I've observed a trend among modern Buddhists (and more so among scholars) to be positivist in their desire for an orginal understanding of the Buddha's teaching. By positivism, I mean basically what the Vienna Circle called "the verification principle" (I believe Mach coined the term; Bertrand Russell wants it be "logical positivism" but that, IMO, takes it too far).
For example, on the one hand, some scholars question the western hermeneutical idea of a canon as applied to the early Buddhist texts as appropriate; and on the other hand, Buddhists like Thannissaro have referred to the Pali Canon as a "living tradition," implying the idea of a canon as a "standard of measurement" is not very applicable (although he uses the term Canon a lot).
So, what is the place of positivism in modern Buddhism? Is it completely inappropriate, or more of a take with a grain of salt situation? IOW, is "originalism" valid?
DanieLion
The Place of Positivism
Re: The Place of Positivism
Hi DanieLion,
This sounds like an interesting idea, but in order for us to understand what you are getting at could you explain a little more in what sense the "desire for an orginal understanding of the Buddha's teaching" is positivist?
Mike
This sounds like an interesting idea, but in order for us to understand what you are getting at could you explain a little more in what sense the "desire for an orginal understanding of the Buddha's teaching" is positivist?
Mike
- ancientbuddhism
- Posts: 887
- Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2011 12:53 pm
- Location: Cyberia
Re: The Place of Positivism
He must be very careful not to use the term tenet-system as that would be going way too far!danieLion wrote:Buddhists like Thannissaro have referred to the Pali Canon as a "living tradition," implying the idea of a canon as a "standard of measurement" is not very applicable (although he uses the term Canon a lot).
Can-on (noun)
1 a : a regulation or dogma decreed by a church council b : a provision of canon law
[Middle English, from Anglo-French, from Late Latin, from Latin, model] : the most solemn and unvarying part of the Mass including the consecration of the bread and wine…
3. Middle English, from Late Latin, from Latin, standard] a : an authoritative list of books accepted as Holy Scripture b : the authentic works of a writer c : a sanctioned or accepted group or body of related works *the canon of great literature*
4 a : an accepted principle or rule b : a criterion or standard of judgment c : a body of principles, rules, standards, or norms ...
“I say, beware of all enterprises that require new clothes, and not rather a new wearer of clothes.” – Henry David Thoreau, Walden, 1854
Secure your own mask before assisting others. – NORTHWEST AIRLINES (Pre-Flight Instruction)
A Handful of Leaves
Secure your own mask before assisting others. – NORTHWEST AIRLINES (Pre-Flight Instruction)
A Handful of Leaves
Re: The Place of Positivism
Sure, Mike,mikenz66 wrote:Hi DanieLion,
This sounds like an interesting idea, but in order for us to understand what you are getting at could you explain a little more in what sense the "desire for an orginal understanding of the Buddha's teaching" is positivist?
Mike
andPositivism asserts that the only authentic knowledge is that which is based on sense experience and positive verification.
source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positivism" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
from my dictionary (Webster's Lexicon).
See also "Verificationism" at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verificationism" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.logical positivism: a 20th-c. form of philosophical thought (*POSITIVISM) which stems from empiricism as modified by the modern non-Aristotelian system of logic. Its salient aim has been to create a comprehensive philosophy of science and, through emphasizing the fundamentally linguistic nature of philosophical problems, to destroy traditional metaphysics. It's chief exponent has been Ludwig Wittgenstein."
One might say bhavana is a process of personal and experiential verification of the Buddha's teaching.
Gombrich's use of Popper's notion of un-intended consequences to the history of Buddhism is an example of a positivist approach the the teachings, frequently emphasizing the idea that the Buddha taught about "processes not things." And Thanissaro has actually used this terminology in print.
Does that help?
D
Re: The Place of Positivism
Hi ancientbuddhism,ancientbuddhism wrote:He must be very careful not to use the term tenet-system as that would be going way too far!danieLion wrote:Buddhists like Thannissaro have referred to the Pali Canon as a "living tradition," implying the idea of a canon as a "standard of measurement" is not very applicable (although he uses the term Canon a lot).
Can-on (noun)
1 a : a regulation or dogma decreed by a church council b : a provision of canon law
[Middle English, from Anglo-French, from Late Latin, from Latin, model] : the most solemn and unvarying part of the Mass including the consecration of the bread and wine…
3. Middle English, from Late Latin, from Latin, standard] a : an authoritative list of books accepted as Holy Scripture b : the authentic works of a writer c : a sanctioned or accepted group or body of related works *the canon of great literature*
4 a : an accepted principle or rule b : a criterion or standard of judgment c : a body of principles, rules, standards, or norms ...
