- This topic has 2 replies, 2 voices, and was last updated 3 years ago by
.
-
Posts
-
-
So, I really, really love this website. I do. I’ve been reading through it for days. I can even make myself believe in the wider cosmology of the Buddha Dhamma if I stretch my imagination beyond what I know to be possible.
But often I wonder why it’s so important for contemporary (and even ancient) religious apologetics to try and create a foundation for their faith within the grounds of current science. The best thing I have seen the authors of this website say about how the Buddha Dhamma fits into current science is to say that science has yet to (and maybe even can’t) discover the truth about the cosmos beyond what we’re able to see with our own eyes and measure with our technological instruments.
For example, say I’m asked the question, “Why don’t we remember our past lives?” Since some people do, and we’ve provided that as evidence for past lives being real, we now need to explain why only a few people have these memories. It’s simple. Because the spiritual component of a human being is the only thing that passes from one life to the next, then it must store memory. But because of the material limitations of the human brain, without some spiritual mechanism to allow the brain to access this information, the brain can only access memory stored in the brain. That is, what we might call short-term memory (if we take into account that the samsara is eternally long).
This makes sense to me, and it seems to make sense scientifically, too. Materialist science does not know about spiritual things, and so of course it cannot explain why the brain cannot access what scientists cannot measure. This does not make scientists silly or foolish. It just means that they work within one realm (i.e., the physical and the empirical) and Buddha Dhamma in another (the greater spiritual and subjective cosmos).
Anyway, I wrote all this because I find it particularly egregious when laypeople say, “It’s only a theory,” as if that was a gotcha for science. It really isn’t. Science has two names for “things that we are currently 99.99% sure that we know about the world.” The two names are laws and theories. Laws are scientific facts that contain mathematical proofs. E=m(c)^2 is the basis for a scientific law. Theories are scientific facts that explain how or why things happen. The theory of special relativity tells us how to interpret that law (i.e., not as an equivalence equation, but as a demonstration of the fact that everything is energy, and matter is an illusory function of spacetime on various forms of energy).
So please stop saying, “It’s only a theory.” Please. I want to be on your side, but every time you talk about science and you say, “It’s only a theory,” what you’re really saying is, “I don’t understand anything that I’m talking about.” To those of us who do understand science, and who are also trying to understand Buddha Dhamma, “It’s only a theory,” is a red flag to run away fast.
EDIT: To clarify, both scientific laws and scientific theories are subject to change if disproven by an exception that “breaks the rules.” That’s the wonderful thing about science. If, one day, we develop instruments that can measure things from spiritual realms or allow us to empirically observe past life memories, then science will quickly abandon some laws and theories and return to the drawing board for more highly advanced math to explain the new data. This paradigm shift would be awesome, and I do hope we live to see it. But if we don’t, there’s always the next life. Or the next… (At least for those of us who don’t become arahants in this one. ;) )
-
-
Hello CeruleanArc! Good observations.
First, let me point out the main difference between the foundational aspects of Buddha Dhamma and modern science.
– Modern science is based on physics, and physics is based on material phenomena. Mental aspects are EXPECTED TO arise out of physical phenomena. Therefore, anything outside of that framework, the scientists label “metaphysics.”
– Buddha Dhamma is based on the mind. Physical things also arise out of mental phenomena. This aspect ALSO comes out of Paticca Samuppada. I have not presented this analysis yet. Understanding that requires a good understanding of Paticca Samuppada (and Abhidhamma.)With that in mind, we can look at your first observation: “Why don’t we remember our past lives?” Since some people do, and we’ve provided that as evidence for past lives being real, we now need to explain why only a few people have these memories. It’s simple. Because the spiritual component of a human being is the only thing that passes from one life to the next, then it must store memory. But because of the material limitations of the human brain, without some spiritual mechanism to allow the brain to access this information, the brain can only access memory stored in the brain..”
– In the above framework of modern science, there is nothing outside of the brain that can retain memories. So, when the brain dies, ALL memories are lost. It is not possible to even think about past lives, because there is no basis for future life to arise DUE TO the current life!
– This is why such phenomena as memories of past lives are not even seriously considered by scientists. They put all such phenomena into the category of “metaphysics” and don’t even try to address them. For them, that would be an impossibility based on the assumptions built into modern science as I outlined above.Now, to the second part of your comment: “Anyway, I wrote all this because I find it particularly egregious when laypeople say, “It’s only a theory,” as if that was a gotcha for science. It really isn’t. Science has two names for “things that we are currently 99.99% sure that we know about the world.” The two names are laws and theories…”
– The difference between scientific LAWS and THEORIES is not clear-cut.
– Even those “laws” tend to be watered down to “theories” with new discoveries of deeper aspects. For example, we had “Newton’s laws of gravitation” for a long while, where gravity was treated as a force. But with Einstein’s theory of general relativity, gravity is a feature of “spacetime.”
– On the other hand, the laws of Buddha Dhamma are UNIVERSAL. Those laws (based on Paticca Samuppada) are effective whether a Buddha discovers them or not. A Buddha only discovers those nature’s laws. Those are not the laws of the Buddha!Finally, you write: “EDIT: To clarify, both scientific laws and scientific theories are subject to change if disproven by an exception that “breaks the rules.” That’s the wonderful thing about science. .”
– Yes. Within the framework of modern science that is true. But science can make only so much progress because the framework is LIMITED TO material phenomena. There is no way to accommodate mental phenomena.
– For example, there are several scientific THEORIES on how consciousness may arise from inert matter. But none has been successful. It is an impossible task!
-
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.