See also...
Keywords
Authorizations, license
-
Visible by: Everyone -
All rights reserved
-
23 visits
- Keyboard shortcuts:
Jump to top
RSS feed- Latest comments - Subscribe to the comment feeds of this photo
- ipernity © 2007-2024
- Help & Contact
|
Club news
|
About ipernity
|
History |
ipernity Club & Prices |
Guide of good conduct
Donate | Group guidelines | Privacy policy | Terms of use | Statutes | In memoria -
Facebook
Twitter
But other approaches are more promising. I quoted (Robert Wright en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Wright_(journalist) above on who we’re evolved to react in disproportionate ways of what strangers feels towards us. He suggests that Buddhist meditative practices can be a fix for this. More generally, he sees in Buddhism a rebellion against the priorities that natural selection has wired into us. Because of evolution, we are driven by attachments and passions; we worry, obsess, and plan. Our perception of the worlds is colored and clouded by our desires. But meditation kight cure all this we might come to appreciate the worlds as it is, to banish the ego, to rid ourselves of unhealthy attachments.
There is much enthusiasm for this approach these days, in both academic and popular culture, and I agree that it deserves more investigation, including more empirical studies of the effects of meditation. But since nobody else seems to be arguing against, I’ll add a critical remark.
My concern is about our relationships with friends and family. The Buddhist goals of equanimity and nonattachment have great moral appeal. My last book was called ‘Against Empathy,’ and I argued there that emotions such as empathy are too biased and innumerate and parochial to be good moral guides; we are better off, when making important decisions, with a more distanced approach, which I called “rational compassion.” And I drew upon Buddhist ideas to make this argument; in this regard, my book was quite aligned with Buddhist philosophy. ~ Page 211/212
Sign-in to write a comment.