[FutureBuddha (6)] Avoiding Scientism

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Jundo
    Treeleaf Founder and Priest
    • Apr 2006
    • 41030

    [FutureBuddha (6)] Avoiding Scientism

    I believe that many innovations of science and technology can strengthen Buddhism ...

    ... and I believe that many values and insights of Buddhism can help science and technology to find good and healthy directions ...

    But I caution against blind faith and reliance on science and technology.

    Overly relying on technology and the artificial can blind us to nature ...

    From the book:

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    Please allow me to say that I have great trust in science, but I am not someone who believes that science has all the answers. That is patently not true. We have to resist the tendency toward “scientism,” an excessive faith and belief in science as the be all and end all in offering explanations and understanding of the world. For example, biologists and chemists, neurologists and physicists may have much to say on the mechanisms by which a flower germinates and grows, the wave patterns of light, the structure of electro-chemical signal transmission from the retina to the synapses of brain, and the physiology of heart rates and hormonal responses when two persons communicate something meaningful between them. However, no formula or equation can capture the richness and beauty of a simple moment of gazing upon a flower, offering one to a lover, or the wordless experience of the Buddha’s holding up a flower before his disciple, Mahākāśyapa, who smiled in understanding.

    Furthermore …

    “There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
    than are dreamt of in your philosophy.”
    (Hamlet, Act 1, Scene 5).

    I do not consider myself a “materialist” because, fundamentally, I am convinced that we barely have begun to pull back the curtain in understanding what is truly afoot beyond the surface appearances of time, space, energy and matter that seem to constitute this world. The solid things that appear so sure and “common sense” to our eyes are not so sure nor solid, as discoveries on the relativity of time, the bending of space, quantum mechanics, “spooky action at a distance,” the mysteries of the origin of consciousness and other wonders all hint. As well, some questions may remain forever beyond our limited human capabilities to understand, just as a crawling ant could never begin to understand (should it even want to) the complex chemical structures, reactions, physics and physiology that combine to let an ant crawl. Whatever is going on with the universe, it may be equally beyond our best understanding, for we are not so smart.

    Nonetheless, as a good Zen Buddhist, I know that we can know much, and understand all reality in some way: Like a sailor on the sea, ignorant of what lies over its far horizons, never having seen the river that is its source, not knowing the names of all its swimming fish or the count of every grain on its sandy shores, I can dip my finger into its briny waters, and taste on my tongue the whole ocean and all it holds. Furthermore, as a good Zen fellow, I can taste and experience that this ocean and all it holds is just me, and you, and that we are just the sea and each other.

    So it is for this whole universe and all the events of time.

    ...

    There may be seasons to return to the minimalist, traditional, low-tech or no tech, rustic, small-scale, natural, socially withdrawn hermitages and ways of life that Zen people have always cherished. We should learn to put down the purchased goods and keyboards, sit still and rest from our goals, quit the quest for constant improvements and efficiency, restrain the endless hunger for achievements, turn off the flashing lights and ceaseless noise. We can be satisfied with enough and not more, for enough is enough. We can learn not to be too desirous, too material, even in a world of increasing material abundance.

    But, as Zen tames our technological thirst, can technology enhance our Zen?

    Zen lessons can guide us in moderating our excesses. At the same time, might technical and biological enhancements potentially render us more physically, psychologically, socially, and spiritually able to do so: better Zen students through chemistry? Is it possible that the very technology which we are designing to enhance and alter the human body and mind might help us be more spiritually equipped and better able to master the art of living simply?

    Or will the outcome be a Zen fiasco, a futuristic version of our present tendency to sell wasteful consumer goods and fake spirituality just by pasting on the label “Zen” and a picture of a plastic Buddha?

    What is the middle ground, is there a good mix and balance?

    With pharmacologically moderated bodily desires and neural stimulator induced feelings of peace, we may crawl into our 5G, 4-D simulation of Master Ryokan’s grass hut, admiring the laser projected mountains. Listening to the synthesized cry of a Japanese warbler, savoring the taste of genetically modified roots and grasses …

    … but what will have happened to the living warblers, ancient stone mountains and natural fields of green, the wild grasses then? Will new Ryokan poems be composed by machine, for we have lost our poetic hearts?

    Gassho, J

    stlah


    Last edited by Jundo; 04-04-2023, 06:44 AM.
    ALL OF LIFE IS OUR TEMPLE
  • Kokuu
    Dharma Transmitted Priest
    • Nov 2012
    • 6937

    #2
    … but what will have happened to the living warblers, ancient stone mountains and natural fields of green, the wild grasses then? Will new Ryokan poems be composed by machine, for we have lost our poetic hearts?
    I will say that, although AI art software has produced some quite decent material, the AI haiku I have seen thus far are pretty unimpressive so I have hope that Ryokan's beating Zen heart will struggle to be replaced by a machine. Who knows, though?

