New things are present, new ideas, new technologies, new dangers, and old thinking is being used to deal with these new problems, because those engaged in that old thinking don't know how to operate with thinking as their object. They don't know how to analyze thinking, assess thinking, reconstruct thinking. They don't know how to enter and learn new systems.
Critical thinking requires you to work on your thinking continually, to make your thinking the object of thought; to make your behavior the object of your thinking; to make your beliefs the object of your thinking.
For example, take your religious thinking: All over the world there are very many religious belief systems.
Sigmund Freud exemplifies this ironic shift. Perhaps more than any modern thinker, he contributed to the undermining of religious certainty. He stated quite unequivocally that “an illusion would be to suppose that what science would not give us, we can get elsewhere.” Elsewhere, of course, refers to religion, as he made clear in his pessimistic indictment of religion in . And yet his own psychoanalytic theory has become a matter of intense debate, and has come under the critical scrutiny of the very scientific system he felt would validate his ideas. But it is in areas other than psychology, most notably in physics, and increasingly in the life sciences, that a growing body of new knowledge is beginning to strain existing models of explanation and understanding.
Critical Thinking | Spiritual Formation on the Run
While American thinkers and newly converted Western Buddhists thought they saw a natural fit between Buddhism and science, Buddhist teachers more steeped in the traditional discipline were less apologetic and often more critical of such facile comparisons. Two notable contemporary examples come to mind: Master Hsuan Hua, from the Mahayana tradition, and Wapola Rahula, a Theravada scholar-monk, both threw cold water on this notion.
What's Buddhist about Socially Engaged Buddhism - …
Mahayana Buddhism still adheres to the basic fundamental beliefs presented in the Pali Canons, however, it Sutras often expand upon these basic ideas and traditions in order to answer the questions of a later generation....
What's Buddhist about Socially Engaged Buddhism ..
There are other ways that Buddhist practice and social engagement need each other. We know that without a spiritual practice, social engagement tends to burn us out because it is emotionally stressful and exhausting. From the other side, however, something else needs to be emphasized just as much: that . I recognize this is a strong claim, which many people may be inclined to resist; but it is the crux of the matter, as we will see. And, of course, without understanding the basic problem we can hardly expect to address it successfully. Instead, our responses almost always miss the mark and we are likely to end up with a social situation worse than when we started. Why did the French Revolution evolve into the Terror and the rise of a new dictator, Napoleon? Why did the Marxist movement turn into Leninism and then Stalinism, Maoism, and the Khmer Rouge? Because the fundamental issue at stake was never just class privilege or capital (although they are certainly important dimensions of the problem). Then what is the basic issue? What does a Buddhist perspective reveal?
we need to highlight some fundamental Buddhist ..
In response, we need to highlight some fundamental Buddhist principles that are generally understood as important for our personal practice, but whose social implications are just as significant. The following ones are the principles that I think are most important. The first one is the relationship between our (usually translated as «suffering») and our sense of self. From a Buddhist perspective, it is not enough to say that the basic problem (dissatisfaction, frustration) of our lives is caused by craving or delusion. Rather, Buddhism relates our specifically to a delusive sense of self. In other words, our inability to live happily is strongly connected to our deluded sense of self/other duality, since the delusion of a self «inside» is also the delusion of an objective world «out there.» An unreal (because constructed) sense of self «inside» cannot escape because it cannot escape its intrinsic insecurity. It can never become secure because it has no reality of its own, being constructed. Feeling groundless, the sense of self wants to ground itself, yet that is something it can never achieve because it is groundless! Many of us devote our lives to seeking symbolic realities such as money, fame, and power, but they cannot make us real, or help us evade our mortality.