Deweyan/Pragmatic Buddhism

[Heiso]

I found this article has given me a lot to think about. It is about how the author, a priest in the White Plumb and Zen Peacemaker traditions, has re-framed his understanding of Buddhism in light of the work of John Dewey (and Aristotle).

I'm not sure I agree with it all but he doesn't seem to go as far as Stephen Batchelor and raises some interesting points:

https://www.existentialbuddhist.com/2022/06/john-dewey-flourishing-and-buddhism/

Gassho,

Heiso

StLah

P.S. apologies for running long.

[Jundo]

I found this article has given me a lot to think about. It is about how the author, a priest in the White Plumb and Zen Peacemaker traditions, has re-framed his understanding of Buddhism in light of the work of John Dewey (and Aristotle).

I'm not sure I agree with it all but he doesn't seem to go as far as Stephen Batchelor and raises some interesting points:

https://www.existentialbuddhist.com/2022/06/john-dewey-flourishing-and-buddhism/

Gassho,

Heiso

StLah

P.S. apologies for running long.

Sorry, I have no idea about this.

Much wheel spinning between the ears.

Gassho, J

STLah

[Jundo]

One error it does seem to make is to see Buddhism as just some school of ethics and interpersonal relationships, if I understand correctly.

That is confusing the scaffolding for the actual treasure within.

Ethics are a supportive means, not the ends.

Gassho, J

[Heiso]

Yes, he seems to be getting toward Stephen Batchelor territory in that regard and I there's a certain amount of shoe-horning traditions together. But while I don't necessarily agree with it, I found it quite an interesting read, particularly the bits about how he is probing dogma and how his views on desire and attachment over time (I might be on my own there though!).

Gassho,

Heiso

StLah

[Gareth]

From this frame of reference, certain aspects of Buddhist dogma no longer make sense to me. For example, I don’t believe we ought to give up desire, full stop. Instead, we ought to aspire to right desire—wanting the things that genuinely enhance flourishing and wanting them in the right sort of way—not rigidly, compulsively, or obsessively. Similarly, I don’t believe we ought to eschew sensual pleasure. Sensual pleasures ought to be pursued ethically and shouldn’t crowd out or undermine our other goals and aspirations—but they do have an important role to play in our well-being. We also don’t have to dwell eternally in the present moment. While we are better off when we find a larger space in our lives for being present, and while we benefit from growth in our ability to be mindful and discerning regarding our thoughts, emotions, and desires, this still leaves plenty of room in our lives for planning for the future and learning from the past.

I think those who reach a state where they have no self-related attachments or desires provide an inspirational demonstration of a way of being that is possible…. However, even though we celebrate these people, it is perhaps not a prescription from Buddhism of how one ought to be? Without this ought within Zen Buddhism at least, no adjustment seems necessary?

Gassho,
Gareth

Sat today, Lah

[Wabo]

Hmmm... Modern philosophical schools are trying hard to bring Buddhism as part of their ideas. I do not consider Buddhism in any way to be part of pragmatism, or utilitarianism, as for exemple Peter Singer tries to present it

https://petersinger.info/projects

Practicing shikantaza as a method to improve one's life is clearly not what Dogen or Kodo Sawaki was talking about. The concept of tathagatagarbha is clearly not the habit of virtue in Aristotle. I think Aristotle would hang himself if he read even one treatise by Nagarjuna.

Although if we take Ancient Greece, then Buddhism undoubtedly influenced the philosophers of the Hellenistic era. School of Skeptics, Epicureanism, to some extent Stoicism.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyrrhonism

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epicureanism#Ethics

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apatheia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greco-Buddhism

But Western philosophers, it seems, since the time of Schopenhauer have their own vision of Buddhism, which is very different from reality and live tradition

Wabo

[Tai Do]

I agree with Jundo and Wabo. The author seems to have some very specific and non traditional views on both Buddhism and Aristotle.

I studied Aristotle academically and his views on ethics are deeply linked to the idea of superiority of the rational animal (free Athenian men with intelectual inclination to Philosophy as he and Plato understood it).

Buddhist ethics appears to be, since the earliest texts, much more universal than this.

Besides, to me, practice and fulfillment are not separated as a means to an end as the author seems to suggest.

