Live data from Hacker News

Zen Buddhism and Alan Watts

aeon.co

81–90 of 154 posts

Re: Zen Buddhism and Alan Watts

#81
post #55

If you're interested in understanding zen but don't know where to start, "The Book" by Alan Watts is a fantastic SHORT read that will give you a powerful framework from which to build your meditative practice, and hopefully structure a happier, more fulfilling lifestyle. To appeal to the western mind, here are some tangible benefits I have achieved(And you can too) through meditation and zen: * More appreciation for…

I would add the free, short, book "Mindfulness in Plain English". It changed my life. Here is the PDF: http://www.urbandharma.org/pdf2/Mindfulness%20in%20Plain%20E...

This is a much better book than anything Watts wrote.

Ironically, at least among Western Mahayana teachers it's very hard to find such a coherent and pragmatic framework as the one described in "Mindfulness in Plain English."

Re: Zen Buddhism and Alan Watts

#82
post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would add the free, short, book "Mindfulness in Plain English". It changed my life. Here is the PDF: http://www.urbandharma.org/pdf2/Mindfulness%20in%20Plain%20E...

What exactly is mindfulness in simple terms? How is different from concentration?

Mindfulness is simply keeping something in mind. In concentration practice, mindfulness is remembering to maintain attention on the object of concentration. Concentration is maintaining a particular state of mind.

"Mindfulness Defined" http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/mindfu...

"The Agendas of Mindfulness" http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/agenda...

"Right Mindfulness" http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/rightm...

Re: Zen Buddhism and Alan Watts

#83
post #3

From the article: "The world is not a logically consistent one, but a profoundly paradoxical one. Again, this is illustrated in science, which shows that two things can be one at the same time — light, for instance, acts as both a particle and a wave." I don't understand the need for constantly interspersing an otherwise flowing article with references to science. It feels like the author thinks that the authenticity…

  > I don't understand the need for constantly interspersing
  > an otherwise flowing article with references to science.
It's just that that was what sold spirituality back in the day. Even though it seems tired and forced now, it was a very easy path to popularity.

Re: Zen Buddhism and Alan Watts

#84
post #51

>Truth is not to be found by picking everything to pieces like a spoilt child What an idiotic attitude. Empiricism ("picking everything to pieces") is one of the few ways to find truth. Attempting to discredit it by comparing it to a "childish" activity speaks to the lack of arguments against it. All of the Zen/Buddhist blog posts I've seen on HN have been intellectually lazy and/or dishonest, relying on pseudo-scien…

That phrase sounds very much as an attack against a straw man. Science does not require that things are cut up, and does not dismiss the interconnectivity of things. It mostly mindfully ignores all the things it can't deal with, so they won't disturb while it deals with the things it can deal.

Anyway, I got the impression the attack was against analytical thinking, and not empiricism. The people that do that kind of attack are completely oblivious from the amount of systemic thinking science does today, they are fighting ideas that are almost a century out of fashion.

Re: Zen Buddhism and Alan Watts

#85
I can imagine that if you are very worried about something and you learn to achieve a state of not worrying you have a useful capability. No worry be happy. Perhaps the simple fact of been able to focus in something trivial and transform it in the center of our universe is a great feat.

Objects are merely objects. The soul and meaning, the creative act is what gives essence and significance to life. I have never meditated but perhaps is something related to this feeling. Just my 2 cents.

Re: Zen Buddhism and Alan Watts

#87
post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I re-read the article. Nowhere is it clear that there is even an attempt at invalidating science. He really does seem to be trying to use science to shore up his ideas. Another excerpt: "This is the basis of Zen itself — that all life and existence is based on a kind of dynamic emptiness (a view now supported by modern science, which sees phenomena at a subatomic level popping in and out of existence in a ‘quantum fr…

I cringed every time he referenced Physics. It's something I've seen other philosophers do in an attempt to legitimize their beliefs by implying that they codify the natural order. In truth, dynamic emptiness has absolutely nothing to do with quantum froth, which could be described using any objects and still make sense. This concept of some unseen physical manifestation of the model arises because of the terms a the…

Truth is not to be found by picking everything to pieces like a spoilt child. -from this very article

Re: Zen Buddhism and Alan Watts

#88
post #55

If you're interested in understanding zen but don't know where to start, "The Book" by Alan Watts is a fantastic SHORT read that will give you a powerful framework from which to build your meditative practice, and hopefully structure a happier, more fulfilling lifestyle. To appeal to the western mind, here are some tangible benefits I have achieved(And you can too) through meditation and zen: * More appreciation for…

I would add the free, short, book "Mindfulness in Plain English". It changed my life. Here is the PDF: http://www.urbandharma.org/pdf2/Mindfulness%20in%20Plain%20E...

