odinslefteye's TakeOnIt

Blackmore does not know what she is talking about. Her understanding of Buddhism is crude at best Buddhist thought thoroughly refutes our attempts to attain permanence, independence, and self-subsistence by identifying with transient, conditioned phenomena, material, psychological, or conceptual. To understand the his one as to understand the doctrine of dependent origination. Both Carrol and Blackmore made there reputation as defenders of the reductionist paradigm and as skeptics.

Buddha expressly denied nihilism. He stated essentially that the self we experience is an illusion because we reify subject and object. What is reborn is reborn every second the notion that there is a body that dies and is born is an illusion. Carrols book of reincarnation was idiotic. For someone who studied Sanskrit classical Chinese and Buddhism for fifty years to hear such gibberish as Blackmore's is painful.. To say that individual self does not exist as a real abiding thing,is to say waves on the ocean do not have an abiding permanent self. They arise and disappear as conditions arise and disappear,but the Ocean remains, and conditions never cease to occur. The karmic energy that was the wave will reform as conditions ripen again. Therefore it is not a permanent self separate form the ocean and not annihilated with its transitions.