Sorry for the long post.

Gassho,
Mateus
Sat/LAH

[Jinyo]

Sorry, I have no idea about this.

Much wheel spinning between the ears.

Gassho, J

STLah

Oh gosh, this brings back memories of ten years ago when I was trying to get a feel for the teachings of Buddhism.
Searching on line I fell into the pit of intense intellectual debate/ disagreement between the authors of the Existential Buddhism site and
the Speculative non-Buddhism site (hosted by Seth Segall and Glenn Wallis respectively.) Ann Gleig, in her book American Dharma, writes of
the 'aggressive interchanges'.
I find I can easily get drawn into this kind of material because it can be stimulating/interesting but I also found it extremely diverting/distracting and it brought me
no nearer to actual practice.
Straight off - I don't feel that a pragmatic attitude of 'we shall see' equates at all to the Zen state of 'not knowing'.... and so would be the opening statement to yet another interminable discussion
But I try not to go there now - Just Sit! - as inscribed on the back of my Rakusu was the best advice Jundo gave me - which is not to decry intellectual discussion or progress in thought - but I have to agree there is much wheel spinning between the ears and many books will continue to be written by authors who have doctorates and a need to meld together western philosophy and Buddhism.
Sorry for going over!

Jinyo

Sat today

[Shonin Risa Bear]

Though there may be no "there" there in any sense that I can articulate, I feel a rightness as I keep walking.

gassho
ds satlah

[Wabo]

I also thought that if we are to be consistent pragmatists, then we need to abandon zazen, which, according to Kodo Sawaki, "has no results", or turn it into a specific type of mindfulness therapy

Gassho
Wabo
ST/LAH

[Heiso]

Oh gosh, this brings back memories of ten years ago when I was trying to get a feel for the teachings of Buddhism.
Searching on line I fell into the pit of intense intellectual debate/ disagreement between the authors of the Existential Buddhism site and
the Speculative non-Buddhism site (hosted by Seth Segall and Glenn Wallis respectively.) Ann Gleig, in her book American Dharma, writes of
the 'aggressive interchanges'.
I find I can easily get drawn into this kind of material because it can be stimulating/interesting but I also found it extremely diverting/distracting and it brought me
no nearer to actual practice.
Straight off - I don't feel that a pragmatic attitude of 'we shall see' equates at all to the Zen state of 'not knowing'.... and so would be the opening statement to yet another interminable discussion
But I try not to go there now - Just Sit! - as inscribed on the back of my Rakusu was the best advice Jundo gave me - which is not to decry intellectual discussion or progress in thought - but I have to agree there is much wheel spinning between the ears and many books will continue to be written by authors who have doctorates and a need to meld together western philosophy and Buddhism.
Sorry for going over!

Jinyo

Sat today

I think I'm the same in that while I don't have any philosophical training I find it interesting these things interesting to read. Ultimately I think everyone here is right though, these kind of articles usually come back to the author trying to make their favourite Western philosophy fit with Buddhism.

I'd never heard of the author and didn't realise he had form. Ann's book is on my to-read list, I used to chat with her a bit online, although mainly about football!

Gassho,

Heiso

StLah

apologies for running long.

[Dogukan]

I think Aristotle would hang himself if he read even one treatise by Nagarjuna.

Couldn't agree more

Gassho, Doğukan.
sat.

[Jinyo]

I think I'm the same in that while I don't have any philosophical training I find it interesting these things interesting to read. Ultimately I think everyone here is right though, these kind of articles usually come back to the author trying to make their favourite Western philosophy fit with Buddhism.

I'd never heard of the author and didn't realise he had form. Ann's book is on my to-read list, I used to chat with her a bit online, although mainly about football!

Gassho,

Heiso

StLah

apologies for running long.

I got half way through Ann's book but got distracted ( no doubt by other reading!) but I was enjoying it.
Re Buddhism and Western philosophy - a philosopher who was brilliant at synthesizing - and producing a new dialectic - was KeiJi Nishitani. His best known work
'Religion and Nothingness' is worth grappling with - he goes deeply into an understanding of Sunyata as the answer to existential nihilism.

Apologies - that's my three sentences for today !

Gassho, Jinyo

Sat Today