Buddhism is not scientific!

[yrreg]

Some other explanations, maybe?

Since I have adopted buddhisim, all of those physical things have NOT improved one iota... except for the smile part and in most cases the blood pressure bit. ​

Can you entertain other possible more mundane explanations for the lowering of blood pressure and increase of smiles? Or would you be self-introspective to examine whether and what factors involved in Buddhism, the salutary effects are due to Buddhism collectively and globally understood as a set of beliefs and practices? Please be more concrete and tangible in your probe into Buddhism's role in the good effects you experience post Buddhist conversion.

Honestly, would you at least suspect that the benefits you now experience can as well be obtained, and even better, faster, easier, on less investment of material and moral resources by other ways and means or broadly lifestyle?

Thanks for your participation.

Yrreg

Annex = rest of Cenobite's post

But with adopting any philosophy that's all that really matters. Greater lifting capacity of muscles?! I have worked with weights since High School, and my lifting capacity is only increased by working out... not by buddhisim. Now you are getting into that qui gong murkiness, or worse... TransMeditation crudola. There have even been studies that colors can change your strength. All it really comes down to is a person THINKING that they can lift more with *insert anything here: special braclets, color, breathing tech, philosopy, god* and they will most likely have positive results.​

 

[yrreg]

Frist science, then philosophy and last religion

Just because people are into philosophy and religion does not dispense them from being scientific and knowing about the worldview of science.

Before we can use the mind to think philosophy and religion, you have got to first use the senses. I can't imagine anything in the mind that is not ultimately founded on a sense contact with the material world. Can Buddhists or anyone here?

Now that as far as I know logic is also a science and not a philosophy and/or a religion, and also mathematics a science from much longer, people doing philosophy should have a deferential regard to logic and mathematics as sciences; and not claim that because they are into non-scientific matters they are above and beyond thinking according to the science of logic and mathematics.

Do we have scientists here in JREF forum who maintain that there are sciences beyond and above logic and mathematics as scientists know logic and mathematics for sciences?


I may be wrong, so correct me.


Yrreg

 

[Dancing David]

There would be great difficulty with scientific testing of some of the tenents of buddhism, however it would be relativly easy to use control groups and quality of life surveys to determine if buddhism has a positive effect on people. Then the models could be secularized and have the cultural elements of buddhism removed to refine the aspects that are beneficial , minus the religous stuff.
This has been done soemwhat in the research of Linnehan who has created the Dialectic Based Treatment for boderline personality disoreder. However while they claim that the Linnehan model is based in part upon buddhism, I am not sure that a clear deliniation could be established. There is also a lot of cognitive behavioral therapy in DBT, so it would currently be a confounding influence. Plus while Linnehan's trainers have claimed it is associated with buddhism, I am not sure how many aspects are incorporated. Also the individuals who get diagnosed with borderline personality disorder would make a poor control group.

 

[nosho]

What are you actually claiming is or isn't true?

I think "Buddhism" claims the following are true:
1) There is suffering.
2) Suffering has a beginning.
3) Suffering has an end.
4) There is a path out of suffering (namely, the "noble eightfold path").

These probably are not testable in the manner you might have in mind.

Can you entertain other possible more mundane explanations for the lowering of blood pressure and increase of smiles? Or would you be self-introspective to examine whether and what factors involved in Buddhism, the salutary effects are due to Buddhism collectively and globally understood as a set of beliefs and practices? Please be more concrete and tangible in your probe into Buddhism's role in the good effects you experience post Buddhist conversion.

Honestly, would you at least suspect that the benefits you now experience can as well be obtained, and even better, faster, easier, on less investment of material and moral resources by other ways and means or broadly lifestyle?

Dancing David's preferred teacher, Thich Naht Hanh, has an interesting alternative way of presenting the 4 truths. The Vietnamese monk says that #3 (end of suffering) can be rephrased as "well-being." #4 can be thought of as the path that leads to well-being. And #2 can be thought of as the path that leads to suffering.

Shuffling these truths with their new phrasing, one can present them as follows:
3) Well-being.
4) There is a path that leads to well-being.
1) Suffering.
2) There is a path that leads to suffering (namely, the "ignoble eightfold path").

According to this view, we are all practicing in our own personal way, regardless of whether we label the practice "Buddhism." But many of us may be pursuing the "ignoble eightfold path" much of the time, namely, wrong speech, wrong action, wrong livelihood, wrong effort, wrong awareness, wrong concentration, wrong thought and wrong understanding, or some combination of those. In other words, NOT the path that leads to well-being.

The first time I encountered this way of looking at the "ignoble" eightfold path, I had a good laugh, because I recognized myself.

