From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!uwm.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!rbrown Tue Mar 24 09:57:25 EST 1992
Article 4607 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!uwm.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!rbrown
>From: rbrown@ncsa.uiuc.edu (Rich Brown Cray Operations)
Subject: Re: Buddhism
Message-ID: <1992Mar19.174509.12697@ncsa.uiuc.edu>
Originator: rbrown@mars.ncsa.uiuc.edu
Keywords: athiesm, debugging, thirst, arrogance arising from ignorance
Sender: rbrown@ncsa.uiuc.edu (Rich Brown Cray Operations)
Organization: Nat'l Ctr for Supercomp App (NCSA) @ University of Illinois
References: <1992Mar12.010517.23690@a.cs.okstate.edu> <1992Mar14.015607.1320@norton.com> <1992Mar18.004449.9503@aio.jsc.nasa.gov>
Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1992 17:44:55 GMT
Lines: 103

In article <1992Mar18.004449.9503@aio.jsc.nasa.gov> dlyndes@deltahp.jsc.nasa.gov writes:
>Before I wade into this dialog between Mr. Yoder and Mr. Onstott,  it
>may help Mr. Yoder appreciate the rationality of buddhism a bit
>if we explain a bit of it.  

I hope that all who have followed this dialog will come to realize that reason
and Buddhism are not mutually exclusive.  I was sorry to have missed most of
it; I caught only this reply and one post by each of Mr. Yoder and Mr. Onstott,
so I can't take sides.  I was glad however to see David Lyndes' restatement of
the _only_ things taught by the historical Buddha (four noble truths):

>for the record they are:
>
>1) There is a cause of suffering
>2) Desire is the cause of suffering.  Variations becomming more common include:
>   Attachment to desire is the occasion of suffering, and
>   Craving is the cause of suffering.
>3) There is a way to end suffering.
>4) The way to end suffering is to follow the eight-fold path.
>
>Does the eight-fold path say anything about empty minds?  Nope.  The
>eight-fold path reads more like the boy-scout oath.  Do buddhists in practice
>pursue empty mind?  Some do, some do not.  How about Japanese Zen buddhists,

I re-emphasize that there is no conflict between the philosophy of Buddhism and
rationality.  The fact is that the teachings of the historical Buddha clearly
embraced _knowledge_ and declared _belief_ to be irrelevent.  Although sub-
sequent mutations of Buddhism may have included any number of bogus interpreta-
tions of the fundamental tenets of the philosophy, what is relevant here is
is that it is entirely possible to follow both reason and a Buddhist path.

Try substituting 'clear' for 'empty' in the phrase 'empty mind'.  Is it not
true that it is easier for a reasoning being to reason, when the mind is clear?
The point is that, to arrive at an apprehesion of "the truth", one's mind must
not be fettered by distractions.  Suppose you wish to solve some mathematical
problem that requires logic:  Is it easier to do when the mind is cluttered by
worries and doubts, or when the mind is free and confident, i.e, 'clear'?

One common misconception about Buddhism (which I saw reproduced here) is that
there is such a thing as 'Buddhist Dogma'.  While there may be some Buddhists
who are dogmatic, it remains that the original teachings did not require any
belief, but instead encouraged "knowing for oneself and seeing for oneself".
(Knowing correctly and seeing correctly are two of the eight pillars of the
"noble eightfold path".)

Now, I missed the part where we inject some Buddhism into a machine to make it
artificially intelligent.  But even if the claim (by Mr. Onstott, I think)
were true, that:
>|> Reason is not "just another
>|> way of thinking", it is the only valid way of thinking.
it is also true that, for a reasoning being to apprehend the truth (i.e., to
attain enlightenment), logic is _insufficient_.  As Mr. Lyndes pointed out:
>
>There are many kinds of mental
>activity each with its own purposes, all inter-related, and all
>forming a whole.  Rationality is good for making inferences.  It
>does not provide the premises.  Experience and praxis/practice provides
>tests for matters of truth.  Senses of beauty, elegance, fairness,
>spirituality makes possible a quality of life.  Shall we go on?  The
>point is not "which is best", but "how do we harmonize the whole."

So, to make a machine intelligent, we certainly must infuse it with logic, but
might we also not have to infuse it also with a sense of beauty, a sense of
elegance, a sense of fairness, a sense of spirituality, etc?  As my own
knowledge of AI is rather limited, I will leave those tasks to the qualified
experts in the field.

There are a couple of other things that I would like to point out:

Noble truth number one is usually translated as, "Suffering exists".  However,
the original Pali texts were translated into German before being translated
into English, and the Pali word that the historical Buddha used, _Samsara_, is
better approximated by the English words "imperfection", or "flaw".  (Even in
English, we may say that something "suffers from a flaw".)  Being a programmer,
I think the word "bug" also works, and would restate 1) as: "Bugs exist."

The Buddha sometimes explicated 2) as, "Not getting what you want, or getting
what you don't want, hurts!"  -- And that's where the suffering 1) comes from.
There is actually something called the "causal chain" which represents the
complete version of 2), wherein the process by which desire leads to suffering
is analyzed, being broken down into half-a-dozen discrete steps...  The idea is
to break this chain.  Interested readers are directed to other more scholarly
texts, e.g., _What_the_Buddha_Taught_, by Walpola Rahula.

Now we may notice that 1) states the problem, 2) states its cause, 3) states
that a solution exists, and 4) states the way to achieve the solution.  Hardly
seems like mystical mumbo-jumbo at all now, does it?  Actually, more like pop
psych, 2600 years ahead of its time!

One last thing that I would like to point out is that the third noble truth was
often stated by the historical Buddha in this way:  "I tell you, there _is_ an
end to suffering, _in_this_very_life_."  Truth number three is the infamous
_Nirvana_ you may have heard about.

Oh, and by the way, Buddhism is atheistic.

Rich Brown (Neither)
Om mani padme, pay me!
-- 
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Rich Brown, UNICOS System Administrator
National Center for Supercomputing Applications
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign


