Follow-up to “Buddhism Is Wrong”

People have asked me to write more on the topic of our thoughts.

My article dissecting a claim that all thoughts are illusions, quickly became a big hit. Many people want to delve into the topics of who we are and how we perceive the world. They are very important topics and important to talk about honestly, without cliches or gimmicks. I enjoy sharing what other philosophers have said on these topics, building on good ideas and dissecting bad ones.

I promise I will write more on these topics but the next two weeks I am busy with the beginning of term at my university. What I can do for now is give you a list of articles in which I have previously touched on these topics.

I’ve discussed Buddhist philosophy twice before, discussing what the concept of emptiness means (BTW, the boxes are links to other articles that you can click on to read),

and what interdependence means.

We are in the world and we are both subject and object in it. What that means is that we are embedded in the world, we are affected by it, but we effect the world. We do not have divine powers, but neither are we helpless in the face of external forces. These are no small matters.

Philosopher Christine Korsgaard says in her wonderful book, Self-Constitution: Agency, Identity, and Integrity, that we are in a continual process of constituting who we are through our experiences, thoughts, and actions. I cannot stress this enough: our experiences change us and our thoughts about our experiences change us. We are not helpless spectators in our lives.

Korsgaard’s ideas are an extension of philosopher Edmund Husserl’s realization that all of our experiences of the world and of ourselves changes our consciousness.

We all have distinct experiences and our own personal reactions to them. The reality that we constitute ourselves is why we are all individuals. Understanding this reality helps us understand people.

I have always loved Kierkegaard’s thoughts, though he was a difficult individual. Still, his philosophy is well worth learning about.

As is philosophy’s other great individual, Nietzsche.

Yes, we are all individuals. Why deny that? Why deny our thoughts, our emotions, our self? Max Scheler didn’t.

Of course, we cannot let our emotions control us, but the extreme view that we should stamp out or run away from our emotions is self-destructive. Edith Stein offered a glimpse into a better way of understanding our emotional states.

I wrote this next piece on the subject of knowledge, specifically what can we know. I pointed to the conclusion a number of philosophers have reached. All we have are beliefs.

We are our beliefs, we are our thoughts, especially our judgments on our thoughts. This is true even if you deny this reality, because in rejecting your own thoughts and your own power, you are negatively affecting yourself. Your beliefs affect you, but of course, not infinitely, as I discussed here.

Finally, I leave you for now with one of the best philosophers on what it means to be a perceiving individual, Henri Bergson.

Read, think, discuss, enjoy.

P.S.- My article on the history of Western philosophy’s denial of individuals: