POSTS:
Mike Slott
An interview with Stephen Batchelor on secular dharma
In a recent interview Stephen Batchelor discussed the historical antecedents and development of secular Buddhism, the divergent 'core logics' of traditional and secular Buddhism, and the need to create a new Mindfulness Based Human Flourishing program.
John Dewey, flourishing and Buddhism
Seth Zuihō Segall argues that the Buddhist notions of non-self, interdependence, impermanence, and dukkha need to be situated in the broader framework offered by John Dewey's pragmatic theory.
The path of the bodhisattva or ‘making the road’ through solidarity?
Mike Slott offers an alternative model to the path of the Bodhisattva, one based on the solidarity of practitioners 'co-creating' the transformative changes that we seek.
How Buddhist insights and values can help sustain political activism
Mike Slott explores the ways in which Buddhist insights and values can enable political activists to sustain their activity in various movements and to make a positive contribution to the organizations in which they participate.
The core life tasks and beliefs for a radically engaged Buddhist
Mike Slott, Katya de Kadt, and Karsten Struhl offer an account of the core tasks and beliefs for radically engaged Buddhists who seek not just individual transformation but the dismantling of social, economic, and political systems which cause harm and suffering to all beings.
A response to ‘The core life tasks and beliefs for a radically engaged Buddhist’
In response to the article by Slott, de Kadt, and Struhl on 'The core life tasks and beliefs for a radically engaged Buddhist,' Winton Higgins expresses his agreement with the authors' perspective, but points to a missing piece in the article: the lack of any discussion over a pathway or transition from our present morass to a socially just, future society.
Secular Buddhism as a ‘paradigm shift’
Jonathan Golden uses Kuhn's notion of a 'paradigm shift' to discuss the issue of 'truths' and 'tasks' in secular Buddhism. He argues that Kuhn's perspective is consistent with Mike Slott's view of truths and tasks; while there are no absolute truths, our beliefs (provisional truth claims) are a necessary precondition for our practice, and practitioners should not be required to make a binary choice between truths and tasks.
Reexamining ‘truths’ and ‘tasks’ in secular Buddhism: a dialogue
Mike Slott, Winton Higgins, Stephen Batchelor, and Jonathan Golden discuss the relationship of truths and tasks in a secular approach to the dharma.
Dharma in the shadow of Buddhism: a response to Mike Slott and Winton Higgins
Stephen Batchelor continues the dialogue on 'truths' and 'tasks' in secular Buddhism by framing the discussion from a broader, historical perspective. Stephen argues that the Buddha's radical move was to depart from the truth-based perspective of Brahmanic, Indian culture to teach a fully committed ethical life that is not underwritten by any ultimate truth.
Rejoinder to Winton Higgins on ‘Reexamining “truths” and “tasks” in secular Buddhism’
Responding to Winton Higgins' criticism of his view of the relationship of tasks and truths in secular Buddhism, Mike Slott argues that in rejecting metaphysical truths as the basis of Buddhism, we don’t need to reject entirely the notion of truth as correspondence. The beliefs of secular Buddhists are provisional and conditional truth claims about our lived experience and the universe in which we are inextricably embedded.
Response to Mike Slott’s ‘Reexamining “truths” and “tasks” in secular Buddhism’
In response to Mike Slott's article on truths and tasks in secular Buddhism Winton Higgins argues that Mike's critique of Stephen Batchelor's formulation is misconceived; the issue is not the epistemological status of truth but about how we should live and practise. Dharma practitioners do have to choose: they can’t wish-wash over the truths/tasks distinction.
Reexamining ‘truths’ and ‘tasks’ in secular Buddhism
While Stephen Batchelor's emphasis on the pragmatic and ethical meaning of the Buddha’s teachings has been crucial in the development of a secular approach to the dharma, Mike Slott argues that Stephen has not adequately addressed a legitimate concern about the role and meaning of truth in his approach. The secular dharmic path challenges us to assess constantly both our ‘tasks’ and the ‘truths’ on which they are based.
Linda Modaro on the need for ethical reflection by teachers and dharma leaders
In an interview with SBN, Linda Modaro, a meditation teacher, discussed a course that she has developed and taught on ethical reflecting for meditation teachers and dharma group leaders.
Avoiding the conceit of superiority: a cautionary note for secular Buddhists
To avoid the superiority conceit pervasive in debates within Buddhism, secular Buddhists need to recognize two key points: 1) our approach to the Buddha's teachings is only one of many legitimate approaches and 2) Buddhism, whether, in a secular or traditional form, does not provide us with all the answers to the key challenges that we face today.
How do we know if secular Buddhism is the ‘appropriate’ view and path?
While we cannot definitively know that secular Buddhism is the most ‘appropriate’ approach to the dharma in some universal sense, Mike Slott asserts that each individual can determine whether secular Buddhism is an ‘appropriate’ view and path for their own life based on their experiences, interests, and goals.
EXPLORE BY SECTION
SEARCH THE SITE
RECENT POSTS
