What is a self? Merely a human being? Or perhaps a soul? Hume claimed he could not find a self when he looked within, only a succession of impressions.
Why do many of us assume that Buddhism and science are polar opposites—that Buddhist teachings are so paradoxical and mysterious they are not even meant to be understood? Is it possible instead that the teachings of Buddhism actually far predate certain scientific conclusions the West is just now discovering? What can be said about the scientific verifiability of Buddhism?
This article by Robert Wright on The New York Times philosophy blog, The Stone, takes a stab at vindicating Buddhism in this way: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/06/opinion/buddhism-western-philosophy.html
Log in or register to post comments
David Hume was a superb essayist, a brilliant philosopher, and a world-class bon vivant.
What is the sound of one hand clapping? Does Zen Buddhism provide a unique perspective on the world that transcends the wisdom in Western Philosophy? Is there a special kind of Zen logic? Or is
Descartes considered the mind to be fully self-transparent; that is, he thought that we need only introspect to know what goes on inside our own minds.
We craft personal brands or images to accompany or represent ourselves in various situations.
Ever since John Locke, philosophers have wondered about memory and its connection to the self. Locke believed that a continuity of consciousness and memory establish a "self" over time.