[Vision2020] Sam Harris: "Something worth extracting...from Buddhism in particular."

[Ted Moffett]

Nick et. al.

Sam Harris is open to the value in religious traditions, but not the demands
for irrational superstitious beliefs for which the evidence is weak.  To
emphasize basing beliefs on reason makes someone a "secular
fundamentalist?"  This seems a misuse of the word "fundamentalist."  Harris
will listen to reason and evidence if it contradicts his views.  A
"fundamentalist" will not.

Perhaps you would like to reconsider labeling Sam Harris in this manner,
along with including him as a member of the "Atheist Brigade," that, as your
phrased it, "seems to forget that we are emotional beings..."

Let's let Sam Harris speak for himself to articulate his arguments regarding
the dangers and harm irrational religious belief, even among so called
religious moderates, poses in a world posed to destroy itself with weapons
of mass destruction. Also read Harris's comments on Buddhism, which he has
studied and practiced, a "religion" he recognizes as having value in its
traditions.  He even indicates he is open to the evidence for "re-birth."
The whole piece in readable at the link immediately below, and the second
link leads to another interview where Harris mentions Jainism as a peaceful
religion, along with more discussion of Buddhism:

http://www.truthdig.com/interview/print/20060403_sam_harris_interview/

http://www.thesunmagazine.org/369_Harris.pdf


*You write passionately in your book about the spirituality of Buddhism. How
do you describe yourself in terms of your spirituality?*

I don't call myself a Buddhist. I recently wrote an article in the Shambhala
Sun, which is one of the more widely read Buddhist magazines, entitled
"Killing the Buddha." I essentially argued that that the wisdom of the
Buddha is trapped in the religion of Buddhism. The teachings of the Buddha,
taken as a whole, probably represent the richest source of contemplative
wisdom that we have, but anyone who values these teachings should get out of
the religion business. It's the wrong message. And, in any case, 99 percent
of Buddhists practice Buddhism as a religion, and therefore are part of the
same egregious discourse.

I think there really is something worth extracting from our contemplative
traditions in general, and from Buddhism in particular. It's a phenomenology
of meditative experience—what people do and realize when they go into a cave
for a year or 10 years and practice meditation. There really is a landscape
there that has been brilliantly articulated in Buddhism, and not so
brilliantly articulated in some of our other contemplative traditions. And
so I think all of this is worth talking about and studying.

But I don't call myself a Buddhist.  and yet, if you asked me how you should
learn to meditate, what books you should read, etc., I'd point you in the
direction of Buddhist techniques of meditation, and to the Buddhist
literature on the subject.

*So you don't need any recourse to the supernatural in Buddhism?*

The core truths of Buddhism, the truth of selflessness, for instance.  It's
simply a fact that it is possible to realize that the ego, as you presently
feel it and conceive of it, is an illusion. You can experience the continuum
of consciousness without the sense of self.  This experience can be had
without believing anything on insufficient evidence. You can simply be
taught to look closely enough at your experience, to de-construct the sense
of self, and then discover what the consequences are of that happening. And
the consequences turn out to be very positive. There's a whole discourse in
Buddhism about the relief of psychological suffering, the transcendence of
self, and the nature of positive human emotions like compassion and loving
kindness. These phenomena have been mapped out with incredible rigor in
Buddhism, and one doesn't need to swallow any mumbo jumbo to find this
discourse useful.

And yet, much that people believe under the guise of Buddhism is dubious:
certainties about re-birth, the idea that one's teacher in the Tibetan
tradition is absolutely the reincarnation of some previous historical
personality—all of this stuff is held rather dogmatically by most Buddhists,
and I think we should be skeptical of it. If people present evidence of
it,—and there's certainly been some interesting studies on the subject of
rebirth—we should look at the evidence.  As someone once said,
"extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."
----------------

