Buddhism and Science Lecture Series

[Balder]

On the Michel Bitbol thread, I posted a link to his contribution to the Buddhism and Science lecture series.  Since several of the talks look interesting and worthwhile to check out, I decided to start a thread for the whole lecture series.

 

Buddhism and Science

 

Summary:  "This seminal series of videos was recorded during a 2-day colloquium on Buddhism and Science at Oxford University involving leading scientists, philosophers, Buddhist scholars and Buddhist practitioners in deep debate on the perceived convergence of modern science (relativity theory, quantum mechanics, systems biology, cognitive psychology, clinical science) with some of the traditional ideas of Buddhism (anti-metaphysical stance, interdependence, emptiness, no-self). The colloquium was organised by Vesna Wallace (Numata Professor of Buddhist Studies at Oxford), Denis Noble (Emeritus Professor of Physiology) and Alan Wallace (Director of the Santa Barbara Institute for Consciousness Studies). In addition to the introduction, there are 11 30-minute recordings. The debates are lively and critical."

[Edward theurj Berge]

I just started to watch Bitbol's presentation and will have to view it in pieces as time permits. But in the beginning the projected text says in comparing Buddhism and QM it is not seeing them as metaphysical views but rather as critiques of metaphysical views of essentialism. Still, they are metaphysical views, are they not? If by that we mean what is the ontic? Even the emptiness of emptiness doctrine, which claims it is not a doctrine due to it not being fixed, is still a doctrine on an absolute principal. More commentary as I view more.

[Edward theurj Berge]

Hmm, at 3:45 "the reason for that is not that there is no ultimate truth but that...it cannot be captured by a metaphysical picture expressed in words or symbols." We've spent quite a bit of time de/reconstructing that one. And Nagarjuna spent quite a few words on it as well.