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.
Demystification of reality
Whoknows
Australia Veteran
Hi all,
Are you satisfied with the trend over the last few centuries of the demystification of our world view? Almost all of us have inherited this world view without consideration. Another question is this: does our current analytical view of the world produce great benefit? Is the resulting benefit enough to justify excluding conflicting views of reality? Do they validly exclude conflicting beliefs? There are many truly great benefits, for instance not anywhere as many women and children die in childbirth (in the western world) now as before (in many ways medicine is probably the greatest outcome). But this demythification / demystification has done nothing to reduce the underlying dukkha and in some ways it has added to it (is addiction to continual economic growth its greatest failing?). I have some concern when meditation is, in some situations, actively discouraged, or its scope is significantly reduced to merely watching the breath and nothing else. If we are left with a purely "scientific" form of Buddhism where does that leave us, and in what way will we be able to find liberation? Are we then left with the dried out bleached bones of a skeleton instead of a living, breathing being?
Is there a way, in future, to be found where our scientific view of reality can coexist with something else? After all liberation will resist definition in rigorous, non-contradictory scientific terms, so in this respect liberation is mysterious and therefore mystical by definition. The typical scientific answer to this, is to find out which chemicals/electrical regions in the brain are activated in the enlightened individual and then work out a drug to induce it in others.
Is it time for the pendulum to swing back towards the centre? Is that wrong aspiration?
Please let me know what you think on this, especially if you disagree as I am genuinely interested in your opinions, misgivings, etc?
Cheers, WK
Are you satisfied with the trend over the last few centuries of the demystification of our world view? Almost all of us have inherited this world view without consideration. Another question is this: does our current analytical view of the world produce great benefit? Is the resulting benefit enough to justify excluding conflicting views of reality? Do they validly exclude conflicting beliefs? There are many truly great benefits, for instance not anywhere as many women and children die in childbirth (in the western world) now as before (in many ways medicine is probably the greatest outcome). But this demythification / demystification has done nothing to reduce the underlying dukkha and in some ways it has added to it (is addiction to continual economic growth its greatest failing?). I have some concern when meditation is, in some situations, actively discouraged, or its scope is significantly reduced to merely watching the breath and nothing else. If we are left with a purely "scientific" form of Buddhism where does that leave us, and in what way will we be able to find liberation? Are we then left with the dried out bleached bones of a skeleton instead of a living, breathing being?
Is there a way, in future, to be found where our scientific view of reality can coexist with something else? After all liberation will resist definition in rigorous, non-contradictory scientific terms, so in this respect liberation is mysterious and therefore mystical by definition. The typical scientific answer to this, is to find out which chemicals/electrical regions in the brain are activated in the enlightened individual and then work out a drug to induce it in others.
Is it time for the pendulum to swing back towards the centre? Is that wrong aspiration?
Please let me know what you think on this, especially if you disagree as I am genuinely interested in your opinions, misgivings, etc?
Cheers, WK
0
Comments
what is this 'liberation' being referred to? what do you expect 'liberation' to be?
thanks
Cheers, WK
you just lost me when referring to 'liberation'
it is hard for me to follow what you are describing without 'liberation' being defined
all the best
Cheers, WK
For me this means it is in line with Buddhism to acknowledge the scientific method and how it limits us in the things we can present as facts.
Anything we say - in the context of our religion - which can not be verified or proven, we should either admit is strictly metaphorical, or drop entirely.
Buddhism has always been a practice of finding truth, and not believing in lies.
I’d say demystification is Buddhism.
Does this rob us of some cherished illusions, yes I think it does.
But losing illusions does not exclude the possibility of liberation.
I can not define liberation, but “losing illusions” comes close.
@zenff , "losing illusions" is good.
As far as I'm concerned (I'm a guy on the internet! :wave: ) science can make life much better for billions more people by transforming what it figures out into helpful technologies.
As far as the "god" question or spiritual question? Science is nothing but a false prophet. It's a nice mode of investigation of the physical (not spiritual or soulful) world which humans have invented and continue to develop.
BTW, I realize I'm causing suffering, or otherwise insulting people who think science can be a powerful reflection of the supernatural or divine. I apologize for that and hope those people will cut me some slack because after all we're just talking here.
"God" (whatever THAT word refers to) is absolutely incomprehensible in a collective sense. You can KNOW what "God" refers to via direct experience but you can never communicate that knowledge to or among others.
I think that's what Enlightenment is. An astounding personal transformative experience, yet totally private.
No room for human-invented science in the Big E.
Yes Einstein and the talented investigators at CERN will shift and maybe radically change our world BUT we ALWAYS will wind up back in a human world.
Some call it "paradigm shift" I like that. OTOH, we can't paradigm shift our way to knowing-whatever-god-is on a collective basis.
That's good news for us: meditation will never go out of style.
Then again I could be waaaay wrong..., about science that is. LOL!