Meditation and morality according to David Deutsch

 Sam Harris, the atheist that started to meditate,  has said in an interview in "The guardian"; 

"We are sleepwalking, and when you learn how to meditate, you recognize that there is another possibility, which is to be vividly aware of your experience in each moment in a way that frees you from routine misery. Meditation is simply the practice of learning to break the spell and wake up."

He has even started a meditation app and it seems he's up to some kind of spiritualty (not religion) if I understand it in the right way. 

Well, he have a podcast too, and there he has been speaking to David Deutsch. 

https://samharris.org/search/David%20Deutsch 

You better look at Wikipedia to have a clue of who David is. 


The conversation may not be so easy to follow, but A man called Sam Hall makes an interpretation of it here: 



About 44 minutes into the video Hall speaks about meditation and  Deutsch's look at it: 

Harris says that meditation him happy and Deutsch replies ; 

Maybe you get happy after a meditation because it helps the unconscious part of your mind work and help you to solve problems.

 To solve problems and to be creative is what makes us happy, according to Deutsch. 

Deutsch maybe true, but for sure you can have happy or satisfied moments under the meditation too. Though that may not be the purpose of mediation. 

Many says that the meaning of meditation is to drop things, including problem solving and philosophy - but most of all the ego. 

Deutsch means that there are less suffering now that in older times, for instance in Buddhas time. But there can still much more progress - but that will lead to new problems so the progress will go on. I guess that is an optimistic view...

Deutsch is a "Popperian"(influenced by Karl Popper), so he thinks that every answer, even in science, is just temporary, and therefore should be criticized. 

Of course Deutsch is a supporter of enlightenment too.

I guess he hasn't studied Buddhism so much and he doesn't seem to meditate - but of course you can be supporter of enlightenment and meditation too.

For progress everything should be looked at with a doubting view. 

That's true even for morality - any theory of morality as utilitarianism should be seen as a kind if criticisms of earlier ethics, according to Deutsch, so utilitarianism can also be criticized. 

Though criticism must be made in a non-violent way. 

An open society that are open for change and many voices is an Popperian society. 

So "true" doctrines like in Buddhism and used by some philosophers  should be seen as temporary. 

Harris tries to build fundaments for an ethic life in his podcast with Deutsch, but he seems not to understand that for Deutsch there can never be any  true fundaments at all. 

Though there are an objective truth out there, we can never reach it.

So freedom  and the right to criticize is the guidelines for Deutsch. Freedom also leads to  peace, according to Deutsch.

Moral fundaments like the Golden rule;  Don't do into other what you don't want others do to you, is a bit troublesome if you are a masochist. 

And does really life always include suffering or unsatisfactory (Dukkha as Buddha called it ) every time? 

Well, if problems always will occur, we will always be unsatisfied in a way, but problem solving can on the other hand lead to happiness for other; a  musical composer is a problem solver according to Deutsch.  

Deutsch's theories can of course be criticized too, as anyone one who says that he knows the truth. 

Deutsch's view is of a forever progress  (as there will always will come new questions). And that may be the case of the understanding of the two books written by Deutsch too - but that makes them even more interesting.

Here's a problem solver from 1975: 


Actually, Sanders could be a supporter of Deutsch. This quote is from and interview with him:

“It just seems like there’s no end to my trying to perfect what I’m trying to do”











Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Cora Diamond on eating animals - with the help of Wittgenstein´s ideas

Image
Cora Diamond is a new name for me, even if she has worked as a professor in Philosophy in the states for a long time and is still  teaching at the university of Virginia, even she is over 80 years old. She has written a lot about Wittgenstein and that has helped her to express her view of the topic. Although she, like Wittgenstein,  has lived in a hut in Norway - and actually brought Tractatus with hes - she seems to be different and for sure more glad than W. Anyways, its W: s writings that interests her and especially his critics of metaphysics and ethics in philosophy. As it is said in Tractacus  : " Whereof one  cannot speak , thereof one must be silent." And of ethics philosophy should not speak - why? Is it like in Buddhism - its better to sit in silence and let know yourself, than to speculate about what will happen when we die? But for sure there ethical guidelines in Buddhism,  but the behaviors is often named skilful, not good (or bad). Another
Read more

I think, therefore I am NOT

Image
So Descartes was wrong. He said that he could doubt everything about himself except that he was thinking. That proved that he existed. The word "I" is the central point here. What does it mean? Perhaps we are sure that we know the answer. Is it the thoughts? In that case - where are you when you aren't thinking? Is it your job, your title? In that case - what happens if you loose your job or change job? Is it your house, your nation? Under my course to be a mindfulness instructor, the teacher, Ola Schenström, made us ask to each other; "Who are you?" After each answer the question was repeated by the questioner.We soon discovered that there were no end to the answers - or maybe an adequate end could be; "I don't know."Or maybe; "It seems I have no essence." Other thinkers have come to the same conclusions; Buddha, Sartre and more recently Damasio and Parfit. Sartre, for instance, has said that we are the sum of our actions. We ha
Read more

Wittgenstein and Buddha -buddies?

Image
Ludwig Wittgenstein, the famous philosopher, reflected in the posthumously published  book "Philosophical Investigations" about the picture above; Is it a hare or duck?  He meant that we make, or must make, a statement what it is. And I suppose he meant that we often or always has to interpret the world around us. But two different interpretations can both be right! Language and thoughts controls what we see.....   You can compare with the picture of a glass. Half empty or half empty?  Who decides? Yes, it's you... And whatever you say is right.  But you can be aware of what you think. That can say more of yourself than of the glass....  You can be aware of that you always do interpretations of things that happens.  If you have a pessimistic or a naive point of view, you can be aware of the view and your statements.  Buddha and Wittgenstein were both aware of that different persons uses different perspectives.  But Buddha spoke about the "right 
Read more