Why Can't We Agree on ANYTHING?

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6629
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: Why Can't We Agree on ANYTHING?

Post by Cittasanto » Sat Nov 10, 2012 5:01 pm

BubbaBuddhist
got any links?
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill

User avatar
BubbaBuddhist
Posts: 640
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 5:55 am
Location: Knoxville, Tennessee
Contact:

Re: Why Can't We Agree on ANYTHING?

Post by BubbaBuddhist » Sat Nov 10, 2012 6:36 pm

Alas, I don't get my info from this newfangled interweb, so I don't. I don't trust its accuracy, I still rely on printed media and visit these ancient temples called libraries where bound scrolls of ancient lore are stored and attended by shamans. But some of you who've embraced the electronic media and actually trust specious sources like Wikipedia and such may be able to track down references. I read of the work of Barry SINGER --not Sullivan-- (the name came to me after I ate lunch) in a series of articles dealing with true-believer syndrome. Ludwik Fleck is very famous and represented in many textbooks, we read of him in some of my physics classes. Hope all this helps.

BB
Author of Redneck Buddhism: or Will You Reincarnate as Your Own Cousin?

User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6629
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: Why Can't We Agree on ANYTHING?

Post by Cittasanto » Sat Nov 10, 2012 6:45 pm

BubbaBuddhist wrote:Alas, I don't get my info from this newfangled interweb, so I don't. I don't trust its accuracy, I still rely on printed media and visit these ancient temples called libraries where bound scrolls of ancient lore are stored and attended by shamans. But some of you who've embraced the electronic media and actually trust specious sources like Wikipedia and such may be able to track down references. I read of the work of Barry SINGER --not Sullivan-- (the name came to me after I ate lunch) in a series of articles dealing with true-believer syndrome. Ludwik Fleck is very famous and represented in many textbooks, we read of him in some of my physics classes. Hope all this helps.

BB
Cheers for the correction. I have heard of these libraries, but thought them a myth of old! are you sure they sill exist? :P
I will have a look and see if I can find anything.
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill

User avatar
daverupa
Posts: 5980
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:58 pm

Re: Why Can't We Agree on ANYTHING?

Post by daverupa » Sat Nov 10, 2012 6:53 pm

Here is a summation of some true-believer research via Singer et al:

http://www.skepdic.com/truebeliever.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy has an entry for Fleck:

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/fleck/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
  • "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting oneself one protects others? By the pursuit, development, and cultivation of the four establishments of mindfulness. It is in such a way that by protecting oneself one protects others.

    "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting others one protects oneself? By patience, harmlessness, goodwill, and sympathy. It is in such a way that by protecting others one protects oneself.

- Sedaka Sutta [SN 47.19]

Nyana
Posts: 2233
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 11:56 am

Re: Why Can't We Agree on ANYTHING?

Post by Nyana » Sat Nov 10, 2012 8:53 pm

danieLion wrote:Buddhists can't seem to agree on anything, including agreeing on what they agree and disagree about. Even within traditions, views are highly individualized (despite the efforts of traditionalists to keep and/or make orthodoxy and orthopraxy uniform).
Consensus isn't necessary, and should definitely not be desired.

However, orthopraxy is terms of vinaya is to a certain degree required for the ordained sangha.

User avatar
BubbaBuddhist
Posts: 640
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 5:55 am
Location: Knoxville, Tennessee
Contact:

Re: Why Can't We Agree on ANYTHING?

Post by BubbaBuddhist » Sun Nov 11, 2012 12:53 am

LOL! Skeptic's Dictionary is one of those examples of thought-style biases taken to the extreme. Carroll is a fanatic dis-believer who gleefully (along with the PSICOP witch-hunters) debunks everything. He's been after me for years to contribute something to his website but I've declined, preferring not to further add to internet fanaticism.
BB
Author of Redneck Buddhism: or Will You Reincarnate as Your Own Cousin?

User avatar
Kusala
Posts: 754
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2011 11:02 am

Re: Why Can't We Agree on ANYTHING?

Post by Kusala » Sun Nov 11, 2012 7:53 am

danieLion wrote:Buddhists can't seem to agree on anything, including agreeing on what they agree and disagree about. Even within traditions, views are highly individualized (despite the efforts of traditionalists to keep and/or make orthodoxy and orthopraxy uniform).

On one end of the spectrum, interpretations of this situation include claiming that the Buddha did not intend strict uniformity and/or that he wasn't a traditionalist. On the other end of the spectrum, interpretations inlclude claiming the idea that the teachings of the Buddha are validated by the nature of their absoluteness and that preserving them as much as possible is important because otherwise it reflects poorly on their veracity.

So, does disunity among Buddhists reflect poorly on the Buddha Śāsana (religion, teachings). If so, why? If not, what does it say about the Śāsana?
Buddhists are humans...and humans are full of defilements. Does that make sense?
Image

"He, the Blessed One, is indeed the Noble Lord, the Perfectly Enlightened One;
He is impeccable in conduct and understanding, the Serene One, the Knower of the Worlds;
He trains perfectly those who wish to be trained; he is Teacher of gods and men; he is Awake and Holy. "

--------------------------------------------
"The Dhamma is well-expounded by the Blessed One,
Apparent here and now, timeless, encouraging investigation,
Leading to liberation, to be experienced individually by the wise. "

User avatar
Sambojjhanga
Posts: 110
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2012 3:51 pm
Location: San Diego, California, USA

Re: Why Can't We Agree on ANYTHING?

