Re: Soul and Self

From: Robin Faichney (robin@reborntechnology.co.uk)
Date: Sat Feb 10 2001 - 14:34:49 GMT

  • Next message: Bill Spight: "Re: Blue Peter. Was: Sources of novelty"

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id OAA04953 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Sat, 10 Feb 2001 14:42:34 GMT
    Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 14:34:49 +0000
    To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    Subject: Re: Soul and Self
    Message-ID: <20010210143449.B3020@reborntechnology.co.uk>
    References: <20010206202309.AAA27700@camailp.harvard.edu@[128.103.125.215]>
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
    Content-Disposition: inline
    User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.12i
    In-Reply-To: <20010206202309.AAA27700@camailp.harvard.edu@[128.103.125.215]>; from wade_smith@harvard.edu on Tue, Feb 06, 2001 at 03:24:13PM -0500
    From: Robin Faichney <robin@reborntechnology.co.uk>
    Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
    Precedence: bulk
    Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    

    On Tue, Feb 06, 2001 at 03:24:13PM -0500, Wade T.Smith wrote:
    > On 02/06/01 09:09, Robin Faichney said this-
    >
    > >The argument
    > >from the skandas is used only with eternalists, and most Buddhists --
    > >and certainly the Buddha -- would understand that it demonstrates the
    > >unreality only of a certain concept of the self. The most profound
    > >Buddhist teachings assert that the self neither exists, nor does
    > >not exist. I'd be grateful if you'd stop slandering Buddhism and the
    > >Buddha this way. After all, I think you have reason to know better!! ;-)
    >
    > Gack. Do all buddhists speak for their titular founder?

    I cannot speak for all buddhists.

    > 'the self neither exists, nor does not exist'

    What it means is that it is sometimes useful to consider the self
    to exist, and other times more useful to consider that it does not.
    Only physical things can have an unambiguous ontological status.
    (And even that can be doubted, with a little imagination.)

    > Triple gack.
    >
    > Slander sounds too good for it.

    With your willingness to view others as stupid -- justifying a lazy
    reluctance to investigate what they really mean by what they say --
    you merely perpetuate your own ignorance.

    -- 
    Robin Faichney
    robin@reborntechnology.co.uk
    

    =============================================================== This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing) see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Feb 10 2001 - 14:47:19 GMT