Buddhism and Science - Stephen Batchelor in conversation
 

This is a video I found at the 'Voices from Oxford' website.


~ "Buddhism and Science - Stephen Batchelor in conversation" ~

Any comments ?


http://www.voicesfromoxford.com/B-S-Batchelor.html

I met Buddhism through science and what is curious is that scientists have taken Buddhism as an insightfull way to explain the nature of reality and nothing more far from that. What was my surprise that when the Four Noble Truths were understood and realized, those, as the core teaching, have nothing to do with "the nature of reality" at least in the way science and philosophy are used to understand whatever is meant by that; because at some level the experience of the essence of reality is given and approached by its unsatisfactoriness.

http://www.discussworldissues.com/fo...ilies/wink.gif

A great discussion!

Around 29'00'' Denis Noble insists at Interdependence assuming that is the great achievement of what the Buddha taught. In a brilliant way, Batchelor explains perfectly well the teaching of Prattyasamupada as it is and not as Noble wants to be.

That section is important during the speech because what has been so fascinating for the scientist community is the stuff about systems and interdependence that also has become a sort of New Age Religion and a kind of strange political ideology in the late teachings of Thich Nhat Hanh.

Batchelor makes clear that there is no such "interdependence" political program at the historical Buddha teachings but a neat prescriptive account of reality as a causal evolution so to make people aware of how they think. I really found this as a good example of how the teachings of the historical Buddha have been misunderstood.

http://www.discussworldissues.com/fo...ilies/wink.gif

I haven't read 'Buddhism Without Beliefs' by Stephen Bachelor, so I have only a faint idea of what Bachelor is proposing. I watched the video from the link in the first post in this thread hoping to learn something.

After a while I woke with a jump, as I realised I had dropped off to sleep while watching. Either the guy has nothing to say to me, or he is operating at a level that I just can't understand.

I'm glad you found something in it, Kaarine, that you recognised and applauded, because I respect your view.

For myself, I'll get by without Stephen Bachelor, he's not for me.

Me neither, and I did not knew who was Bachelor until then. I looked the discussion with no idea of what was going to be told there. And I really kept watching it, because yes... it was a little slow, because it has the title of Buddhism and Science and I wanted to watch the Science part. I watched Bachelor and I liked the perspective he hold about Buddhism at least in the interview and what was really interesting was the topic of Interdependence making it clear to Noble. Many scientists get hooked with this idea and it has nothing to do with what is stated in the teachings, at least of the historical Buddha.

There was also a contrast. Nobel was exited with an idea. The idealization of a concept very common in some philosophical speculations and Bachelor in a much more dispassionate mood given, maybe, by the understanding of what the Buddha stated in the Prattyasamupada teaching. But well, as you said, this is just the perspective I got through the interview.

http://www.discussworldissues.com/fo...ilies/wink.gif

The quickest one-sentence summary I could give of Buddhism Without Beliefs (from what I remember after reading it) is this: Buddhist religions and dharma practice don't need to be conflated, because it is entirely possible to be diligent and devoted to the latter without getting bogged down in the former.

For a lot of people who have been thinking about these things longer than I have, I can see why this wouldn't be an earthshattering revelation or anything. For me, though, it was part of me learning that it's okay to spend time and effort on dharma practice even if I don't believe in gods and extraplanar quests and past lives and ghosts and supernatural karma. It fell into my lap at precisely the time I needed. It was actually mentioned to me in one of my first threads here, and that book and this board have had a big influence on me.

Anyway. Ramble over. Summary: I like Stephen Batchelor, and if I had sound on my computer at the moment, I would be able to offer more specific feedback on this video.

This link to talks in Australia earlier in the year may be of interest http://www.dharma.org.au/Batchelor-talks.html http://www.discussworldissues.com/fo...milies/bow.gif