Paul Williams and other Buddhist Studies scholars have argued that stripping Buddhism of these metaphysical commitments to achieve scientific compatibility produces a reductio of Buddhist doctrine itself.

?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.

Buddhist Studies(as the field Paul Williams works in): The academic field where researchers study Buddhism's history, texts, beliefs, and practices from a scholarly standpoint (rather than practicing Buddhism themselves).
Buddhist doctrine(as what gets damaged by removing metaphysical commitments): The official teachings and core beliefs of Buddhism as traditionally understood and passed down.
Metaphysical commitments(in metaphysics): The fundamental beliefs you're taking on about what's real and how the world actually is when you adopt a certain position.
Paul Williams(as a Buddhist Studies scholar cited in this argument): A leading scholar who studies Buddhism from an academic perspective; he's known for arguing that trying to make Buddhism fit with modern science actually breaks apart some of Buddhism's core ideas.

Based on where you are in your exploration