What is the source of these definitions? Which reminds me, insistence on sources is a positivist attitude/endeavor.
D
Re: The Place of Positivism
Interesting idea you have there, danieLion, but you have fallen into the trap of using a lot of big words without defining them properly. By that I don't mean dictionary definitions, I'm referring to your understanding of the terms, and why they are of interest. I'm afraid the general reader will be left adrift, wondering what you meant, and unwilling to do the research necessary to properly answer the question.
Perhaps you can rephrase your question in a manner more user-friendly?
Perhaps you can rephrase your question in a manner more user-friendly?
Re: The Place of Positivism
I know. It's ironic, though, isn't it? Because of "the fundamentally linguistic nature of philosophical problems"?alan wrote:Interesting idea you have there, danieLion, but you have fallen into the trap of using a lot of big words without defining them properly. By that I don't mean dictionary definitions, I'm referring to your understanding of the terms, and why they are of interest. I'm afraid the general reader will be left adrift, wondering what you meant, and unwilling to do the research necessary to properly answer the question.
Perhaps you can rephrase your question in a manner more user-friendly?
Let's see.
Positivism to me is wanting to know what the hell is going on. It's a desire for "truth" or seeing things as they really are even if you don't like what you find. It's being as honest with yourself and your world as you can. But it also means discarding or setting aside anything irrelevant to this. The Vienna Circle strikes me as group expressions of this desire. Positivism is now out of style in academia, but I see a strong current of positivism/verificationism in the Buddha's attitude toward reality. However, modern philosophers have mainly used positivism to dismiss anything "spiritual", including Buddhism, Gombrich/Popper being a "secular" exception and Thanissaro appearing as a positivist (look at how deals with "faith"/conviction in Wings.)
Here at Dhammawheel, many posters seem to be after the original teachings, which I can sympathize with. But I can also sympathize with those who point out that the nature historical inquiry is necessarily speculative.
I hope that helps. This is a difficult "problem" and I'm kind of thinking out loud on this one.
D
Re: The Place of Positivism
No, it is not ironic. Where do you see irony here?
If "positivism" is understood as wanting to know what is really going on, and a desire for truth, then count me as a positivist. But so what?
If you have a question, ask it. And make it clear. No one cares about your opinion of the Vienna Circle.
If "positivism" is understood as wanting to know what is really going on, and a desire for truth, then count me as a positivist. But so what?
If you have a question, ask it. And make it clear. No one cares about your opinion of the Vienna Circle.
Re: The Place of Positivism
Interesting idea. I'm not sure what you mean by "reality" but I'll take it to be "The All". Since the contents of "The All" is fabricated things and since they are mutually referential then the idea of "verification" seems a bit strained in that there is no independent or fixed reference by which to verify....the blind leading the blind.....I see a strong current of positivism/verificationism in the Buddha's attitude toward reality
So now if we take a definition for positivism you provided (that definition being:"Positivism asserts that the only authentic knowledge is that which is based on sense experience and positive verification.") and we strip off the verification part we end up with sense expereince being the only basis for knowledge which at first seems consistent with the Buddha's teachings but I think the positivist take on this sort of disintegrates when the Buddhistic idea that perception of knowledge is just another experience......saying that knowledge is based on experience is just saying that expereince is based on experience......I guess.....
chownah
P.S. I think your original post was too vague and open ended as to what to discuss which is why I took just one of your sentences to reply to. I guess you shouldn't think aloud when your mind is too full!
chownah
- ancientbuddhism
- Posts: 887
- Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2011 12:53 pm
- Location: Cyberia
Re: The Place of Positivism
One example could be that unicorn of Buddhist studies called ‘Early Buddhism’, led by such thinkers as Venerables Ñāṇavira Thera, Ñāṇananda, Analayo, Sujato et al.
I use a Webesters dictionary In the puter.danieLion wrote:What is the source of these definitions? Which reminds me, insistence on sources is a positivist attitude/endeavor.
“I say, beware of all enterprises that require new clothes, and not rather a new wearer of clothes.” – Henry David Thoreau, Walden, 1854
Secure your own mask before assisting others. – NORTHWEST AIRLINES (Pre-Flight Instruction)
A Handful of Leaves
Secure your own mask before assisting others. – NORTHWEST AIRLINES (Pre-Flight Instruction)
A Handful of Leaves
Re: The Place of Positivism
Gee Alan, why don't you tell me how you really feel?alan wrote:No, it is not ironic. Where do you see irony here?
If "positivism" is understood as wanting to know what is really going on, and a desire for truth, then count me as a positivist. But so what?
If you have a question, ask it. And make it clear. No one cares about your opinion of the Vienna Circle.
