(July 3, 2012 at 7:55 am)Tempus Wrote:(July 3, 2012 at 7:36 am)Brian37 Wrote: Buddhism is merely a social club like all social clubs invented by humans. Newton had religious beliefs too, but his correct science didn't make any social club he belonged to the center of science.
When did I, or Harris, say he his views on X, Y, or Z were the centre of science. You make a lot of good points. Unfortunately, most of them have nothing to do with what I said. The usefulness of some terms (eg, 'spirituality') is debatable, and some are ambiguous at best. However, you weren't objecting to the terminology, you were calling his views in those areas "woo" - you know, pseudoscience, nonsense. Don't refer me to a book because you're too lazy to make your own case.
What? It is nonsense. Buddhism was not around 500,000 years ago, and if the current adherents to it gave up on it today, the ability to make offspring would not change. Buddhism, nor Christianity, nor Hinduism are a physical scientific requirement for evolution to occur.
Buddhism is nothing but a social club, like all the rest, a human invented social club.
You insist on poo pooing me, fine, but when you wont even read a book by a SCIENTIST, not one I wrote, lazy would be more suited for that attitude, than someone like me who actually read it.
You are acting just like the Libertarian atheist I am debating economics on. He pontificates his arguments, then when I bring up economists with PHDs who disagree with him, he does the same thing.
NOW if there truly were something to what Sam said about Buddhism, then it would still be a human action that would need to be studied, the label is not required to study human actions.
Scientific method is not Buddhist based or Christian based or Hindu based. I don't give Sam a pass merely because he wrote books I like.
Stinger isn't a layperson like me and he didn't write that to piss you off or Sam for that matter. Ethics in science isn't protecting a claim, ethics in science is having the shit kicked out of a claim and having it stand the shit kicking.
You like what Sam wrote, so? If it is the greatest thing since sliced bread as you claim, then why isn't it being universally taught like entropy and DNA?
And why do other SCIENTISTS who are NOT laypeople, like me, such as Victor Stinger objecting to what he claims?
THAT BOOK goes into detail as to why Victor rejects his claims. YOU DO NOT have to take my word for it.
