Page 6 of 7

Re: Intellectual Integrity

Posted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 7:44 pm
by danieLion
Mr Man wrote:
danieLion wrote:
Mr Man wrote:It only lacks intellectual integrity when you put it in the wrong context.
Contexts are neither wrong nor right.
Of course context can be wrong. The intellect is not the ground for understanding (in the case of dhamma).
Contexts are either effective or ineffective, and their pragmatic value is entirley dependent upon one's purposes, aims and goals. The Buddha's path to "awakening" was intensely intellectual. There's no way he would've had so many profound things to say about the dhamma if he'd not grounded his pursuit of understanding it in his intellect.

Re: Intellectual Integrity

Posted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 7:45 pm
by danieLion
Cittasanto wrote:then I shall simply refer you back to my previous post.
Buddhism is whatever....
danieLion wrote:
Cittasanto wrote:and how do you come to those conclusions?
danieLion wrote:they're not conclusions
Cittasanto wrote:Then what are they? has your reasoning not ended up with this at this point?
This has all been thoroughly addressed in my repsones to polarbuddha101's questions.

To summarize: crtical thinking for the sake of intellectual integrity is not about "coming to conclusions" or "ending up at a point." "Truth" serves no definitive, absolute, ultimate telos. It's not something "out there" waiting to be discovered.
Huh?

Re: Intellectual Integrity

Posted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 8:11 pm
by beeblebrox
SDC wrote:
beeblebrox wrote:Aleister Crowley, really?
I do not know very much about Crowley, but I give him a hell of a lot of credit, as I do many others from his era in the west, for having the guts to think outside the box when there really wasn't much there to work with. Maybe he went to the extreme, but there is definitely something there to respect...in my opinion.

Correct me if I am wrong, but didn't one of his early peers ordain in the Theravada tradition?

EDIT - Sorry for the off topic post
I think it's in the practice, not words...

Daniel made a claim that Aleister made a more sophisticated treatment on the spirituality than the Buddha did.

:anjali:

Re: Intellectual Integrity

Posted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 8:14 pm
by danieLion
SDC wrote:Correct me if I am wrong, but didn't one of his early peers ordain in the Theravada tradition?
Yes. Crowley attributed his success with jhana, for instance, to his friend Allan Bennett's (a.k.a. Bhikkhu Ananda Metteyya's) instruction. He met him in The Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn. Ananda Metteyya founded (in 1903) the Buddhasasana Samagama or the International Buddhist Society in London, UK (not to be confused with the International Buddhist Society in British Columbia, Canada). Bennett later began a periodical called Buddhism: An Illustrated Review.

See also:

The Meditations of Allan Bennett

The Bhikkhu and the Magus

Bennett's THE RELIGION OF BURMA AND OTHER PAPERS

The Influence of Buddhism on Aleister Crowley

Allan Bennett Theravada Monk and Pioneer Publisher

Buddhist Influence on Aleister Crowley

You will also find accountings of their relationship in Crowley's autohagiography, Confesssions, and in Richard Kaczynski's exhaustively researched and impeccably documented Perdurabo: The Life of Aleister Crowley.

Re: Intellectual Integrity

Posted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 8:17 pm
by beeblebrox
danieLion wrote:
Aleister Crowley, really?
Really.

You got a problem with AC? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I bet your understanding of AC is based on propaganda you've heard about it him instead of a personal, intellectually integral inquiry into his teachings.
In case you hadn't noticed, I passed the mark of the beast a few posts ago... you did also apparently, way ahead of me. :)

:anjali:

Re: Intellectual Integrity

Posted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 8:22 pm
by danieLion
beeblebrox wrote:Daniel made a claim that Aleister made a more sophisticated treatment on the spirituality than the Buddha did.
Correct. However, I made this claim with several individuals, not just AC. AC demonstated ambivalence towards the teachings of the Buddha throughout his life. However, I can think of no one relgious figure that he showed more deference to than the Buddha. He found it a matter of intellectual integrity to include the aspects of Buddhism he found valid in his "system".

Re: Intellectual Integrity

Posted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 8:25 pm
by danieLion
beeblebrox wrote:
danieLion wrote:
Aleister Crowley, really?
Really.

You got a problem with AC? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I bet your understanding of AC is based on propaganda you've heard about it him instead of a personal, intellectually integral inquiry into his teachings.
In case you hadn't noticed, I passed the mark of the beast a few posts ago... you did also apparently, way ahead of me. :)

:anjali:
Crowley said the main reason he jokingly referred to himself as "The Beast" was because that's what his mother used to call him. :lol:

Re: Intellectual Integrity

Posted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 8:58 pm
by tiltbillings
Back to the topic, please.