Beg to differ, but I couldn't get through "Mindfulness ...". To me, it was going on and on without getting anywhere.

Re: Zen Buddhism and Alan Watts

#89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you are going to lay criticism against Watts' understanding of Zen, you should make specific points.

Yes his criticism just boils down to appeal to authority.

Exactly. Practitioners of Zen Buddhism believe that enlightenment is transmitted from one who is enlightened to one who is not. With only very rare exceptions, it requires an authority to transmit. People who think they're practicing Zen without a trained instructor are just deluding themselves.

Re: Zen Buddhism and Alan Watts

#90
post #21
post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The text promotes keeping an open mind and to be humble. Often, The exception to a common rule are dismissed as minor and without effect which allows us to keep our certainties. The light example in this context, is well choosen : it is fundamental, factual and therefore cannot be dismissed easily. The scientific aspect is secondary to those advantages.

> The light example in this context, is well choosen : it is fundamental, factual and therefore cannot be dismissed easily. I'm curious, have you actually studied quantum mechanics? Because the impression I get from people who have is that the "light is a particle and a wave" thing is pretty much bullshit. (Which isn't the same thing as false , but more like "not actually a thing that you tell people if you want them…

The (thought) experiment in quantum mechanics that demonstrates that light is neither a (classical) particle or a wave is the double slit experiment, careful analysis of the experiment demonstrates that the observation is neither consistent with the behavior of a classical particle or classical (say water) wave. Instead the state of the system (in the Copenhagen interpretation) is described by a probability amplitude ψ (if it is a "pure" state) or more generally by a "density matrix" ρ and there is a semi-rigorous prescription of how to translate classical notions like position, momentum and energy into "observables" of the system. Then the expectation value for an observable A of the system in a particular state ρ, is given by Trace(ρA). If you have taken a course in linear algebra then this is the same trace you have met there and there are simple quantum mechanical systems that can be described by two by two matrices (spin of electron going through a sequence of inhomogenous magnetic fields). Once you have introduced probability amplitudes you can reason about them as if they were classical particles within certain limits you find such reasoning in the wikipedia article on the double slit experiment for example.

The crucial idea behind all of this is "quantization", physicists have worked out a way of obtaining quantum systems from classical system and in particular a mapping of familiar observables to quantum mechanical observables.

One insight of Feynman was that this can be done via the so Lagrangian formulation of classical physics. It postulates that the future state of a system can be predicted from the current state of the system by assigning to each possible state a so called Lagrange density. Given two possible states of the system and a path in state space between them, integrating the Lagrange density along that path gives an "action" for that possibility, the theory postulates that the path with the minimal action is chosen. With appropriate choices of Lagrange density this correctly predicts the behavior of all classical mechanical systems, and also Maxwells equations. Feynman instead postulated that to obtain the probability amplitude for a system to transition between two states one had to sum over all possible paths in the classical state space weighted with exp(iS/2πh) where the action S is the result of integrating the Lagrangian density along that path and h is Planck's constant. Then by analogy with a result of 19th century analysis (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Method_of_steepest_descent) the sum will be dominated by contributions close to the critical (classical) path, so that for S much larger than h (which is true for classical mechanics) we recover the original Lagrangian formulation.

So to summarize Physicists use the intuition gained from classical physical systems to study quantum mechanical systems, but not in the naive way of "light is both a particle and wave", which at best is misleading. What constitutes a quantum system is largely a question of length or energy scales. The method of path integral quantization suggests a very concrete way of how to quantize a classical physical system.

Post reply on HN