I think they would fully agree! They may just hesitate to take all conclusions of spiritual teachers at face value, before being convinced of the merits of their arguments and interpretations.
Taleb has a lot of great insights too but I think there's a trap there. He's got a great framework for coming up with risk management positions in high uncertainty environments. He's not an endless font of wisdom though. His paleo-conservatism gets in the way a lot.
-
-
I don't see paleoconservativism in him. And I don't see what he's getting in the way of.
-
you don't? his constant obsession on ancient religion, "Mediterranean" identity, genealogy, traditionalism, and basing his ethics on a mixture of classical stoicism and "tough guy" macho bullshit?
-
That's a shallow interpretation. Essentially what he's really describing in these things you mentioned above is the history of multilevel selection. You have to offend some open to rip apart the modern myth of universalism.
-
I think his posturing gets in the way of developing compassion, which is a much better basis of an ethical system than anything Taleb is talking about.
-
Bravado is indistinguishable from compassion in vajrayana. You gotta be macho to take on the suffering of others and dissolve them into emptiness as a Bodhisattva.
-
Avolokiteshvara is androgynous and Guan Yin is feminine
-
I'm not meaning to say that the iconography is necessarily authoritative or that there's any "one true path". just that what you've said is at odds with traditional representations.
End of conversation
New conversation -
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.