It's probably pretty easy, especially for skeptics, to get hung up on the term "Buddhism," because the term itself means that there is a religion called "Buddhism" which one either believes in or doesn't. But it's also true that we all have our own way of speaking, acting, earning a living, making an effort, being aware, concentrating, thinking and understanding, and it doesn't matter if we're athiests, agnostics, Christians or whatever. We're all following a path, regardless of how we choose to label it, and that path is leading us to suffering, or to well-being. Some might call the path "Buddhism," but that's optional and perhaps even distracting.

For most of us, our path is probably always changing. Each of us individually must be his or her own best witness in deciding whether the path we are on is the right path, based on an honest evaluation of the fruits of that path in terms of our well-being.

Yrreg, you give all of us a very valid challenge: to examine our beliefs, to examine ourselves, to examine whether we're deluded, to examine our path. It's a kind of "Buddhist" challenge, to be honest. I appreciate that element of what you're trying to do.

 

[CENOBITE]

Can you entertain other possible more mundane explanations for the lowering of blood pressure and increase of smiles? Or would you be self-introspective to examine whether and what factors involved in Buddhism, the salutary effects are due to Buddhism collectively and globally understood as a set of beliefs and practices? Please be more concrete and tangible in your probe into Buddhism's role in the good effects you experience post Buddhist conversion.

Honestly, would you at least suspect that the benefits you now experience can as well be obtained, and even better, faster, easier, on less investment of material and moral resources by other ways and means or broadly lifestyle?

My blood pressure is dropped by meditation. I did not meditate before finding buddhisim.
My smiles have increased due to controlling my explosive anger and letting it pass.

I'm shure the same results could be obtained faster, easier, etc... but they would be brief and momentary. It's the old saying: "Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Teach him to fish and he will never be hungry."

 

[epepke]

This has been done soemwhat in the research of Linnehan who has created the Dialectic Based Treatment for boderline personality disoreder. However while they claim that the Linnehan model is based in part upon buddhism, I am not sure that a clear deliniation could be established. There is also a lot of cognitive behavioral therapy in DBT, so it would currently be a confounding influence. Plus while Linnehan's trainers have claimed it is associated with buddhism, I am not sure how many aspects are incorporated. Also the individuals who get diagnosed with borderline personality disorder would make a poor control group.

It would be interesting if it worked, because BPD is notably hard to treat. The best approaches that I've seen involve heavy setting of limits.

 

[yrreg]

Direct causality?

My blood pressure is dropped by meditation. I did not meditate before finding Buddhism.
My smiles have increased due to controlling my explosive anger and letting it pass.

I'm shure the same results could be obtained faster, easier, etc... but they would be brief and momentary. It's the old saying: "Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Teach him to fish and he will never be hungry."

I am glad that you are willing and frank in your cooperation with my questions.

Now, suppose you examine your life circumstances prior to your contact and conversion to Buddhist meditation, and your circumstances post taking up Buddhist meditation, and look for the differences in the two sets of circumstances, to see whether without Buddhist meditation you could also produce or bring yourself to the circumstances you are now situated in post Buddhist meditation.

Remember also that when people in your life know that you are into Buddhist meditation, they can be without knowing it more considerate toward and with you, which certainly can bring down your blood pressure and make you smile more often.



Yrreg

 

[yrreg]

Intruding into my privacy like a voyeur

This is just for comic relief. Don't read it if you don't have a good sense of humor.

-------------

Ryokan is asking me what is wrong with the a* word.

Well, Ryokan, nothing wrong at all for you in your Resident Buddhist's way of using language here, but please keep me out of your imagination as to picture me pulling stuffs and words out of my a*.

About the f* word, what about your use of WTF in a post directed with anger against me. Remember, the ancients, including Buddha and his contemporary folks, certainly observe the injunction of not bringing inside the temple anything so much as deservikng of any taboo, and they will tell you also that what you cannot bring inside the temple nakedly, you cannot bring it inside also even if in an acronymic way.

Besides, you use the acronymic f* word in my direction, which again is an invasion of my privacy, at least in your mind, in your imagination. And I will thank you to keep your mind off my physiological parts and functions which are customarily considered private domains.


[Hahaha softly]

All together now:

Om Mani Padme Hum -- Om Mani Padme Hum -- Om Mani Padme Hum​

Anyway, just for laugh only, Ryokan; and on the other hand, you have not yet used the s* word on me, yet.


Yrreg

 

[Dancing David]

It would be interesting if it worked, because BPD is notably hard to treat. The best approaches that I've seen involve heavy setting of limits.

The model invoves that, the identified client can connect with helping professionals until they engage in suicidal or parasuicidal behavior, at that point they are only allowed to access thier scheduled appointments for that week and can no longer use the open line of communication. It also has a heavy commitment to attending the groups and scheduled therapy appointments, the client is taught coping skills and can access the whole treatment team , until they engage in suicidal or parasucidal behavior.

 

[yrreg]

How did Buddhism come to a science or scientific reputation?

Has anyone ever seriously contened that Bhuddism is scientific? If so, they are wrong.

