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.
4NT and the scientific method
I brought this up in another place a while ago. It would seem that the four noble truths can be framed in terms of the scientific method:
The Scientific Method:
1. Define the problem.
2. Formulate a hypothesis.
3. Design an experiment.
4. Test the hypothesis.
The Four Noble Truths:
1. Suffering. (Problem definition.)
2. Origin of suffering. (Hypothesis)
3. End of suffering. (State the experiment)
4. The way to the end of suffering. (The 8FP = conduct the experiment)
Is the epistemic foundation of Buddhism scientific? What do you think? It can also be argued that the four noble truths are patterned after the model of Ayurvedic medicine, which already existed at the time of Siddharta Gautama. The following text is quoted from Tibetan Buddhist medicine and psychiatry by Terry Clifford, page 38-39:
1. Is there a disease, and if so what is it?
2. What is the cause of the disease?
3. Is there a cure for the disease?
4. If the disease is curable, what is the proper treatment?"
Cheers, Thomas
The Scientific Method:
1. Define the problem.
2. Formulate a hypothesis.
3. Design an experiment.
4. Test the hypothesis.
The Four Noble Truths:
1. Suffering. (Problem definition.)
2. Origin of suffering. (Hypothesis)
3. End of suffering. (State the experiment)
4. The way to the end of suffering. (The 8FP = conduct the experiment)
Is the epistemic foundation of Buddhism scientific? What do you think? It can also be argued that the four noble truths are patterned after the model of Ayurvedic medicine, which already existed at the time of Siddharta Gautama. The following text is quoted from Tibetan Buddhist medicine and psychiatry by Terry Clifford, page 38-39:
1. Is there a disease, and if so what is it?
2. What is the cause of the disease?
3. Is there a cure for the disease?
4. If the disease is curable, what is the proper treatment?"
Cheers, Thomas
0
Comments
Like when we are sick and tell the doctor: "I have sneezing, blocked throat, stuffy nose, headache, fever, etc," are these the problem or only the outer symptoms???
Similarly, when the Buddha spoke of birth, aging, illness death, sorrow, pain, despair, separation, etc, are these the problem or only the outer symptoms of something much deeper and more subtle???
Cheers, Thomas
No logician here..... but this looks like a kind of hollow idea-balloon. It seems to be asking..... Can the way of knowing, that is Buddhism, be reduced to a scientificness?
I do not see significance in seeing Buddhism as scientific. Not because it is or isn't, but because it is a defining that is not relevant to the actual practice, the doing, the being the practice. The Dharma can also be described in poetic terms, it can be seen in so many ways.
But, others may see it differently.
2. Formulate a hypothesis. - the 2nd Noble Truth isn't a Hypothesis. It's a clarification
3. Design an experiment. - an "experiment"...? Don't you mean a 'prescription'?
4. Test the hypothesis. - you mean, 'apply the cure'.
Your scientific method seems to hinge upon it being a questionable formula. The Four Noble Truths are no such thing.
Anyway, what the heck is it with trying to correlate, connect or relate Buddhism to *something else*?
What's wrong with leaving a 3000-year-old formula - that has hitherto worked perfectly well - alone?
Ever heard the term "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."....?
What IS the point of this, exactly?
:coffee:
:coffee:
I was taught the 4NTs like this.
My view is the scientific or medicinal metaphor applies perfectly.
Often, a 'cosmic' rather than 'diagnostic' approach is taken towards the 4NTs.
I prefer the diagnostic approach.
Some of the wisdom of the Buddha appears astonishingly modern. For example, the noble eightfold path bears some similarities with modern cognitive therapy. One could even argue that Buddhism has a proto-concept of the subconscious. Obviously, the parallels aren't always clear and hence they are subject to interpretation. This is not an attempt to "fix" the 4NT, but to put them into relation with modern thought. Perhaps the term "diagnostic approach" suggested by Dhamma Dhatu describes it better.
Cheers, Thomas
I know that this is a refrain that you sing over and again, Fede, but do you really think it an adequate argument? Just because the Buddha's teachings have lasted for 3000 years does not make them any truer than, say, the worship of Osiris (which lasted longer) or, indeed, Jainism or Zoroastrianism which are older.
Westerners, thrust through the educational mincing machine, like to think that "scientific method" is the last word - not a very scientific attitude, don't you think? The basis, of course, usually ignored: it is doubt, doubt at any answer or explanation. It is not surprising that teachers, trying to re-contextualise the Buddha's words for contemporaries, should recast the Noble Truths and the Eightfold Path in scientific terms - not always particularly well.
Both you and I have a great respect for HHDL, and it is worth bearing in mind that he is very encouraging of a scientific approach to the message.
As for whether the First Truth can be called a hypothesis, I have my doubts. It is the preliminary observation of the problem to be addressed. Both Second and Third Truths are hypotheses, which are tested by the Fourth.
The flexibility of the Dharma and its capacity for expression within any myth structure (applying Campbell's concept of myth to 'scientific method' as yet another 'story') is one of its great strengths. To the superstitious, it offers superstitions; to the historian, history; to the philosopher, philosophy; and to the scientist, science. All of these are the masks or disguises that permit it to spread in such diverse cultures.
It is as well to remember that they are only masks.
To me it seems they are all fruits of a common seed. I would not call it superstitious, but it might be a mirror that is bringing to the surface the attached qualities of superstition in the practitioner. I would not call it a science, but could bring the attached qualities of scientific method to the surface.
Because the dharma is a simple and direct interpretation of how the world works, other innovations during the development of humankind will naturally follow some of the patterns. They are all related through a common harmony... simple and direct.
I find it interesting how people project and interpret relationships. Its like holding an apple in each hand, but one you call Buddhism and one you call science and then become amazed that they are made of the same stuff.
With warmth,
Matt
Well said.
Which is why I ask....why bother?
True 'nuff...but he doesn't necessarily seek to pose the questions of Buddhism in scientific terms. And badly, at that....
I disagree....
The second is a clarification of the first, and has not yet been found to be an either inaccurate or dubious clarification.
The Third is a clear indication to a conclusion.
The Fourth is the pudding, which we eat as proof.....
In what ways exactly do you see The Second and Third to be 'hypotheses'....?
For instance we should be able to see the principle of conditionality in the formula of the four truths: dukkha arises dependent on the condition of craving, and it ceases with the cessation of just that craving. However, this formula may also derive from Indian medical tradition; the implication is that the Buddha’s Dharma is a medicine to heal the disease of dukkha.
The first truth states the problem, the disease, the symptom – it is dukkha, all the difficulty, pain and unsatisfactoriness that we experience. The second truth states the origin of dukkha, the diagnosis of it – it is taṇhā or ‘craving’. That is to say, dependent on the condition of craving arises dukkha. But since this dukkha has a condition on which it depends, then with the cessation of that condition, the dukkha will cease. Hence the third truth states the solution or prognosis – that there is a cessation (nirodha) of dukkha. The fourth truth states the cure for dukkha, the way to bring about the cessation of craving – it is the noble eightfold path.
Yes, the 4 NT are an application of the general principle of conditionality, which basically says that all phenomena arises and cease in dependence on causes and condition...sounds pretty scientific to me.:)
P