Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
What is DOgma?
We encounter dogma lots all over our lives.
Many of us, some without knowing, some with, will also propagate dogma in our interactions.
But what is dogma? And is it really as good as it seems?
We shouldn't really care about what people belief but rather how they use their beliefs to effect changes outside of their own minds.
Most people are a little dogmatic about some things, some of them mundane, some of them preposterous.
There is always a little bit of uncertainty in all contingent truths.
It is hard to be dogmatic about maths and logic, but even science, at the base, needs a little bit of faith.
But this gap between faith and fact is a leash between reason and dogma, the longer it is, the bigger the dogma.
We should keep our dogmas on the shortest possible leash.
Woof!:)
I guess as a forum of Buddhists we should be happy to have our slips in the dogma pointed out?
Mat
Many of us, some without knowing, some with, will also propagate dogma in our interactions.
But what is dogma? And is it really as good as it seems?
- A dogma is a doctrine that is professed with certainty when, in fact, there is no such certainty available to profess.
- A belief is dogmatic if is is stated and used as a fact, when in fact it is just a belief.
We shouldn't really care about what people belief but rather how they use their beliefs to effect changes outside of their own minds.
Most people are a little dogmatic about some things, some of them mundane, some of them preposterous.
There is always a little bit of uncertainty in all contingent truths.
It is hard to be dogmatic about maths and logic, but even science, at the base, needs a little bit of faith.
But this gap between faith and fact is a leash between reason and dogma, the longer it is, the bigger the dogma.
We should keep our dogmas on the shortest possible leash.
Woof!:)
I guess as a forum of Buddhists we should be happy to have our slips in the dogma pointed out?
Mat
0
Comments
I think it is better if it's consensual, or else you will just meet with resistance. Feel free to point those out in me.
Yep, I agree. You scrub my dogma I'll scrub yourse.
Although there is a sense in which....
"Dont point out the dogma of others, unless it is barking up your own tree." ConfusedUs
Mtns
You have been throwing this word "dogma" around a lot lately which is fine but when I am read your definition of dogma
I think it needs a little work. I feel wikipedia gives a much better definition.
You miss that the belief is authoratative and not to be disputed, doubted, or diverged form.
In this forum, I have read some people claim things (including you and me) that are unsubstantiated but I have never read anyone claim a belief that supposes supreme authority and prohibits that one should believe it without dispute, doubt, or the ability to think differently. Without the supposed authority it is not a dogmatic belief it is just a unsubstantiated belief. The many things you claim like an abbundance of instant enlightenment without meditation or your ideas on rebirth could be considered dogmatic according to your definition.
For sure it needs work:) But re your point, I wanted to get away from the authority aspect because it makes it much harder to spot in ourselves. i suspect we talk with authorities we dont really think we have when we stand back.
I am often dogmatic, but its not because I think I know best but that I present my beliefs with more certainty than the facts and reasoning entitles me to. It's so easy to do:)
Well maybe. I don't know:) Dogmatic is in its most primal sense telling somone else what to believe. its more like an unsubstantiated belief that you pass off with more substance than it has, perhaps?
BTW The dictionary definition is generally the poorest, especially about abstract concepts.
For sure! I am very aware I am dogmatic, but mainly about doubt and I dont thjink I am about the point you mention:)
Regarding the meditation/enligtenemnt, I don't think its in despite that there are instances of enlightenment without a rigorous multi staged account of meditation for them and that many people became enlightened in the suttas whereas today it seems nobody seems to:) What's in dispute about those facts?
Well wishes
Mat
QW: It might be harder to see but that dinstinction is what dinstinguishes a dogmatic belief from personal unsubstantiated claim.
M: I am often dogmatic, but its not because I think I know best but that I present my beliefs with more certainty than the facts and reasoning entitles me to. It's so easy to do:)
QW: Surely you are as am I, at least according to your definition, but as I mentioned, I am not convinced your definition is sufficiently accurate. Claiming authority is what makes it a dogma, as I mentioned.
M: Well maybe. I don't know:) Dogmatic is in its most primal sense telling somone else what to believe. its more like an unsubstantiated belief that you pass off with more substance than it has, perhaps?
QW: Here again that is not dogma. This abstract idea you are assigning to the word dogma does not work. First off, dogma is a loaded word and the definition you are assigning to it will confuse everyone but you. Furthermore, this confusion with other readers will distract them from the point you are trying to make, as I saw in a previous thread you started yesterday.
M: BTW The dictionary definition is generally the poorest, especially about abstract concepts.
QW: Following your definition, this statement is dogmatic but it clearly is not. It is just an unsubstantiated claim. What dinstinguishes your definition from the one wikipedia presented except that I think wiki had a better one? If you make that claim then added that all Buddhists should agree to consider themselves Buddhists, then it would be an actual dogmatic claim.
M: For sure! I am very aware I am dogmatic, but mainly about doubt and I dont thjink I am about the point you mention:)
QW: I don't think you are, I think you are just opinionated sometimes correctly sometimes inaccurately.
M: Regarding the meditation/enligtenemnt, I don't think its in despite that there are instances of enlightenment without a rigorous multi staged account of meditation for them and that many people became enlightened in the suttas whereas today it seems nobody seems to:) What's in dispute about those facts?
QW: We can hash this out in another thread as we have enough to go over now and I think this will get us off topic.
As always Mat, even if I don't agree with what you are saying, it inspires me to think and that in itself is worth while.
Peace brother.
Such as claiming, A + B = C is not a Buddhist belief (where in reality there is no way to prove the value of C or what is a Buddhist).
" My Karma just ran over your Dogma".
Made me chuckle anyway...........................