Post by Sambojjhanga » Sun Nov 11, 2012 12:14 pm

Kusala wrote:
danieLion wrote:Buddhists can't seem to agree on anything, including agreeing on what they agree and disagree about. Even within traditions, views are highly individualized (despite the efforts of traditionalists to keep and/or make orthodoxy and orthopraxy uniform).

On one end of the spectrum, interpretations of this situation include claiming that the Buddha did not intend strict uniformity and/or that he wasn't a traditionalist. On the other end of the spectrum, interpretations inlclude claiming the idea that the teachings of the Buddha are validated by the nature of their absoluteness and that preserving them as much as possible is important because otherwise it reflects poorly on their veracity.

So, does disunity among Buddhists reflect poorly on the Buddha Śāsana (religion, teachings). If so, why? If not, what does it say about the Śāsana?
Buddhists are humans...and humans are full of defilements. Does that make sense?
More than you can even imagine, friend.

Metta!

:anjali:
Sabba rasam dhammaraso jinati
The flavor of the dhamma exceeds all other flavors

danieLion
Posts: 1947
Joined: Wed May 25, 2011 4:49 am

Re: Why Can't We Agree on ANYTHING?

Post by danieLion » Wed Nov 14, 2012 8:54 am

Thanks everyone, especially Dave, Mike & Geoff. Circumstances prevented me from logging on for a few days, and things are still a bit unpredictable. I'm going to try to reflect some and try to post later.

danieLion
Posts: 1947
Joined: Wed May 25, 2011 4:49 am

Re: Why Can't We Agree on ANYTHING?

Post by danieLion » Fri Nov 16, 2012 9:54 pm

Cittasanto wrote:Hi Danial,
serious now :)
Can you expand what you mean here please. particularly the underlined words.
danieLion wrote:On one end of the spectrum, interpretations of this situation include claiming that the Buddha did not intend strict uniformity and/or that he wasn't a traditionalist. On the other end of the spectrum, interpretations inlclude claiming the idea that the teachings of the Buddha are validated by the nature of their absoluteness and that preserving them as much as possible is important because otherwise it reflects poorly on their veracity.
but If we agree on every detail it does not lead to expanding our tools. how we explain things may not refect in one persons understanding exactly what is meant yet something else said by another which is totally missing 90% of the meaning may fill in the blanks in understanding.
unfortunately the pill Thanissaro Bhikkhu talks about in the Boddhisatva talk where he says "under" and the audience says "stand" does not exist.
So, does disunity among Buddhists reflect poorly on the Buddha Śāsana (religion, teachings). If so, why? If not, what does it say about the Śāsana?
I think running off making new factions left right and centre reflects poorly. there isn't many people here I would not consider part of the Buddhas Dispensation.
Expansion on "did not intend strict uniformity": he didn't teach a one-size-fits-all practice, BUT...
Expansion on "validated by the nature of their absoluteness" e.g., as this Access to Insight glossary entry puts it:
ariya-sacca: Noble Truth. The word "ariya" (noble) can also mean ideal or standard, and in this context means "objective" or "universal" truth. There are four: stress, the origin of stress, the disbanding of stress, and the path of practice leading to the disbanding of stress. [MORE]
I don't get the "under-stand" reference.

danieLion
Posts: 1947
Joined: Wed May 25, 2011 4:49 am

Re: Why Can't We Agree on ANYTHING?

Post by danieLion » Fri Nov 16, 2012 9:58 pm

Raksha wrote:As for the Dhamma, there are said to be 84000 versions, and there are probably as many interpretations as there are people. :anjali:
But didn't the Buddha say something like, "the truth is One"? :stirthepot:

danieLion
Posts: 1947
Joined: Wed May 25, 2011 4:49 am

Re: Why Can't We Agree on ANYTHING?

Post by danieLion » Fri Nov 16, 2012 10:05 pm

LonesomeYogurt wrote:...I agree it can get dramatic.
That's an understatement. E.g., the creation of the Mahavihara (according to Rev. Analayo anyway) was basically reactionary and the history of Buddhism (not to mention the history of Dhammawheel) is replete with conflicts. Soap opera's got nothing on that drama. :juggling:

danieLion
Posts: 1947
Joined: Wed May 25, 2011 4:49 am

Re: Why Can't We Agree on ANYTHING?

Post by danieLion » Fri Nov 16, 2012 10:15 pm

santa100 wrote:Until the day of enlightenment, guess we're still like the blind men of Savatthi (or at least partially blind) ( http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; )
Quote from the above sutta link: "They don't know what is the Dhamma and what is non-Dhamma." Can we unpack this without disagreement?

danieLion
Posts: 1947
Joined: Wed May 25, 2011 4:49 am

Re: Why Can't We Agree on ANYTHING?

Post by danieLion » Fri Nov 16, 2012 10:18 pm

mikenz66 wrote:Isn't this a bit of an on-line phenomenon?
Not where I live. It's a schism fest here.

User avatar
BubbaBuddhist
Posts: 640
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 5:55 am
Location: Knoxville, Tennessee
Contact:

Re: Why Can't We Agree on ANYTHING?

Post by BubbaBuddhist » Fri Nov 16, 2012 10:22 pm

Heh. I'm reminded of a favorite quote of Charles Fort:

"If there is a Universal Mind, must it be sane?"

BB
Author of Redneck Buddhism: or Will You Reincarnate as Your Own Cousin?

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot], SkillfulA and 110 guests