By 1990 it became apparent that no answer to that was possible, even in principle. Once you bite that bullet, the whole cognitivist project collapses.
-
-
Replying to @Meaningness @OortCloudAtlas and
Then you can start to think about alternatives. There’s lots of appealing starting points, but so far none of them have led to a generative research program that can regularly crank out concrete substantive results. No “normal science” yet; it’s “pre-paradigm” in Kuhn’s terms.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Meaningness @OortCloudAtlas and
Somewhat relatedly: I find Culadasa’s appeals to cognitive science and/or neuroscience unconvincing and potentially misleading. Very short on details/footnotes; it seems to be a vague rehash of mainly 1980s-era stuff that has been discredited for decades.
2 replies 0 retweets 7 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness @OortCloudAtlas and
What do you have in mind in particular?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @SpeakingSubject @OortCloudAtlas and
Well… a proper analysis would be a long post and would be interpreted as a nasty attack on a nice person. But, for example, >
5 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Meaningness @OortCloudAtlas and
Is it particularly the case that critique is taken personally in the Buddhist world? I haven’t encountered that concern so prominently until these discussions.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @SpeakingSubject @OortCloudAtlas and
That is my impression. I’ve described mainstream American Buddhism “the religion of niceness.” But it may just be me. I am not as considerate of others’ feelings as I should be.https://vividness.live/2011/06/10/nice-buddhism/ …
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness @OortCloudAtlas and
Seems to me that here more than anywhere critique should be welcomed. After all, people base their whole lives on these practices, as far as I can tell.
2 replies 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @SpeakingSubject @Meaningness and
I think it’s true (that critique is taken as personally offensive/insulting) by Buddhist practitioners/teachers. Most don’t have an academic background. Academia at its best does teach rigorous argument and clear thinking in a way that is difficult to pick up elsewhere. >
2 replies 0 retweets 6 likes -
Replying to @_awbery_ @SpeakingSubject and
Without that training the default is to conflate nuanced critique with personal or whole-system criticism, or a desire to argue for argument’s sake.
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes
These are good points. OTOH, I have a bad tendency to say “fMRI stuff is mostly nonsense” or “Professor X is an idiot and his theory is phenomenally beef-brained” as shorthand when I mean something a bit more nuanced :)
-
-
Replying to @Meaningness @_awbery_ and
David, wanted to pop in and say that I really appreciate how you respond to criticism on your blogs (Vividness is where I've read the most comments). It's like... clear and kind but also firm?
0 replies 0 retweets 7 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.