    Gassho
    Kokuu
    -sattoday-
    Last edited by Jundo; 01-22-2023, 01:14 PM.

    Comment

    • WorkerB
      Member
      • Jan 2023
      • 176

      #3


      -b.

      St

      Comment

      • Dogukan
        Member
        • Oct 2021
        • 144

        #4
        I've been following the threads in this subforum for a while. Thank you all. Truly, the subjects are both entertaining and thought-provoking. And they helped me get to know myself more. It turned out that I am quite - and I mean, QUITE - 'conservative' regarding all these possibilities that the future may or may not bring one day. I am, of course, not going to write an essay, but my reservations are mainly based on The Obsolescence of Man written by Günther Anders in the '50s. A very analytical and still somewhat up-to-date text, I recommend it.

        And I am glad to be involved in the discussion at this point. The title, 'Avoiding Scientism', suits me for I am certainly on Hamlet's side, and not Horatio's. The passages from your book ring quite true, thanks Jundo.

        Regarding the questions about the relationship between technology and our practice, I do believe that whatever happens, we have to rely on our own judgment and conscience. After all, whether the world becomes a paradise or a disastrous black hole, all we have is our practice. There may be some "better Zen students through chemistry", but I will not be one of them. So, I simply wish them luck if they'll come into existence. If I ever meet one of them, I will be as polite as I can. But I still prefer to talk about my practice with my flawed friends who make mistakes and sometimes get lazy. There may be some wonderfully AI-written koans one day. Well done, I may say. (To whom exactly - that I am not sure). But since these koans will unavoidably lack real spice of life, I really doubt to what extent they can resonate with me.

        I know, these are not very clever answers. Unfortunately, I feel that my 'habit energy' prevents me from using my imagination and even speculation power in this subject.

        Gassho,
        Doğukan
        sat
        Last edited by Dogukan; 01-23-2023, 12:25 PM.

        Comment

        • Veronica
          Member
          • Nov 2022
          • 123

          #5
          I love the title of avoiding scientism. It speaks to the vast amount of knowledge that is known, and the vast amount of knowledge that is unknown. All true scientists are aware that their full scientific picture is not the full picture. There will always be more to learn, and some current science will be disproven in the future. This is science, and allows room for speculation, ideas and exploration. And in this room for ideas and exploration (which come before specific hypothesis and experiments), there is beauty and space to breathe. Zen, poetry, art, spirituality and other non-science-limited thoughts can fit into that space. Then science continues with hypothesis, experiments, results, papers, progression... It is all connected because it is all part of the world.

          Veronica
          stlah

          Comment

          • Spiritdove

            #6
            I wont avoid science its my passion guess that makes me into scientism at least it works with evidence.

            will no longer do comments in forum will just do video stream sits ty be well be safe.


            Marj "Spiritdove"
            Sat today

            Comment

            • Jundo
              Treeleaf Founder and Priest
              • Apr 2006
              • 41030

              #7
              I have trust in the scientific method, because it works in producing working technology and in producing perspectives on the world which actually seem to explain and predict how the world works.

              I reject much superstition, including within Buddhism, that does not seem to do the same. For example, I see no evidence that the world is actually flat (as traditional Buddhists claimed), nor that Dharani spells work when recited to cure disease or make it rain in actuality (although there are certainly psychological benefits derived from faith in their power, a kind of placebo effect, which are testable and do have confirmed psychological benefits for many individuals, as do medical placebos.)

              I am an agnostic about any possibility, no matter what, but to the point of denial and rejection if credible evidence is simply not present (e.g., while it is possible that ancient space travelers built the pyramids, the lack of believable evidence, coupled with better explanations and the existence of tangible evidence for other methods of their building, lead me to believe such a proposition to be simply ridiculous). On the other hand, I believe in the scientific claim that time is relative even though my senses do not see it as so, because reliable experimentation has proven the truth of the claim time and time again even if my eyes fail to see it.

              I reject merely the EXTREMES of science, when taken too far:

              First, I reject "pseudo-science," e.g., non-scientific mumbo jumbo wrapped up in the words and appearances of "science." An example is this nonsense:

              The pseudoscience of creating beautiful (or ugly) water
              A Japanese ‘doctor of alternative medicine’ claims to be able to think good or bad thoughts when looking at a glass of water …


              I also do not believe that science has (or will ever) offer a complete explanation of all phenomena. We are not smart enough. On the other hand, that fact does not mean that whatever we do not know is true (e.g., just because science cannot know everything, that does not mean that there is actually a Loch Ness Monster. I am skeptical, right to the point of rejecting, overly literal descriptions of post-death rebirth even though science is incapable of knowing for sure and may never know exactly what happens over the horizon of death.)

