Which side is western Buddhism on?

While neuroscience seems to be going back in time to the age of Newton with its theory that consciousness comes, ultimately, from matter which has somehow managed to turn into brains, modern physics, in the opposite direction, has already declared that matter comes from spirit (Max Planck: Dieser Geist ist der Urgrund aller Materie)!  But which side does Western Buddhism seem to be on?  Is it matter or spirit?

A wild guess, I think it is moving to the side of matter in which mind or consciousness is produced in some way by the brain.  But is this what the Buddha taught?  No, not at all; nor should Western Buddhism be moving in this direction.  If anything Buddhism, Yoga, Vedanta and most of Hinduism should be categorized as “spiritual science” which rests on the notion that there is, fundamentally, no matter.  The ultimate basis of things is, instead, spirit.

But how can the West resolve its dichotomy between neuroscience and physics, especially, QM (quantum mechanics)?  It doesn’t seem as easy as it should be.  A physics resting on consciousness or spirit, is not easily understood by the masses.  It is much more convincing to first see colorful images from a f MRI of the brain; then be told that this is where consciousness comes from.    

This dichotomy has not been absent from Buddhism insofar as Buddhism is turning into a kind of Asian psychology with it own special therapy which soon attracts those who have fallen prey to neuroscience’s advertising.  The first sign of this is best recognized when a Westerner declares his personal skepticism of karma and rebirth; who is also fascinated with the notion of no self and emptiness which he believes to be  nothingness.

The harder path is away from materialism which holds that consciousness is a product of the brain which is not, in the final analysis, a scientific theory but, instead, a philosophical one which explores conceptual possibilities.  The world of spirit, on the other hand, is what we are now as first-persons; persons who see colors and smell roses; who have thoughts, ideas, hunches and mental representations; who can even realize their own true nature from which are composed all the just named phenomena and much more.

Comments

[M]

I watched a debate between a Christian and an Atheist before on Youtube, and of course I had to side with the Christian; the Atheist was too stupid to understand that since materialism is a worldview, it is presuppositional, and therefore cannot be proven empirically. He kept saying "we have measurements"! As if that mattered. As if there doesn't have to be a mind interpreting those measurements. Really I find that it is among atheists that you find the most philosophically uneducated, spiritual base people, and they're arrogant and think that their "measurements" disprove spiritual truth, and bully people of faith.

I like your idea of calling it "spiritual science". We should contrast it with the term "materialist religion".