Re: Intellectual Integrity

Posted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 9:12 pm
by Mr Man
Mr Man wrote:
danieLion wrote:
Of course context can be wrong. The intellect is not the ground for understanding (in the case of dhamma).
Contexts are either effective or ineffective, and their pragmatic value is entirley dependent upon one's purposes, aims and goals. The Buddha's path to "awakening" was intensely intellectual. There's no way he would've had so many profound things to say about the dhamma if he'd not grounded his pursuit of understanding it in his intellect.
Well if I am remembering correctly you have been rather skeptical about the historical accuracy of the Buddha story so the personalization here seems rather odd. I don't agree that "The Buddha's path to "awakening" was intensely intellectual". I don't think that there was a even a "pursuit of understanding" (intellectual).

Re: Intellectual Integrity

Posted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 9:50 pm
by danieLion
Mr Man wrote:...the historical accuracy of the Buddha story...
Do you see the contradiction in this phrase?
Mr Man wrote:...so the personalization here seems rather odd.
Really? Tell me more. I'm interested. Who's "personilization"? How, exactly, does it appear "odd" to you?
Mr Man wrote:I don't agree that "The Buddha's path to "awakening" was intensely intellectual".
Really? Tell me more. I'm interested. Do you think he just sat around stopping his thoughts until he experienced nibbana? How would he even know how to direct his Views, Intentions, Speech, Actions, Livelihood, Efforts, Mindfulness and Concentration without his intellect?
Mr Man wrote:I don't think that there was a even a "pursuit of understanding" (intellectual).
Really? Tell me more. I'm interested. How could he pursue Right View and Right Effort without his intellect?

Re: Intellectual Integrity

Posted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 10:18 pm
by Mr Man
danieLion wrote:
Mr Man wrote:...the historical accuracy of the Buddha story...
Do you see the contradiction in this phrase?
Mr Man wrote:...so the personalization here seems rather odd.
Really? Tell me more. I'm interested. Who's "personilization"? How, exactly, does it appear "odd" to you?
Mr Man wrote:I don't agree that "The Buddha's path to "awakening" was intensely intellectual".
Really? Tell me more. I'm interested. Do you think he just sat around stopping his thoughts until he experienced nibbana? How would he even know how to direct his Views, Intentions, Speech, Actions, Livelihood, Efforts, Mindfulness and Concentration without his intellect?
Mr Man wrote:I don't think that there was a even a "pursuit of understanding" (intellectual).
Really? Tell me more. I'm interested. How could he pursue Right View and Right Effort without his intellect?

I do see the contradiction and that is why I found your personalization, of the Buddha, as odd.

if we look at events leading up to Bodhi the four signs are in my opinion something that touch on an emotion level not intellectual, the angst was primordial not intellectual, the struggle was physical not intellectual, and the awakening is transcendental not intellectual.

Re: Intellectual Integrity

Posted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 10:33 pm
by Cittasanto
danieLion wrote:
Cittasanto wrote:then I shall simply refer you back to my previous post.
Buddhism is whatever....
Huh?
I think Buddhism is what it is depending on how you look at it. It can be a religion, psychology, way of life, philosophy....
I think the work of Alain debottom (sp?) is closer now, to what Buddhism was then at that time.
Studying psychology can help frame the teachings, but so can studying philosophy, theology and a number of other subjects. but no one area shows the full spectrum of the teachings.
in other words personal views, and what area is looked at changes what is seen.
if we only look at the psychological aspects we do not get a full picture of the phychology. the same goes for theological. it is all intertwined in the Dhammavinaya. remove one aspect and it is dislodged from other supporting structures and blurred.

Re: Intellectual Integrity

Posted: Wed Feb 20, 2013 2:43 pm
by kirk5a
danieLion wrote: No epistemic method is completely reliable, but it's more reliable than other methods. I'm not after absolute reliabity. I'm after understanding the teachings in terms of pragmatism, especialy the pragmatism of John Dewey, William James and Richard Rorty.
Ok. I'm after absolute reliability.

Re: Intellectual Integrity

Posted: Wed Feb 20, 2013 2:50 pm
by daverupa
Reasoned acceptance of a statement can turn out in one of two ways, in the course of things...

Re: Intellectual Integrity

Posted: Tue Feb 26, 2013 3:41 am
by danieLion
Cittasanto wrote:if we only look at the psychological aspects we do not get a full picture of the phychology.
Depends on what, exactly, is meant/you mean by psychology.