jeeprs
 
Reply Thu 10 Dec, 2009 12:46 am
In an excellent article called 'The Neural Buddhists'published back in May 2008 in the New York Times, columnist David Brooks identified what he saw as an emerging paradigm in consciousness studies and neural philosophizing. This he called 'neural buddhism'.

Some background. He starts with a reference to a fascinating essay by Tom Wolfe, called 'Sorry, but your Soul Just Died'Andrew Newbergscientists who practise Buddhist meditation.

Brooks concludes his article with the observation "We're in the middle of a scientific revolution. It's going to have big cultural effects".

And I can feel them already.
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 1,244 • Replies: 4
No top replies

 
Reconstructo
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Dec, 2009 07:18 pm
@jeeprs,
delete delete delete
Jebediah
 
  1  
Reply Wed 16 Dec, 2009 09:52 pm
@Reconstructo,
Quote:
As I write this, the Dalai Lama is star attraction at a conference in Sydney on 'the science of happiness'. Work is underway at research centres all over the world on 'the effect of mindfulness on the brain' and validation of the positive effects from meditation. And there's a flood of books being published on related themes, often by scientists who practise Buddhist meditation.


I think the jury is still out on the science. Last time I looked around, I came across an overview study that reviewed something like 600 studies done and found that most were poorly designed. Results seem to be inconclusive, although I'm sure they will do more.
0 Replies
 
jeeprs
 
  1  
Reply Wed 16 Dec, 2009 09:58 pm
@jeeprs,
Interesting, isn't it, how difficult it is to 'scientifically validate' a practise that has been found by millions of people for thousands of years to be beneficial, isn't it. I don't suppose it says anything about a cultural prejudice against anything that sounds 'subjective' or possibly 'spiritual', does it?
Jebediah
 
  1  
Reply Wed 16 Dec, 2009 11:50 pm
@jeeprs,
jeeprs;111980 wrote:
Interesting, isn't it, how difficult it is to 'scientifically validate' a practise that has been found by millions of people for thousands of years to be beneficial, isn't it. I don't suppose it says anything about a cultural prejudice against anything that sounds 'subjective' or possibly 'spiritual', does it?


I think it says more about our desire to validate our beliefs with science, even when it isn't necessary.

Interesting stuff though.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
  1. Forums
  2. » The Neural Buddhists
Copyright © 2018 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 11/14/2018 at 04:20:41