Navigation

The Rational Response Squad is a group of atheist activists who impact society by changing the way we view god belief. This site is a haven for those who are pushing back against the norm, and a place for believers of gods to have their beliefs exposed as false should they want to try their hand at confronting us.

Buy any item on AMAZON, and we'll use the small commission to help improve critical thinking. Buy a Laptop -- Apple

Brian Sapient on Twitter

Brian Sapient

Celebrity Atheists

List of atheist sites

Ask the atheist

Antiques and Art

Atheists' view on Buddhism

Posted on: December 27, 2012 - 10:06pm

holda2nd

Posts: 11

Joined: 2012-12-26

Offline

Atheists' view on Buddhism

Hi,

It's common to find atheists disagree with theism (Abrahammic religions.) I wonder what atheists think about Buddhism. Buddhism is not theism, nor atheism (it doesn't fit the definition of atheism on this website.) Care to share your thoughts?

Posted on: January 3, 2013 - 11:10pm #51

Atheistextremist

Posts: 5134

Joined: 2009-09-17

Offline

Very

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

harleysportster wrote:
I don't buy into any of the koans that I read ( i.e. what is the sound of one hand clapping),
a spanking

fucken funny.

"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck

Posted on: January 3, 2013 - 11:17pm #52

Atheistextremist

Posts: 5134

Joined: 2009-09-17

Offline

It creates other

digitalbeachbum wrote:

If this Universe is an expansion of an event, then Universes must be created elsewhere. If this is so, then there is a source to the creation of the Universes. Therefore there is an timeless number of Universes. Which leaves me to observe that this Universe, down to the atoms, was created previously, and will be created again and endless number of times.

challenges for physicists but it's not beyond impossible that rather than a big bang, the universe's observed current expansion event does not relate to a singularity but is an expansion event caused by something as yet unknown.

"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck

Posted on: January 3, 2013 - 11:26pm #53

Atheistextremist

Posts: 5134

Joined: 2009-09-17

Offline

Given it does not apply to

digitalbeachbum wrote:

3 - "I think therefore I am" is a falsehood.

simpler life forms, the ancestors of which form the indubitable 100-billion-strong cellular colony of me, I've always thought this comment showed Descartes' was blind to his anthropocentric bias.

"I think therefore I am self aware" is what Rene should have said. Material reality is obviously not dependent on human awareness for its existence.

"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck

Posted on: January 4, 2013 - 2:51am #54

danatemporary

Posts: 1951

Joined: 2011-01-12

Offline

Ideal juncture for this YouTube Video (View Video):

Atheistextremist wrote:

re :: Ideal juncture for this YouTube Video :
{Atheistextremist quoted}
digitalbeachbum wrote:
3 - "I think therefore I am" is a falsehood.

simpler life forms, the ancestors of which form the indubitable 100-billion-strong cellular colony of me, I've always thought this comment showed Descartes' was blind to his anthropocentric bias.
"I think therefore I am self aware" is what Rene should have said. Material reality is obviously not dependent on human awareness for its existence.

YouTube ..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qj_i7YqDwJA

p.s. -- I differ from Old Seer in a lot of ways!!

Posted on: January 4, 2013 - 7:11am #55

A_Nony_Mouse

Posts: 2880

Joined: 2008-04-23

Offline

iwbiek wrote:

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:
iwbiek wrote:
and these are of course the basics of the buddhist doctrine of pratityasamutpada and indian cosmology in general. attractive hypotheses, i admit, but i stop short of saying, "it is so."
Seems to me the only useful view of cosmology is the one that can be tested and verified. I therefore would recommend Stephen Hawking over any long dead guy with to many syllables in his name.
pratityasamutpada is not a person. it's a sanskrit term usually translated as something like "dependent origination."
and cosmologies can only be tested and verified by those living billions of years. and imo, no cosmology is useful. what use could cosmology have, except for those who want to say, "ha ha, i was right"?

I suggest that it is not necessary to live billions of years if one can observe billions of years into the past as astronomers do every night.

Why? These things always seem to pay off sooner or later. Agreed cosmology appears to be firmly in the later camp.

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml

Posted on: January 4, 2013 - 7:19am #56

A_Nony_Mouse

Posts: 2880

Joined: 2008-04-23

Offline

Atheistextremist wrote:

digitalbeachbum wrote:
3 - "I think therefore I am" is a falsehood.
simpler life forms, the ancestors of which form the indubitable 100-billion-strong cellular colony of me, I've always thought this comment showed Descartes' was blind to his anthropocentric bias.
"I think therefore I am self aware" is what Rene should have said. Material reality is obviously not dependent on human awareness for its existence.

Actually it was a two part argument. Can I imagine myself without a body? Yes. Can I imagine myself without a mind? No. Therefore I am the mind.

Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.

www.ussliberty.org

www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html

www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml

Posted on: January 4, 2013 - 9:19am #57

digitalbeachbum

Posts: 4895

Joined: 2007-10-15

Offline

danatemporary

danatemporary wrote:

Atheistextremist wrote:
re :: Ideal juncture for this YouTube Video :
{Atheistextremist quoted}
digitalbeachbum wrote:
3 - "I think therefore I am" is a falsehood.

simpler life forms, the ancestors of which form the indubitable 100-billion-strong cellular colony of me, I've always thought this comment showed Descartes' was blind to his anthropocentric bias.
"I think therefore I am self aware" is what Rene should have said. Material reality is obviously not dependent on human awareness for its existence.

YouTube ..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qj_i7YqDwJA
p.s. -- I differ from Old Seer in a lot of ways!!

Very cool videos. I've seen them previously.

Thank you for posting them.

Posted on: January 4, 2013 - 9:21am #58

digitalbeachbum

Posts: 4895

Joined: 2007-10-15

Offline

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:Actually

A_Nony_Mouse wrote:

Actually it was a two part argument. Can I imagine myself without a body? Yes. Can I imagine myself without a mind? No. Therefore I am the mind.

True

Posted on: January 22, 2013 - 2:56am #59

Vastet

Posts: 13254

Joined: 2006-12-25

Offline

Yoda was a buddhist.

Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.