THANK HUMANS THERE ARE HUMANS, BECAUSE...

You seem to agree with what the Buddha had to say. He does not teach that one should rely on authority when contemplating his teachings.

igm wrote:

How do you know that, "Buddhists are pretentious guessers"? Give at least one example.

Frank Apisa wrote:

Igm.

That's not an example... you'll need to give an example of igm making a pretentious guess... and saying it is Buddhism.. or... just an example of a pretentious guess not being attributed to Buddhism (I don't believe that will count as an example though).

...I consider Buddhists to be, for the most part, pretentious guessers.

Frank Apisa wrote:

...I consider Buddhists to be, for the most part, pretentious guessers.

What exactly do you find pretentious in that old OP of mine?

pre·ten·tious
Adjective
Attempting to impress by affecting greater importance, talent, culture, etc., than is actually possessed.
Synonyms
showy


What in that old OP is a guess and why would a guess be wrong?

and to suppose that others have to prove there are selves or a self.

Quote:

and to suppose that others have to prove there are selves or a self.

You believe that others, read, Frank Apisa, don't have to provide proof for anything. When you get to the end of any of your "arguments", which comes with amazing rapidity for a "top of the class renowned editorial writer", you immediately fall back on your lame, "well [name], you have your opinion and I have mine".

Frank Apisa wrote:

I consider Buddhism to be nothing more than an appeal to authority...and I consider Buddhists to be, for the most part, pretentious guessers.

I disagree.

... I consider Buddhists to be, for the most part, pretentious guessers.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

2. How do you know that, "Buddhists are pretentious guessers"? Give at least one example.

Igm.

It is pretentious to suppose that there is no "self" just because the Buddha taught it...and to suppose that others have to prove there are selves or a self.

igm wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:

I consider Buddhism to be nothing more than an appeal to authority...and I consider Buddhists to be, for the most part, pretentious guessers.

I disagree.

Frank Apisa wrote:

... I consider Buddhists to be, for the most part, pretentious guessers.

Quote:

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

2. How do you know that, "Buddhists are pretentious guessers"? Give at least one example.

Frank Apisa wrote:

Igm.

Frank Apisa wrote:

It is pretentious to suppose that there is no "self" just because the Buddha taught it...and to suppose that others have to prove there are selves or a self.

The Buddha couldn't find a self and when I looked for a self I couldn't find one... so I don't have an absence of a belief in a self because the Buddha taught it but because I couldn't find one nor could I find a reason to believe there was one.

The absence of a belief in a self because of the reasons I have given is not what you are accusing me of and is therefore not pretentious, even under your definition of 'pretentious'.

This is trivial anyway... it doesn't matter to me whether you believe I'm one thing or another. The fact that you agree that Buddhism is not just an appeal to authority is more important as you previously said the opposite and I've changed your mind with a quote from the Buddha showing that he was against appeals to authority... as I say you misunderstand Buddhism and so are not qualified to critique it in any depth, which is perfectly understandable, but please try to resist making the attempt.

...it is amazing Frank how those who often speak against materialism are the most materialistic of us all...they ask us where is the "I" in hope we can point to something immediately n sensibly tangible, otherwise it doesn't exist...I tell you, this forsaken world is full of irony...