Buddhism as Taught by the Buddha

== Re: 3 MARKS OF EXISTENCE == 1. Impermanence This seems like another way to state that energy cannot be created or destroyed - only transformed - which is a law of physics that I obviously acknowledge. 2. Suffering Undoubtedly people suffer; however, just because nothing can bring eternal satisfaction ignores the reality that while life is suffering, it is also non-suffering. 3. Non-Self Pro states, "Any notions or perceptions as an ego-self are simply delusional." I disagree. Yes everything is interconnected, but that does not prove that there is no such thing as the self. Buddhists believe in the notion of not-self or "anatta." However, all that cognitive science has revealed is that the mind is an emergent phenomenon, which is difficult to explain or predict in terms of its parts. Few scientists would equate the property of emergence with nonexistence as anatta does [1]. == Re: 4 NOBLE TRUTHS == 1. Life Is Suffering The human condition is not perfect and neither is the world we live in. We experience both pleasure and pain. Neither is more relevant; life is suffering but life is also non-suffering. Life is full of mixed experiences: good, bad and neutral. 2. We Suffer Because of Desire One could easily say that we experience pleasure because of desire. People are most happy when they are working to pursue a goal (or desire) [2]. 3. The Cessation of Suffering is Attainable Pro states that death proves suffering when he writes, "There is happiness in life, but all good things eventually come to an end. You may be healthy, but will meet sickness; your loved ones will eventually die; etc." However, death is unavoidable so suffering is unavoidable, meaning this truth is also negated. Moreover, if the only way to end suffering is to end desire, then that would include abandoning the desire to end suffering. This again is contradictory to the self-evident axiom of logic: the law of non-contradiction. One cannot desire non-desire and not desire anything at the same time. Finally on this point, without desire we would not be able to LIVE. Our desire to eat and sleep for example is vital to our survival. Other desires such as romantic attachment and sexual desires are also natural and necessary for procreation. 4. Following the 8-Fold Path Will End Suffering The 8-fold path as I will explain is nothing but a set of ethics instructing one to live morally. There is no proof that following these rules will end suffering. == Re: 8-FOLD PATH == The 8-fold path is basically a set of ethics that suggests one speak and act truthfully and genuinely, seek improvement, concentrate, acknowledge things for what they are, etc. None of these things can be proven to free one from desire; instead they just instruct on what is the proper way to treat other people and achieve happiness. A handful of other religions preach similar ethics. == Re: KARMA == Pro states that events are neither predetermined nor random. I'm sure Pro understands that I do believe events are in fact predetermined, and the best arguments against this notion suggest that they are random... so either way, I negate this assessment, though I doubt Pro intends for this to turn into another debate about free will. Regardless, I reject the notion of karma. Pro quoted Buddha as saying, "Those who do good will reap good results, and those who do evil will reap evil results." I am assuming that this quote applies to one's life here on earth and not a reincarnated life -- after all if it extends beyond one's life here, then we are delving into the world of postmortem mysticism which is no different (verifiable) than the monotheistic view of Heaven and Hell. I believe it is common knowledge that bad things happen to good people and vice versa. There is no way to prove that if one does good deeds then good will find its way back into their lives. Karma is intangible. The only thing that makes it 'real' is one's choice to believe it. Man has an inherent desire for justice; we want to believe that good deeds will be rewarded and bad deeds will be punished. Because this is not so, we've even expanded the realm of justice to include life after death. This is convenient because it gives us no way to prove anything. There is no proof that karma exists, and Pro has already argued against it in his opening round by arguing against determinism. Determinism states that everything is a consequence of antecedent states of affairs. If karma suggests that doing good brings forth good, then it agrees that goodness (or badness) is a consequence of antecedent affairs, thus affirming determinism and presenting yet another illogical contradiction in my opponent's case. == Re: 5 AGGREGATES == Pro writes, "The Six Senses that make up an entity and allows entities to experience reality: Eyes, ears, nose, tongue, body, and mind." Actually, that is ONE entity. The eyes, ears, nose, etc. are all a part of the body. Additionally, the concept of 'mind' is only possible because it is physically sustained by the body (brain). Moreover, this contradicts Pro's later statement that Buddhists believe in non-dualism. Saying the mind is separate from the body is upholding dualism: yet another contradiction in his case. == Re: PHILOSOPHY == [Empiricism] Like determinism, the empiricism vs. rationalism argument will not (and should not) be settled in this debate. Whichever one is right or wrong has no bearing here, so let's move on. [Atheism] Buddha mentions that believing in God is unnecessary to achieving "supreme wisdom," though just because acknowledging God might be "unnecessary" doesn't mean that God does not exist. To believe in reincarnation is to espouse life after death, which of course one cannot prove. Moreover, Buddhists pay homage to Buddha through a prayer like series of 5 precepts [3]. Surely one can respect a non-divine figure; however, why is a ritual pertinent? Buddhists may reject the idea of 'God' but they believe in a lot of mystical things, and the original Buddhist texts aim to convert (much like religion). Additionally, many find the teachings of Buddha to be agnostic rather than atheist. [Nondualism] Pro notes that Buddha says, "In seeing, there is just seeing. No seer and nothing seen. In hearing, there is just hearing. No hearer and nothing heard." If there is no seer, than how can seeing occur? If to be seen one needs a seer (obvious), this statement cannot be true. In fact this entire statement is fallacious. To be seen requires existence, meaning there is in fact something to be seen. This is nothing but a completely non-sensical statement meant to sound profound but that actually does not make any sense at all. [Rebith] There is no proof of rebirth. Pro describes it as the Middle Way between annhilation and eternalism. A transfer of energy does not necessarily indicate rebirth, as birth implies life. == NIRVANA == The ultimate goal of Buddhism is described as liberation from consciousness and awareness. In other words: death (or brain death). == SKEPTICISM == Buddhism essentially argues that one must reject what makes life *life* such as desire and other ordinary experiences. Buddha himself abandoned his wife and child in search of enlightenment. Buddhists believe that the universe was created for our benefit or that there is some "enlightened state" to be attained, though scientifically there is evidence that our existence is accidental. In other words, enlightenment is just another made-up theory. Let us also not forget other wacky Buddhist traditions such as how Buddhist's choose their spiritual leader as a toddler (the Dalai Lama), and the fact that Buddha encouraged meditation though studies show meditation is largely ineffective [1]. /Characters :( [1] http://slate.msn.com... [2] http://www.geometricvisions.com... [3] http://en.allexperts.com...