              I think that science overreaches sometimes or, better said, people misinterpret its conclusions or draw extended conclusions that are not justified by what science is demonstrating. For example, although the universe is vast, and the earth is not the center of the cosmos, many people then impose a subjective value judgement on that fact to say that, relatively, our human lives are just as small and meaningless and insignificant as grains of dust in the corner of a vast room. It is at that point that I remind folks that, to the Mahayana Buddhist, the dust is a jewel, contains the whole cosmos within, and relative worth is not a scientific conclusion, and instead, only personally subjective and economic. Next to the elephant, the ant is tiny and seemingly nothing ... but don't tell that to the ant's husband and kids!

              In fact, every point of the universe, and point of space within your bones, is equally "a" center of the universe as much as any other, and the universe is also ALL the center of itself. You are right smack at the center of the universe ... but so is everything. Most of us are not aware of this mathematical view, and the value judgements that might be derived from the same:



              I further suspect that some scientific theories, although right, are also incomplete and not as final an explanation as we think. Frankly, I suspect as much for Darwin's Theory of Evolution which (although I have great faith in its conclusions and the mechanism of change it describes) may possibly fail to explain some aspects of how we (you and me) ended up so conveniently in our particular lives spewed out by that process (right in a universe with laws of physics and chemistry, on a planet and with bodies just goldilocks right for that outcome to be) when, it would seem, that outcome was ridiculously unlikely to an absurd extreme. There is something more to the process, I suspect, than the theory accounts for, even if the theory is not wrong.

              So, science is a treasure, but even treasure can be misused or over-used.

              Gassho, J

              stlah
              Last edited by Jundo; 01-25-2023, 04:05 AM.
              ALL OF LIFE IS OUR TEMPLE

              Comment

              • Spiritdove

                #8
                I must say I do not feel you understand scientific method by this view. I have read a lot on the subject myself. you said "I also do not believe that science has (or will ever) offer a complete explanation of all phenomena" science does not claim too .There are many different kinds of science: physics, chemistry, biology and sociology. Each discipline also breaks down into its own subfields. Physics is really particle physics (quarks, etc.), nuclear physics (nuclei), condensed matter physics (the study of aggregates of matter like solids), quantum optics (the study of light) and astrophysics (to name a few).Everything in the universe happens for a reason, and science is man’s way of explaining why these things happen. Science is based on fact, rather than religion, which is based on belief, and many scientific theories can actually be proved. If they cannot be proved, then evidence for them can be suggested. While science cannot PROVE everything, it CAN make educated theories, based on similar scientific studies, as to why things occur. This is why a large majority of science is purely theoretical – because our equipment is not yet advanced enough to allow us to prove everything. However, technology (and therefore science) is rapidly improving and expanding each year; it is only a matter of time. Factors are in motion on earth and life happened if that were not the case we would not be here. Yes the tree of humanity evolved from an apelike ancestor now extinct. We are animal species with plenty of solid evidence to back evolution . Science and religion just do not mix. To me if it is real its able to be tested though we may not have the tools "yet" to do so. You said"science overreaches sometimes or, better said, people misinterpret its conclusions or draw extended conclusions that are not right" People make errors and science wants you to prove it wrong . Needed to reply on this "respectfully" Im done

                Marj "Spiritdove"
                Sat today

                Comment

                • Jundo
                  Treeleaf Founder and Priest
                  • Apr 2006
                  • 41030

                  #9
                  I think that you may have misunderstood what I wrote. Some people (usually not the scientists themselves, although they can sometimes be equally foolish) DO believe that science is the be all and end all of explanation. I merely point out that science is not, cannot and may never be.

                  This is why a large majority of science is purely theoretical – because our equipment is not yet advanced enough to allow us to prove everything.
                  You say "not yet" advanced, but it may never be sufficiently advanced to answer some questions. It may not be "only a matter of time." Certainly, we will know more in the future (some of our most cherished ideas may even need to be tossed out the window ... current ideas about gravity as one example), but I doubt that science will ever crack every puzzle.

                  Gassho, J

                  stlah
                  ALL OF LIFE IS OUR TEMPLE

                  Comment

                  • Ryumon
                    Member
                    • Apr 2007
                    • 1820

                    #10
                    Originally posted by Jundo
                    I think that you may have misunderstood what I wrote. Some people (usually not the scientists themselves, although they can sometimes be equally foolish) DO believe that science is the be all and end all of explanation. I merely point out that science is not, cannot and may never be.
                    I doubt that this belief is very common. It’s thrown around a lot in internet discussions about “spirituality,” and, sure, a lot of tech bros and perhaps many scientists believe it, but I don’t think the general public feels this way.