How can you be so confident you know what others care about?
I haven't stated my opinion about the Vienna Circle.
I all ready asked the question.
This was the result of someone requesting language clarification, which is where the irony lies. Positivism challenges the traditional roles of language in determining what the hell is going on.
Take the Canon for example. A positivist would ask if experience verifies the teachings in their written form.
Non-Buddhist scholars like Gombrich and Hamilton use positivism to deconstructive or revisionist ends, but Buddhist teachers seem to use it to actually change their lives by building conviction through verification.
Daniel
Re: The Place of Positivism
Do Buddhists have dogmas, or churches, or creeds? Do they have a concept comparable to "holiness" and "scriptures"?ancientbuddhism wrote:He must be very careful not to use the term tenet-system as that would be going way too far!danieLion wrote:Buddhists like Thannissaro have referred to the Pali Canon as a "living tradition," implying the idea of a canon as a "standard of measurement" is not very applicable (although he uses the term Canon a lot).
Can-on (noun)
1 a : a regulation or dogma decreed by a church council b : a provision of canon law
[Middle English, from Anglo-French, from Late Latin, from Latin, model] : the most solemn and unvarying part of the Mass including the consecration of the bread and wine…
3. Middle English, from Late Latin, from Latin, standard] a : an authoritative list of books accepted as Holy Scripture b : the authentic works of a writer c : a sanctioned or accepted group or body of related works *the canon of great literature*
4 a : an accepted principle or rule b : a criterion or standard of judgment c : a body of principles, rules, standards, or norms ...
If some texts in the Canon are corrupt, we can't call it an accepted body or group of principles, rules, standards, judgments or norms
D
Re: The Place of Positivism
ancientbuddhism wrote:danieLion wrote:Buddhists like Thannissaro have referred to the Pali Canon as a "living tradition," implying the idea of a canon as a "standard of measurement" is not very applicable (although he uses the term Canon a lot).
Why? Or are you joking over my dense skull?ancientbuddhism wrote:He must be very careful not to use the term tenet-system as that would be going way too far!
D
Re: The Place of Positivism
I provided it. I don't necessarily agree with it. It's hard to define an intellectual trend.chownah wrote:So now if we take a definition for positivism you provided (that definition being:"Positivism asserts that the only authentic knowledge is that which is based on sense experience and positive verification.")
Epistemic empiricism claims that all knowledge comes from experience, which the Buddha did not teach, for as you saychownah wrote:and we strip off the verification part we end up with sense expereince being the only basis for knowledge
However, you threw me off with the word "perception"? The Buddha taught a form of knowledge independent of sense experience and perception, right?chownah wrote:which at first seems consistent with the Buddha's teachings but I think the positivist take on this sort of disintegrates when the Buddhistic idea that perception of knowledge is just another experience....
D
Re: The Place of Positivism
[quote="ancientbuddhism"]One example could be that unicorn of Buddhist studies called ‘Early Buddhism’, led by such thinkers as Venerables Ñāṇavira Thera, Ñāṇananda, Analayo, Sujato et al.
Exactly! Where does "early" Buddhism end and "late" Buddhism begin? I see the phrase "early Buddhism" etc... all the time, but rarely a discussion of the time-line. The implication is the earlier the better, and non-Buddhist scholars seem use the phrase with an eye to educate us mere practitioners and relieve us of our superstitions.
I want the early, EARLY Buddhism! None of this contaminated religiosity.
It reminds me of the lady who would only read the words in her Bible in red because she wanted the undiluted Jesus. The flip side, however, is that you need some idea of the terrain before you set out exploring. This is where a trustworthy, reliable, map comes in. You know it doesn't exactly match the territory but you trust your conviction that the people who made it understood it enough to make a map of it for others.
But mere textual analysis is like map making without having been there. Or, is there more validity to non-Buddhist scholarship than the my analogy suggest?
D
Exactly! Where does "early" Buddhism end and "late" Buddhism begin? I see the phrase "early Buddhism" etc... all the time, but rarely a discussion of the time-line. The implication is the earlier the better, and non-Buddhist scholars seem use the phrase with an eye to educate us mere practitioners and relieve us of our superstitions.
I want the early, EARLY Buddhism! None of this contaminated religiosity.
It reminds me of the lady who would only read the words in her Bible in red because she wanted the undiluted Jesus. The flip side, however, is that you need some idea of the terrain before you set out exploring. This is where a trustworthy, reliable, map comes in. You know it doesn't exactly match the territory but you trust your conviction that the people who made it understood it enough to make a map of it for others.
But mere textual analysis is like map making without having been there. Or, is there more validity to non-Buddhist scholarship than the my analogy suggest?
D