Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Buddhism's no-self doctrine holds that the self is an ill... — Carmelics
    Home/Natural Theology
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→Kropotkin's mutual aid theory is more compatible with Buddhism than Darwinian struggle, but remains insufficient

    Buddhism's no-self doctrine holds that the self is an illusion

    Natural Theology
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Topics

    Natural Theology

    Related

    Cooperation and altruism align better with Buddhist ethics than the struggle for...However, mutual aid still presupposes a self that aids othersKropotkin argued that cooperation and altruism, not competition, are central to ...Kropotkin's mutual aid theory is more compatible with Buddhism than Darwinian st...

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Natural Theology
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.

    Similar

    Buddhism holds a no-self doctrine, rejecting the existence of a perman...87%Nishida also speaks of the absolute self-negation of absolute nothingn...75%Buddhism does not require belief in metaphysically substantive entitie...73%Avicenna's conception of being, used to establish the Necessary Existe...73%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: religion-science
    View source passageHide passage
    Buddhists do not distinguish between human beings as possessing a soul and other animals as soulless. As we are all part of the cycle of rebirth, we have all been in previous lives various other beings, including birds, insects, and fish. The problem of the specificity of the human soul does not even arise because of the no-self doctrine. Nevertheless, as Justin Ritzinger (2013) points out, Chinese Buddhists in the 1920s and 1930s who were confronted with early evolutionary theory did not accept

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective