Quoted By:
I am a Buddhist and I dedicate some considerable time sometimes to study the Dhamma. Mostly in line of the Theravada school, though initially I was brought into it because of the Tibetan school, which is the one which has the most presence in the West. No, I am not a "hippy fag/ soyboy". In fact I am more conservative than most people that I know.
The reason why is that it is the most sound conception of the world that I have found so far. The Dhamma taught thousands of years ago many things that science in the West didn't re-discover up until a few centuries ago, and keeps being confirmed further every day.
The main difference between the Buddha Dhamma and science is that science parts from a materialist basis, focusing only on evidence that can be perceived with our five [arbitrary] senses and discarding everything else as hallucinatory. As if it didn't "exist". Materialist science in this way becomes a self fulfilling prophecy: "I am right because all the evidence that contradicts me is hallucinatory or because I cannot replicate it with my perception apparatus which I wrongly assume it works exactly the same as everyone else's".
The way to realize why scientism is wrong is to acknowledge the fact that it is based on the belief that such a thing as the "objective observer" exists.
If the average folk here were acquainted with the Abhidhamma they would know what I mean. It is like a grand scientific theory that explains our reality on a basis that is the opposite of materialism, mind over matter, and not the opposite.
Basic universal principles like kamma [skt:karma] (ie: causality, action-reaction, etc) are described to give a framework within one can make sense of the really REALLY big picture of the world. And that's not to mention the quality of the moral teachings and techniques of psychological transformation (""meditation"") that he gave us and that are preserved in the Pali Canon.
This topic simply is too broad to explain in one post. [CHAR LIMIT]