                    Gassho,
                    Ryūmon (Kirk)
                    Sat
                    I know nothing.

                    Comment

                    • Jundo
                      Treeleaf Founder and Priest
                      • Apr 2006
                      • 41030

                      #11
                      Originally posted by Ryumon
                      ... but I don’t think the general public feels this way.

                      Gassho,
                      Ryūmon (Kirk)
                      Sat
                      People, especially religious people (but really anybody), can fall into the even more pernicious tendency to doubt sound science, and to uphold pseudo-scientific beliefs, quack cure, conspiracy theories, old wives tales and the like.

                      There is a fine line to walk.

                      I just listened to an excellent podcast episode tonight on this very topic ... it was quite good ...

                      The Last Archive ...

                      A fake moon landing…

                      Astronauts carrying space pathogens back to earth. Michael Crichton’s Andromeda Strain. HIV manufactured in a government laboratory. COVID-19 vaccines killing millions. In this episode, Jill Lepore follows a trail of disease stories and conspiracies from Apollo 11 to COVID-19. In part two of our series about the moon landing: Apollo’s splashdown, and the tidal wave of doubt it set off.
                      https://www.thelastarchive.com/seaso...om-outer-space
                      Gassho, J

                      stlah
                      ALL OF LIFE IS OUR TEMPLE

                      Comment

                      • Nengei
                        Member
                        • Dec 2016
                        • 1658

                        #12
                        After a lifetime dedicated to science and the pursuit of knowledge and understanding, my thoughts align with the perspective you have presented here, Jundo Roshi. My experience has been that in ongoing study, we see a great breadth of knowledge. The we begin to explore some of that knowledge in depth. Then we think we know everything. Then, as we really begin to drill down and explore, and to conduct experimental research, and finally to teach others, we come to understand that we know very little about anything. With all we have accomplished, all that we have learned, we are only beginning to break the surface in the teensiest corner of an unimaginably large universe. What we do know is always colored by the lens of our own schema and paradigm. And we come to see that there remain, and always will remain, parts of the human experience that lie outside the reach of our scientific process.

                        Gassho,
                        Nengei
                        Sat today. LAH.

                        Please forgive any indication I am trying to teach anything. I am a priest in training and have no depth of knowledge or qualifications for teaching Zen practice or the Dharma.
                        遜道念芸 Sondō Nengei (he/him)

                        Please excuse any indication that I am trying to teach anything. I am a priest in training and have no qualifications or credentials to teach Zen practice or the Dharma.

                        Comment

                        • Doshin
                          Member
                          • May 2015
                          • 2634

                          #13
                          Well, this has been an interesting read. I have paused after digesting this discussion or debate or “argument” and asked myself do I belong to the OoS (Order of Scientism)? Maybe I am guilty of that but I do have caveats in my paradigm. I attempt to consider others ideas.

                          I spent over 10 years in Universities training in the sciences, hundreds (thousands?) of hours in workshops, conferences, and now webinars focused on science, worked in application of Science to environmental issues for almost 40 years, most of my recreational reading and many hobbies focus on an aspect of science, and just realized that the majority of my friends have multiple degrees in science (I need to be more inclusive). Maybe I should of diverged into the arts more but then being outside within nature is my appreciation of an art that took billions of years to establish.. However, I do know that science cannot bring us all the solutions, just a better understanding of the many challenges. I believe we do not even know what we don’t know and given the path of our species I am pessimistic we will be here long enough to know what questions we should be asking.

                          Jundo, I have known you for many years now and understand your appreciation and respect for science and your questions are appropriate and give us in the OoS something to ponder.

                          To paraphrase one of my Spiritual teachers The Dude

                          Yeah, well, like that’s just my opinion man

                          May we all keep open minds and learn from each other. The Scientific Method in enriched by Peer Review in whatever form it takes.

                          Doshin
                          st
                          Last edited by Doshin; 01-25-2023, 04:59 PM.

                          Comment

                          • Spiritdove

                            #14
                            Alright if I misunderstood I apologize. I come from that background where religion denies science at times I'm to 'testy" I just know religion failed me but science hasn't. I read up on meditation and its effects on a science paper and it does say the benefits are there. I like that. Something solid to hold on to than "oh I say it so just believe it" I know Buddhism is far better than that of course. I will work on my stuff. Like I said I may skip the forum for a bit as far as commenting and more on reading.. I enjoy the 2pm zoom with the chants. Very nice folks.

                            Marj "spiritdove"
                            Sat today early

                            Comment

                            • Spiritdove

                              #15
                              I love listening to podcasts. That looks interesting thanks for the the link

                              Marj "Spiritdove"
                              Sat today
                              Now aFk for a bit. namaste

                              Comment

                              Working...