Return to CreateDebate.comphilosophy • Join this debate community

Philosophy


Debate Info

39
20
Generally Agree Generally Disagree
Debate Score:59
Arguments:41
Total Votes:59
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Generally Agree (27)
 
 Generally Disagree (13)

Debate Creator

Bradf0rd(1428) pic



Your thoughts on the Four Noble Truths and Noble Eightfold Path of Buddhism...

 Four Noble Truths

  1. Life as we know it ultimately is or leads to suffering/uneasiness in one way or another.
  2. Suffering is caused by craving or attachments to worldly pleasures of all kinds. This is often expressed as a deluded clinging to a certain sense of existence, to selfhood, or to the things or phenomena that we consider the cause of happiness or unhappiness.
  3. Suffering ends when craving ends, when one is freed from desire. This is achieved by eliminating all delusion, thereby reaching a liberated state of Enlightenment.
  4. Reaching this liberated state is achieved by following the path laid out by *"a teacher"* (the Buddha).

 Noble Eightfold Path

  1. Viewing reality as it is, not just as it appears to be.
  2. Intention of renunciation, freedom and harmlessness.
  3. Speaking in a truthful and non hurtful way.
  4. Acting in a non harmful way.
  5. A non harmful livelihood.
  6. Making an effort to improve.
  7. Awareness to see things for what they are with clear consciousness, being aware of the present reality within oneself, without any craving or aversion.
  8. Correct meditation or concentration, explained as the first 4.

Generally Agree

Side Score: 39
VS.

Generally Disagree

Side Score: 20
3 points

I always liked Buddhism because they approach is from a position of 1. not trying to force or guilt others into it, instead they simply live their lives. 2. they stay out of politics, which is kind of an extension of the whole live and let live credo.

As for the 4 noble truths, they're awsome. A "religion" that actual is based on inherent facts of human life and nature is fantastic, as opposed to the obvious and inherent fallacy of every other religion.

However, outside of these, and what everyone knows about Buddhism, I have no idea how their deity system works, and I am generally opposed to any deity anyway.

That said though, again you don't have to believe in Krsna, Budha, etc. in order to really get something out of Buddhism.

Buddhism = calm, interspective, peaceful

Christianity, Judaism, Muslim, Mormon, Protestant, Catholic, etc. = inner turmoil, self-hate through self guilt, fear of death, fear of afterlife, pressure to conform

Yeah, if I ever decide I need to make believe in a religion, Buddhism is definitely the route to take.

Side: Generally Agree
4 points

Buddhism isn't a religion, it's a philosophy. People often call it a religion, and some aspects of Buddhism deal a lot with the idea of "spirits", and beings that live forever as stars, etc. But Buddhism, especially Zen Buddhism deals with pragmatic ideas, like these, specifically.

Even though those beliefs are held by some Buddhists, they don't force it upon other people like religion does, it's just a theory to them. Not TRUTH, like spirits and demons and God is to the typical American Christian. You can't be saved by following parts of the Bible that don't have anything to do with God or Jesus. If you don't accept them as real and your father, etc. you won't even be considered.

One of the main ideas in Buddhism is that there are many paths to the summit, meaning that there are different ways to reach enlightenment. This is why "making an effort to improve" is so important. So long as you working your way to the summit, you're doing good.

I think you're right though, Religion is unhealthy and if you need structure in your life turn to Buddhism for your help.

Side: Generally Agree
1 point

Buddhism isn't a religion, it's a philosophy.

Maybe some, or most of it. But Lamic Buddhism (that which follows the Dalai Lama) is most definitely a religion. Look up its similarities to the Catholic church.

Side: Generally Agree
1 point

I see. That makes sense.

But surely there are some branches that are religious?

My only interaction was with one of those monks at an airport during a layover, really cool guy, but the book he gave me was literally full of deities which I assumed meant it was religious on some level.

Side: Generally Agree
1 point

on the answer of a deity, they are actually more agnostic. They just believe that "it is what it is". They believe in Karma and Darma, though, which I don't believe in (since it insights that we're being watched or something).

As for the other religions... most people who are very religious (that i meet at least) are very happy... you should probably stop hanging out with such depressed people.

Side: Generally Agree
3 points

They believe in Karma and Darma, though, which I don't believe in (since it insights that we're being watched or something).

