How was it, scholars of Buddhism have asked, that a single Zen monk produced such a vast body of commentary, seemingly over the course of generations? The answer lays waste to our modern idea of intellectual property.
Hume ‘the sceptic‘ did eventually find an escape from his scepticism. He mitigated the problems posed by induction by concluding that the search for rational grounds for trusting our senses is unnecessary for creatures like us. But was this a fair way out of the problems posed by induction?
Buddhism is seen as a religion of peace and spirituality. Renouncing the illusions of political life, its adherents strive to eliminate suffering. History tells a different story, however.
Mahāyāna Buddhists believe that there are not ultimate distinctions between one person and the next. Liberals, on the other hand, believe that persons are fundamentally separate. Buddhists apparently deny what liberals seems to affirm; namely, the separateness of persons. How can these views be compatible?
My MA dissertation was about whether Buddhist and liberal approaches to ethics can be reconciled, or whether they are pulling in different directions. I discussed a number of ways they could be reconciled before finally concluding that the task is probably futile given the practical differences of each world-view.