At last night’s Socrates Café session in Montclair, we talked about government. The kick-off question regarded China – why did China embrace Communism in the 20th century, given all the cruelties that resulted in Maoist times? Why hadn’t the Chinese people embraced a governing system which more fully integrated the values of the Confucian, Taoist and Buddhist heritage? Why couldn’t there have been a Buddhist governing system in China, a kinder and gentler kind of governing system?

Interesting questions. The group (about 6 people that night) rallied to the intellectual challenge as usual. In the initial volleys, we came to an agreement that Buddhism doesn’t lend itself to governing a billion or so people. Buddhism, at least as we westerners imagine it, is more a philosophy for individual existence than for collective regulation. Perhaps there have been instances of Buddhist government — one member pointed out that the Dali Lama dynasty ruled Tibet until the Chinese Communists (them again!) invaded in 1950. In fact, there are Buddhist monks today who still have an axe to grind with the present Lama (who set up protests in places where he gives talks). Ah, politics.

(Read this article about political Buddhism and civil war in Sri Lanka; it can get just as ugly under Buddhism as under any other -ism.)

We then pondered the notion that Communism, in its pure state  »  continue reading …

Last week the local Socrates Café group decided to tackle the question “what is wisdom”. There was a good turnout that night (about 12 people, including myself), and a lively discussion ensued. Just about everyone had a different take on the idea of “wisdom” and how it differed from facts, knowledge, art, scientific beliefs, technique, etc. Some people said it was all about love and relationships (the long-term versions of those things, anyway). Others cited the great spiritual avatars, including Jesus and the Buddha. I interjected that wisdom in the greater sense would even encompass economics and politics (e.g., Warren Buffet and Abraham Lincoln).

In the end, we were all “chasing a butterfly” with an intellectual net, and coming up empty. Unlike something like a lump of coal or an apple, which succumb quite readily to the taxonomic guidelines provided by science, wisdom is something that refuses to be nailed down. I cited two examples. First, I brought back memories of Robert Pirsig and his quest for the notion of “quality” in his first book, “Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance”. I proposed that Pirsig’s high-level concept of “quality” and our sought-after notion of “wisdom” were about the same thing. And that we both had about the same success; Pirsig went on in his second book (“Lila”) to derive a formal specification for quality, i.e.his “MOQ” or “metaphysics of quality”.

Lila was not nearly as successful as Zen and the Art, and Pirsig  »  continue reading …

I was at the local Socrates Cafe meeting in Montclair a few evenings ago (yes, after 4 years I’m back with them). That night, the group seemed to lack its usual enthusiasm for coming up with a multitude of topics for discussion, and then weaning them down through a balloting process. So I threw out an idea that had been rattling around in my head, about the nature of morality and ethical behavior in humans. I.e., is it more social or innate? Does morality originate within each of us (or many of us, or at least some of us) and then somehow get co-opted by the human collective (as laws, ethical notions, shared moral values)? Or does it somehow emerge from the group, and is then assumed by the individual through osmosis (at least in the better of us)? Given the lack of inspiration on anyone else’s part that night, my idea was quickly accepted.

Well, this turned out to be a good topic, as it inspired about 90 minutes of intense and wide-ranging discussion. I can’t say that I left the room with a conclusion; a lot of the discussion frankly veered off from the intended subject. But that’s OK, Socrates Cafe is all the more charming for its lack of academic discipline. What did interest me was the reaction that one of the men in the group had. This fellow, who I respect greatly, is in his late 50’s or early 60’s, and is employed as a bio scientist. I would describe him as “logical positivist” in outlook. He appears to believe that science is the best answer to humankind’s dilemma. He feels that notions of God or gods or spirits or inner spiritualities are hardly necessary. Science explains more and more of our reality, in a very definitive and useful fashion. There’s hardly anything left to the realm of mystery anymore.

So in response to my question,  »  continue reading …

I went to the local Socrates Cafe meeting the other night, for an interesting discussion about God. The topic for the evening, suggested by a young medical school student from the Middle East, was whether God exists. Yes, the young student made it clear that he comes from the Islamic faith tradition. However, the science and high-tech environment of western medicine was giving him some . . . well, perhaps not doubts about God, but some second thoughts anyway. He said that he was reading some books by evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins, who of course goes totally nuclear against any notion of a transcendent creator and sustainer in the universe. So, the young fellow with the beard had come to the local half-assed western philosophers, to see what they had to say about it.

This was quite interesting and special. I myself have lived a sheltered life, relative to the Islamic world. I really haven’t known too many Muslims; and the few that I have known weren’t / aren’t very up-front about it. They are mostly just average Americans, trying to get by; their religious practice and heritage just happens to be Islam. This young doctor-to-be wasn’t really all that different. However, he certainly did care about God, and was open-minded enough to reach out beyond the counsels of the local mosque or imam to talk about “it” (i.e., the question of God’s existence).

The group was rather small, only myself, the moderator,  »  continue reading …