Vision2020 Post: Ted Moffett
On 6/11/07, nickgier at adelphia.net <nickgier at adelphia.net> wrote:
>
> Greetings:
>
> Thanks to those on the Vision who gave me the inspiration to move this
> topic up on my list.
>
> This is this week's radio commentary on KRFP FM, which although low in
> wattage has provided the most comprehensive coverage of local events than
> any other Palouse station.
>
> Who else but KRFP gave you all night coverage of the shooting, or blow by
> blow coverage of hearings and rallies?  Send your check of support to the
> station: 116 E. 3rd St., #201.  With your help we can boost our wattage and
> transmit from Paradise Ridge.
>
> And no one except KRFP's own Leigh Roberts could have brought you this
> morning's story about saving 16 bull bison from slaughter in West
> Yellowstone.
>
> GOD IS DEAD (AGAIN!): SECULAR FUNDAMENTALISTS FIGHT BACK
>
> The madman jumped into their midst and pierced them with his eyes.
> "Whither is God?" he cried; "I will tell you. We have killed him---you and
> I. All of us are his murderers.
>
> —Friedrich Nietzsche, Joyful Wisdom §125
>
> Nietzsche is dead.
> —God
>
> The tone of this Charge of the Atheist Brigade is often . . . intolerant
> and mean.  It's contemptuous and even a bit fundamentalist.
>
> —Nicholas Kristof
>
> The ugly giant of the Religious Right, Jerry Falwell, is dead; Pat
> Robertson discredits himself nearly every time he speaks; and Ralph Reed,
> the founder of the Christian Coalition, cannot even win a primary election
> in Georgia.
>
> In the 2006 election, former Senator Rick Santorum, a darling of the
> Religious Right, lost to Democratic Governor Bob Casey by 18 percentage
> points. Senator Sam Brownback, the GOP presidential candidate most
> compatible with conservative Christian positions, drew, in most recent ABC
> poll, one percent compared to liberal Rudy Giuliani's 32 percent.
>
> The GOP coalition between Goldwater and early Reagan conservatives and the
> Religious Right is in shambles, and the birth of Vice-President Cheney's
> grandson to a normal lesbian family marks a symbolic turning point.
>
> "Left-wing" evangelicals such as Jim Wallis are making headlines and is
> speaking all over the country: "I say at every stop, 'Fighting poverty's a
> moral value, too.' There's a whole generation of young Christians who care
> about the environment. That's their big issue. Protecting God's creation,
> they would say, is a moral value, too."
>
> Leaders the National Association of Evangelicals agree and have issued the
> following statement: "We affirm that God-given dominion is a sacred
> responsibility to steward the earth and not a license to abuse the creation
> of which we are a part."
>
> What a change from former Secretary of the Interior James Watt, testifying
> before Congress in 1981: "God gave us these things to use. After the last
> tree is felled, Christ will come back."
>
> Although I certainly respect their right to speak out and actually agree
> with some of their points, this is the worst possible time for atheists such
> as Sam Harris ("The End of Faith" and "Letter to a Christian Nation"),
> Richard Dawkins ("The God Delusion"), Daniel Dennet ("Breaking the Spell:
> Religion as a Natural Phenomenon"), and Christopher Hitchens ("God Is Not
> Great: How Religion Poisons Everything") to stoke the fires of the culture
> wars.
>
> It is a sad fact that theological illiteracy is found among the nation's
> non-believers as well as its believers.  There is a whole range of religious
> options between the two extremes of religious fundamentalism and atheism of
> which most people are unaware.
>
> The Atheist Brigade seems to forget that we are emotional beings as well
> as rational beings, and need I remind them that there are many things in
> this world that reason cannot comprehend?
>
> I have a degree in philosophical theology, and I taught philosophy of
> religion for 30 years.  What always struck me at my professional meetings
> was the fact that some reformulations of the traditional arguments for God's
> existence are still holding their own.
>
> One can perhaps excuse the amateurs in the Atheist Brigade, but philosophy
> professor Dennet should be ashamed of himself when he claims that it is not
> necessary to address the arguments of his professional colleagues.
>
> Because of his lack of respect for others' expertise, Dawkins has been
> rightly ridiculed for his "Ultimate 747" argument, previous forms of which
> most of my students saw through easily.  Biologist Dawkins has always
> rejected such argumentative sloppiness by critics of evolution.
>
> Moderate evangelicals, such as Richard Mouw, president of Fuller
> [Evangelical] Seminary, admits that "we have done a terrible job of
> presenting our perspective" and that "whatever may be wrong with Christopher
> Hichens' attack on religious leaders, we have certainly already matched it
> in our attacks."
>
> But extreme Calvinists such as Douglas Wilson make no concessions (as is
> his wont), and is thrilled to have one more chance to fly the banners of a
> Christian Crusade.  His book "Letter from a Christian Citizen" is a response
> to Sam Harris' second book and is a now a Conservative Book Club selection.
>
> Wilson and Hitchens had a debate in the May, 2007 issue of "Christianity
> Today."  After despairful dealings with Wilson's over many years, I totally
> agree with Hitchens' description of his writing as "mildly amusing
> casuistry," but I not always happy with Hitchens' rhetorical excesses.
>
> John Green of the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life states: "These
> writers share a few things with the zealous religionists they oppose, such
> as a high degree of dogmatism and an aggressive rhetorical style.  Indeed,
> one could speak of a secular fundamentalism that resembles religious
> fundamentalism."
>
> At the turn of the 20th Century many conservative Christians urged the
> return to the "fundamentals" of biblical inerrancy and the divinity of
> Christ.  Our atheists want everyone to use science and empirical tests for
> guidance in their lives. I certainly prefer the latter to the former, but it
> is still far from being the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
>
>
>
>
>
> =======================================================
> List services made available by First Step Internet,
> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>               http://www.fsr.net
>          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> =======================================================
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20070611/159ed353/attachment.html