There are Buddhists contending that Buddhism is scientific.

No, not me, I don't; but I have read time and again repeatedly in the web of Buddhists or their sympathizers making that statement.

Now, it is my impression of Buddhists here that if you say Buddhism is scientific or a science, and you say it with a smiling face of approval and agreement, they will not contradict you; but if you criticize and oppose Buddhism's claims to scientific merits, so that you show a disapproval face of incredulity with frowning eyebrows , they will react with anger toward you.

Here, look up Google this phrase, including all characters and symbols except the quotation marks, "* Buddhism * scientific * science * ", and you will find Buddhists most learned and even with science credentials praising Buddhism to the heavens as a science or scientific, even more scientific than conventional science as done by physicists and chemists and biologists and astronomers.

Buddhism is more scientific than modern science. Like science, Buddhism is based on verifiable cause-and-effect relationships. But unlike science, Buddhism challenges with thoroughness every belief.

Buddhism... is so scientific, so rational, so progressive that it will be a pride for a man in the modern world to call himself a Buddhist. In fact, Buddhism is more scientific in approach than science... ​

Please read the rest of the hits found by Google.

----------------

Who started this fad of calling Buddhism a science or that Buddhism is scientific?

No, not the Buddhist masters in the Far East who have never been to the West and never came to know that the West is science obsessed, and count everything scientific as unquestionable; more probably they don't know science at all, much less the distinction between science, philosophy, and religion.

It is the Buddhists who have been to the West and the impressionistic disciples they won in the West, and also the public relations people.

I am sure the Dalai Lama has a lot of PR people telling him how to make himself and his religion, Buddhism, so attractive to Westerners, aside from projecting himself as a refugee head of state in flight from political repression at home from communist China, namely, to make himself a champion of science and to proclaim Buddhism a science or scientific, even getting himself to lecture before scientists.

Correct me however if I am wrong in my conjectures, founded upon common knowledge of how the world of business and politics even on a world-wide scale really operate.


Yrreg

 

[username]

well, I am still in the learning phase concerning buddhism and I don't see what is scientific about it. I read, learn, meditate, experience things etc. Not really sure how this is or isn't scientific and I will firmly say "Screw off" to any lab coated dudes wishing to hook electrodes up to me.

It works for me, the rest of ya can stare into test tubes until you keel over.

 

[yrreg]

Two kinds of humans: the self-studying kind and the non-self-studying kind

well, I am still in the learning phase concerning buddhism and I don't see what is scientific about it. I read, learn, meditate, experience things etc. Not really sure how this is or isn't scientific and I will firmly say "Screw off" to any lab coated dudes wishing to hook electrodes up to me.

It works for me, the rest of ya can stare into test tubes until you keel over.

There have always been a few humans -- I am one of them -- who study themselves to learn what they are and why and how they act the way they do.

Now that we have all the science and technology to study everything that we can bring our senses, namely, our eyes, our ears, our nose, our tongue, our skin to touch, including our what I call the super sense of consciousness, to come into contact with our self and the universe, to scrutinize everything and every notion, I and fellow humans who have this penchant to study themselves, we count ourselves living in the most interesting of times ever in man's history.


So, I would not congratulate Username for the attitude that he does express in his post quoted above. He should rather join me and other humans like himself in being of the human species but different for exercising the zeal to study themselves, namely, to introspect into himself and find out why he goes for Buddhism and seeing that it works for him, delve into the why's and how's Buddhism works for himself.

In his self-study in regard to his belief and practice of Buddhism, I submit and suggest to him, that he should proceed scientifically.


And what is it to study something scientifically? It is to use the scientific method to exam it.

Now, here in brief is the scientific method as known and practiced by my favorite opinion maker, Pes Oir Amsus:

The scientific method is the application directly or indirectly by instrumentation: of our eyes, and ears, and nose, and tongue, and fingers or skin and our reason on a concrete and tangible phenomenon, to see how we can enact the phenomenon in other circumstances than those in which the phenomenon originally occurs.​

​

For example of a concrete and tangible phenomenon to apply the scientific method on, take the phenomenon of blood pressure decrease effected by meditation: what are the circumstances of the phenomenon of meditation, the concrete and tangible ones?

I can point out one concrete tangible circumstance of Buddhist meditation, that of sitting on one's haunches on the floor. Now, instead of sitting on one's haunches on the floor, you do meditation lying comfortably in your own bed, then do or don't do all the things you engage in otherwise sitting on your haunches, now find out whether your blood pressure will go down and even stay down habitually.

So, here is a program for a scientific study on oneself with Buddhist meditation and lowering of blood pressure, lie in your own bed instead of sitting on your haunches on the floor, do lying in your bed for as many hours everyday or every so many days as you otherwise do on you haunches for meditation, and see if your blood pressure does or doesn't go down.


Yrreg