
If there is evidence that Buddhism makes certain people happier than certain other people, well that's fine. This has no bearing whatsoever on the veracity of Buddhism. If an idea makes you feel happier, it doesn't necessarily mean that the idea is true.
Click to expand...

Well if the idea is, "This is how to prevent suffering [make you happier]," then whether or not it makes people happy would be the test for truth. If there's more to it than a method, then you have a point.
 
Michael C said:
If there is evidence that Buddhism makes certain people happier than certain other people, well that's fine. This has no bearing whatsoever on the veracity of Buddhism. If an idea makes you feel happier, it doesn't necessarily mean that the idea is true.
Click to expand...
Unless the claim is that the idea makes you happier.

eta-a tad slow it seems.
 
Last edited:
quixotecoyote said:
Well if the idea is, "This is how to prevent suffering [make you happier]," then whether or not it makes people happy would be the test for truth. If there's more to it than a method, then you have a point.
Click to expand...

The goal of Buddhism is, according to the OP, the "end of suffering". This is not the same as "making people happier". The fact that Buddhist meditation makes someone feel happier does not prove that this person will be free of suffering, or even that they will finally suffer less than another person who does not practice this meditation.

If my only goal is "the end of suffering", I can accomplish it very simply by killing myself.
 
Michael C said:
The goal of Buddhism is, according to the OP, the "end of suffering". This is not the same as "making people happier". The fact that Buddhist meditation makes someone feel happier does not prove that this person will be free of suffering, or even that they will finally suffer less than another person who does not practice this meditation.

If my only goal is "the end of suffering", I can accomplish it very simply by killing myself.
Click to expand...

I doubt that the Buddhists here will add 'while still alive' to the end of that goal just to satisfy your pedantry.
 
Michael C said:
If there is evidence that Buddhism makes certain people happier than certain other people, well that's fine. This has no bearing whatsoever on the veracity of Buddhism. If an idea makes you feel happier, it doesn't necessarily mean that the idea is true.
Click to expand...

There are different types of meditation.

Mindfullness meditation, the one practiced commonly in the west is just a technique, not a claim. (Sometimes it is related to the claim of "annata", but I think it is not neccessary. )


Tibetan buddhists (though not only them) practice meditation on "the four immeasurables" - love, compassion, equanimity, and joy. These are more feelings than ideas.


Another type of meditation is devotion towards your spiritual teachers. This was also measured in the lab.

http://www.randomhouse.com/bantamdell/catalog/display.pperl?isbn=9780553381054&view=excerpt

Another type is meditation on a concept, on an idea - emptyness. Normally, if one meditates on an idea, and that shows to cause happiness, that doesn't prove the idea is true, only that thinking about it causes happiness. But in conjunction with the fact that the buddhist scriptures say that

meditating upon this idea will cause happiness, because it is a true idea,

doesn't it seem like the best explanation?
 
Michael C said:
The goal of Buddhism is, according to the OP, the "end of suffering". This is not the same as "making people happier". The fact that Buddhist meditation makes someone feel happier does not prove that this person will be free of suffering, or even that they will finally suffer less than another person who does not practice this meditation.

If my only goal is "the end of suffering", I can accomplish it very simply by killing myself.
Click to expand...


That tends to create more suffering, not the end of dukka. Suicide usually effects the survivors rather badly.
 
Kopji said:
hehehe, must be hard to concentrate with a two ton cat scanner following you around.
Click to expand...

This was one of the things that impressed me most, actually :

With all the time taken up by reprogramming and ironing out technical hitches, the whole run took more than three hours. Subjects rarely emerge from the MRI—particularly after having been in there for so long--with anything but an expression of weary relief. But Davidson was pleasantly astonished to see Oser come out from his grueling routine in the MRI beaming broadly and proclaiming, "It's like a mini-retreat!"


From

http://www.randomhouse.com/bantamdell/catalog/display.pperl?isbn=9780553381054&view=excerpt
 
Still having trouble shaking the thought that Buddhist monks that demostrate the behaviors described are a self selected group.

They didn't test the ex-monks, the ones that couldn't stand, err sit in, hours of meditation every day.

Teach a random group of people the same skills are let's see how they do.
 
IllegalArgument said:
Still having trouble shaking the thought that Buddhist monks that demostrate the behaviors described are a self selected group.

They didn't test the ex-monks, the ones that couldn't stand, err sit in, hours of meditation every day.

Teach a random group of people the same skills are let's see how they do.
Click to expand...

So what? They are testing 'people that are experienced in meditation'. That shouldn't be a random group. Being a monk or not is irrelevant.
 
See there's the issue, 'people that are experienced in meditation', maybe the meditation techniques only work for select groups of people.

I would like to bench press 600lbs, but even if I diet, lift regularly and use illegal drugs I doubt would ever achieve that because of my build.

Someone with heavier body type could follow the same training as me and achieve that weight, because it's with their genetic boundaries.

The ability to achieve these behaviors through meditation maybe only available to select groups of people.

Hence, the need the for studies on random groups of people.

No, matter how much you scretch you're not going to be a world class contortionist without the right genetics.

Why are mental feats treated differently?
 
I see. Can you suggest any concrete parameters that might have an effect on the quality of one's meditation practice?
 
1. Get a truely randomized group of people, not just people that are interested
2. Make sure they are all taught the same methods
3. Have a control group taught different methods, something not directly related to Buddhist meditation.

I'll think of more later.
 
IllegalArgument said:
Still having trouble shaking the thought that Buddhist monks that demostrate the behaviors described are a self selected group.

They didn't test the ex-monks, the ones that couldn't stand, err sit in, hours of meditation every day.

Teach a random group of people the same skills are let's see how they do.
Click to expand...


And a random control group doing a randomly assigned task, good point.
 
IllegalArgument said:
See there's the issue, 'people that are experienced in meditation', maybe the meditation techniques only work for select groups of people.

I would like to bench press 600lbs, but even if I diet, lift regularly and use illegal drugs I doubt would ever achieve that because of my build.

Someone with heavier body type could follow the same training as me and achieve that weight, because it's with their genetic boundaries.

The ability to achieve these behaviors through meditation maybe only available to select groups of people.

Hence, the need the for studies on random groups of people.

No, matter how much you scretch you're not going to be a world class contortionist without the right genetics.

Why are mental feats treated differently?
Click to expand...


If the claim would be "SOME buddhists are far happier than the average, proven scientifically", would that satisfy you?

As in

http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/this_britain/article2171679.ece
 
Sure, that would satisfy.

It doesn't prove that meditation or Buddhism made them that way. :)

I have a soft spot for Buddhism, but I try and clear and keep a clear head about these kinds of studies.

I'll avoid the endless discussion about the definition of "happiness".
 
When an anti-buddhist site has freespeech and a buddhist site (E-sangha) doesn't. Something is completely screwed up. Sorry but I disagree with buddhists being overall more happier, most are just as stupid, ignorant than a person of any other religion, the difference is they don sheeps clothing and that make's it worse. Though that's not to say the possibility that anyone that pursues a spiritual path genuinely will become happier.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom