My rant on the West

The ‘West’, if we think of it as representing the vanguard of science that brings us facts, not assumptions or fantasies, has brought us little in the way of real or reliable facts when it comes to certain important matters such as health.  (I would like to get into cosmology but that is too long of a subject.  Suffice it to say the Big Bang is bullshit.)  Even today, we don’t really know the cause of cancer or heart disease or why males are far more likely to suffer from autism than females.  There are a lot of assumptions as to why cancer rates have not significantly fallen; the same with autism which is still on the rise.  In addition, the West’s so-called scientific method seems to be more interested in chasing grants than truth.

When it comes to dismissing religion the West is certainly at the vanguard.  Christopher Hitchens’ book, God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything (2007) encapsulates the modern West’s view of religion in general.  Hitchens’ criticism sets the stage for a new religion, one in which the physical sciences and reason dominate, or put more simply, one in which sensory consciousness sits on the ‘chair of Peter’ being the new preserver of unity.

Perish the thought that sensory consciousness is only an attribute of absolute spirit and can be superseded.  In essence, this is what Buddhism actually teaches which should be obvious to anyone who is familiar with the Lankavatara Sutra which, incidentally, early Zen Buddhism was based upon.  With this in mind, the West can mount no real criticism of Buddhism, except to dismiss it completely as teaching mumbo-jumbo.  But this is not a real attack anymore than ignoring Plato can be viewed as a victory over his ideas.  

To really defeat Buddhism one must prove that nirvana is impossible in which the human mind transcends its phenomena and by doing so, returns to itself as pure substance, proving that all things have no real existence as we previously believed.  There is only Mind (cittamâtra).  This, to be sure, is a daunting task for anyone wishing to overthrow Buddhism.  Yes, it is better to ignore Buddhism hoping it goes away.  

If we imagine Christopher Hitchens taking on Buddhism his criticisms would be directed against the culturally derived institutions of Buddhism which have fallen prey to a totalitarian state or a feudal system.  Needless to say, many of his arguments would be justified.  Such, however, is not a criticism of Buddhism itself, that is, the actual words of the Buddha.

Right now the West is the defender of the dogma of Scientism, that is, the omnipotence of the physical sciences, all of which rest completely on sensory consciousness and sensory experience. But even granting the West to be the upholder of reason, reason can know nothing purely of itself, according to Kant. The limit of seonsory experience cannot go beyond the conditioned, either.  The West has, in effect, thrown itself into a conditioned prison of its own making from which it cannot escape since it denies the unconditioned (i.e., absolute substance, nirvana, etc.) and along with this, will not accept that reason is limited to the conditioned.

 

Comments

[Bob Morris]

I'm with JJ, the "West" is a perfect place for Buddhism to reinvent itself

[Java Junkie]

the 'east' (india/china/SE Asia) are very rapidly becoming HIGHLY materialistic and its spiritualistic attribute is almost dead

whereas the 'west' (USA) is ever the more leaning VERY much so in general towards metaphysical, paranormal, and ontological inquiry, having already passed thru the lens of pure unbridled materialism to the extreme.

In so concluding this fact, your anti-west rant contains more cowshyat than a slaughterhouse full of heffers.

[Jure]

(Kant thought we cannot penetrate into the Thing-in-itself. Hegel, after him, identified the "Thing-in-itself" (the Thing outside of out thoughts) with (pure) Mind or Self, thus, doing something close to the Advaita "tat tvam asi": the Thing-in-itself is the Mind/Self. - Interestingly enough, Hegel called the absolute substance "Geist" - cf. your last post. - And Hegel, too, was against scientism. Continental philosophers were always defenders of Gnosis against the Anglo-American materialism, scientism. We shouldn't forget "Western" really means just the dominance of Anglo-Americanism, the English spirit of practicality, averageness, common sense. - The more spiritual Germans always felt an antipathy to the Anglo-American spirit. But in these days the Anglo-Saxon poison is spread all over the Earth, the English pragmatism, the lowest form of philosophy, is completely dominant. Dawkins & Hitchens operate on such a low level of thinking that really the only audience for that kind of literature are high school kids rebelling against their Catholic parents. -)