I think they look at Dharma more as a natural force than an entity.

most people who are very religious (that i meet at least) are very happy...

I'm just nitpicking, but how do you know? I live in San Antonio, so nearly everyone's Catholic. The highly religious ones here give off very happy vibes, but knowing some of them shows that they're generally the exact opposite. I think the rules of religion are inherently suppressive of human nature, so the ones who are truly happy might be the aberrant ones.

This is an agnostic speaking out his ass, mind you. But does your experience match mine?

Side: Generally Agree
2 points

The best thing about the Truths and Path is that you don't need to be a Buddhist to believe in them. They are generally good rules for living, without overstepping the boundaries of what a religion should do. Also, Buddhism is one of the only religions whose policy is to defer to science in event of conflict. That's badass :]

EDIT: Also like the Samsaric realms. Very elucidating to contemplate which realm you might be in.

Side: Generally Agree

I was strictly Buddhist for a while, but I eventually drifted away from the 'dogma' view to a kind of guidance and truthful view. It's a good way to live, even without being Buddhist. I'm a loose interpreter.

Side: Generally Agree

Yeah..., I generally agree...., but then I crave a beer and...., well...., you know ;)

Side: Generally Agree
1 point

Let's first break down what Buddhist really is. There is not such thing as Buddhist or non-Buddhist. You are called a Buddhist because you follow Buddha's teaching. In reality, Buddhism means nothing other than practice on morals that Buddha had rediscovered from such diluted understanding of what moral is in the world at that time. Generally, morals as we understand got completely diluted roughly every 5000 years. Now, why do I agree with him? As he asked many to test and try his teachings yourselves, you have to take it with your personal experience. I have tried to evaluate every pros and cons of every situation that had ever conceived with human being and found that middle path was just as good as it gets. All 4 noble truths are valid. Every single existing entity has its own good and bad side to its own and others, mostly evenly. Every single action that we take have pros and cons with it. Good or bad is subjected to what you want and what others want. All and all, what we all want is just another freedom of desire, that's if we can attain. If not, then we all are suffering. As what Buddha teaches us that we should be free from desire. Right then and there, then we all can attain happiness.

Side: Generally Agree
4 points

Buddhism is a philosophy, or at least that's the closest Western equivalent, but often its tenets are held as dogma. For example, my friend's Buddhist mother told her that if she violated such rules, angry spirits would haunt her.

I do not generally disagree to the principles of Buddhism, and actually abide by most of them, albeit independently. However, no tenants of any Eastern religion should be followed distinctively, rigorously, and most especially, uncritically. If Buddhism is a philosophy, then we can modify it. A Zen Master, Lin Chi, is attributed to saying, "If you meet the Buddha, kill the Buddha." In one's own particular path to enlightenment, whether it be spiritual, or intellectual, sometimes you have to break the rules, and "kill" your patriarchs.

Side: Generally Disagree
2 points

I disagree with Noble Truth #3. True suffering comes from physical or emotional pain. A broken arm, loneliness or enslavement are all potential sources of suffering. This suffering can never be eliminated because it is an integral part of what makes us human.

I agree with the Eightfold Path except for the part about not causing harm. It is human nature to compete and competition by definition must cause some degree of harm to the losers.

Side: Generally Disagree
Mahollinder(895) Disputed
2 points

I disagree with Noble Truth #3. True suffering comes from physical or emotional pain.

"Pain" is not synonymous with suffering. The word "suffering" is used to highlight a metaphysical point of the self-degenerating nature of yearning or "desire".

It is human nature to compete and competition by definition must cause some degree of harm to the losers.

Speaking of "a nature" is a philosophically easy thing to do - and permits us to talk about behavior axiomatically without having to question the verity of our claims. But whether or not it allows us to talk about things as they are is another question altogether. People do compete; it doesn't mean that it is in our nature to compete any more than smoking cigarettes is in our nature just because people do it. Behavior is a contingency, resulting from the development of an overarching vocabulary. So is the notion of "competition" a part of this greater vocabulary. But that's it.

The fact that you nor anyone else has to compete and can consciously choose not to compete suggests that on the one hand it is a contingent behavior and on the other hand can be abstained from such that you are not doing harm. But, even the latter isn't necessarily a part of the consideration of the suggestion to do no harm or that competition does cause harm.

Side: Generally Agree
jessald(1915) Disputed
4 points

Wikipedia says suffering is synonymous with pain.

Metaphysical? I'm no philosopher, but that word sounds suspiciously close to "supernatural", which in turn sounds suspiciously close to "bullshit."

Evolution has given us a genetic predisposition to compete. This disposition is manifested through basic emotions such as anger and greed. This is what I mean when I say something is in our nature. Evolution doesn't predispose us toward as specific an activity as smoking cigarettes, so that comparison is invalid.

True, we can choose not to harm others, but this usually results in exploitation by those who are willing to harm others.

Competition does not itself cause harm, but it frequently results in harm being done, both through the conflict itself (e.g. war) and through the resultant deprivation for the loser.

Side: Generally Disagree
atypican(4874) Disputed
1 point

"competition by definition must cause some degree of harm to the losers."

That is not true. I compete as often as I can. I gain more from losses than I do wins.

Side: Generally Agree
KrittMasta(19) Disputed
1 point

Winning does create harm at some level to people that loses. It doesn't matter in what world or what field, competition creates this duality to project happiness for one side and sadness to another side. Having the majority of people to win like democracy is not a good thing for us all. Imagine if 99% of people agrees for the government to break down your house to make highway and you will leave with nothing, would you think that's a win situation? Competition sure creates the environment that enforce the idea of survival for the fittest. But maybe, it's the fittest because we turn this place into hell hole. For example, if you can compete and get away with playing around with your numbers for the companies' stocks so you can profit the most, is that really a good thing? "Win" and "Lose" are 2 words that create such hatred concept. Though playing video games will have winners and losers, but I think people loving playing because they enjoy the process itself, not the result. I believe it's not that fun to compete with bunch of other companies when you job is on the line is it?

Side: Generally Agree
KrittMasta(19) Disputed
1 point

Suffering only happens when you feel that you're not getting what you want and you're not happy with it. To let go and accept of what happens and solve the problem or deal with it is the first step to eliminate suffering. The moment that you still think that's suffering is the moment that you're not accepting that fact that you're at that state. This is why the Buddha teaches us to be mindful of what we do. To carefully execute every action with fully thought out consequences. Let say if you're lonely, it's your own mind that makes you lonely. Let say if you get enslaved, means that many rights were taken away, I feel enslaved now with taxes. So what is the fine line of what is and what is not freedom anyway. You are as free as what you desire and fulfilled it. However, Buddha taught that it's impossible to fulfill all your desires and the only way to be free is to be free from your desire NOT freedom of your desires. Competition is an illusion. We all do it to fulfill our desire, no matter what the goal or target of that competition is.

Side: Generally Agree
KrittMasta(19) Disputed
1 point

"A broken arm, loneliness or enslavement are all potential sources of suffering", these are all attachment to something that we are coupled with. However, if you practice hard enough, these pain will merely be something that you're used to. Your state of mind is not at the level to understand that yet. On top of that, Buddha himself says that the greatest gift is the gift of great health. True that in certain situation, you will have pain that cannot be fixed. However, there is a reason where Buddha thought to keep yourself away from those situation. Also, part of being in that situation is your karma. It works like money, the more of a good you have, the easier to get away with practice, the more deth that you owe, the harder it gets to train yourself. This is the reason where we weren't all born with equal status.

Side: Generally Agree
1 point

Buddhist philosophy is worthy of respect. However like all philosophical/religious constructs it is due criticism.

Here are my thoughts (starting with the four noble? truths?)

#1.Suffering and uneasiness can be beneficial. I don't think the avoidance of suffering is a goal that should be at the forefront of "enlightened" philosophy.

#2. I am not convinced that craving or attachment is the sole or even main cause of suffering. Certainly it is a component of many problems. I would say wisdom is in large measure the ability to let go AND hold on when appropriate.

#3. Right!? Don't desire anything and you will be freed from suffering. Enlightened Buddhists shouldn't swim under water then because while trying to conquer their desire for a breath of air they may drown. LOL

I have desires, areas of discontent, ie hopes. I am motivated to action by them.

My curiosity, my favored form of discontent which I cherish, would "enlightenment" quench? I hope not.

In my opinion they (desires) like everything else can get out of hand if left un-moderated or obsessed upon.

I think a better target for elimination (instead of desire) would be obsessiveness in general. But then there are even times where obsessing could be beneficial.

#4. I would say... Don't seek a teacher....ask yourself solemnly realistically and regularly...What do I want to make of my life? AKA What are my priorities

Now to the noble eightfold path (Buddhists have somewhat of an attachment to these no?)

#1. Understand that you CAN be deceived is how I would put it. Trust but don't take it too far you/they/it may fail - This would fall under the humility category

I am happy if the statement provokes deeper examination of things beyond initial appearances but I'm irritated by the wording in that it implies that we can completely avoid delusion. I think we must necessarily battle it.

#2. Isn't intention much the same as desire? If you intend to renounce as much as you can I sure wouldn't leave any of my valuables under your care. And intending freedom and harmlessness? I agree with those

#3. #4. #5. #6. Well I agree with that but that's not at all unique to Buddhism

#7. Blah Blah Blah

#8. I would not give a recipe for meditation and expect the recipe to work for anyone and everyone. The shoe that fits one pinches another.

Can you believe that Buddhism is one of my favorites? LOL

Side: Generally Disagree
KrittMasta(19) Disputed
1 point

You are confusing yourself not knowing the differences between Lacking of desire and contentment. Many people made this mistake. If I fall in the middle of the ocean, then I'll do whatever I can to get out of it. Some would panic, some would be afraid to die. What we taught is to do your best to resolve the problem, but not to fear nor give up. We can peacefully progress our effort even if the end result of this life time does not please you that much. Your number 4 is exactly what Buddha ask you to do. You don't just take his word for it. You have to look at many scenario and try to understand them. Evaluate them with no bias judgement and find what it is. If you seek no teacher at all then you would only base all the knowledge from yourself. This way, progressing would be absolutely few to none since everyone is not willing to share information with everyone else. Last but not least, meditation works with everyone that is ready. Without having right state of mind from the first place, you would not even look at meditation. Buddha taught progression, not 1 time jackpot lottery. To shave off your desire is like losing fat. Very fat people lose fat faster than thinner people. Same thing like human desire, the further you go deeper into letting it go, the more free you are and the harder for you to do so. Really try it 1 stage at a time before you comment it. Again, just sitting down and act as if you are meditating is nothing more than just a waste of time if you have no concentrate to free your mind from all desires.

Side: Generally Agree
atypican(4874) Disputed
1 point

You are confusing yourself not knowing the differences between Lacking of desire and contentment. Many people made this mistake.

Ok. Help me out then. Explain the difference.

Side: Generally Disagree
1 point

The Eightfold Path to me seems generally a good way to go about improving oneself but the Four Noble Truths are neither noble, nor true.

1. That life involves suffering is true, but is this a Noble place to begin? What of joy? Love?

2. Suffering is caused by more things in this world than attachment. Physical pain, a form of suffering, happens largely without regard for a person's attachment to a thing, concept or person.

3. The notion that one can rid oneself of suffering, even ignoring the issue of physical pain, is preposterous.

4. As one cannot oneself rid of suffering, the path may lead only to an enlightened state of being, not full-blown nirvana.

Side: Generally Disagree
KrittMasta(19) Disputed
1 point

1. I looked up in dictionary.com and found that the word noble means distinguish, not just good, comfort and beauty. It says nothing about that but only just how great and outed rank it is.

2. Your mind attaches to your body, whether if it's metaphysical or deep thoughts. Notice that sometimes if you pay attention more to where it hurts, you'll feel more pain. Notice that when you want something you can't get, you feel unpleasant.

3. That's because you never tried at least reaching the level ignoring the cold temperature by the stillness of your mind. I have. It worked.

4. Again, suffering causes by attachment or desire. The get rid of them is to let go and be content. Notice, content is the keyword, not get rid of desires. Content means whatever it is, it's ok, you'll make the best out of it. That's what the Buddha teaches and most people are confused and don't get that. Contentment is the key.

Side: Generally Agree
KrittMasta(19) Disputed
1 point

All 4 comments that you made above just shows that you really don't understand his teachings. You only take 4 truths and expanded in your head without digging further on what each of them meant. You need to read and learn more about Buddhism before making those 4 opposed comments.

Side: Generally Agree