[Buddha-l] FW: Three year Research Associate, UK, Indian & Buddhist theories of self

[Richard Hayes]

On Wednesday 01 August 2007 13:15, jkirk wrote:

> Modern intellectual and critical developments may have decided to view ego
> or a self as non-static and changeable. However, that is critically not the
> idea of selfhood that pervades a lot of psychological and other sorts of
> counseling today.

This is quite surprising. I can't imagine anyone who believes in counselling 
thinking that the self is fixed in nature. If one believed that, then one 
would surely think all therapeutic interventions would be in vain.

> Identity phrased as, say, tribal or religion-affiliation, is generally
> considered to be a desirable feature of selfhood, to be retained (at all
> costs?--depends..). So, although intellectuals and academics might agree
> with the Buddhist view of self as variable rather than uncaused, permanent
> etc., the day to day ballpark  view of people neither intellectuals nor
> academics, nor monks, et al--is that self is a Thing-- to be discovered,

Well, I'll have to take your word for this. I don't know anyone who thinks in 
the way you describe, but then I don;t spend much time in ballparks with 
people who are neither academics, intellectuals or monks. This sounds like an 
interesting item for a Pew Research Foundation poll. After all, Pew reports 
that something like 80% of Americans believe there is such a place as hell 
(although only 10% believe they might go there when they die). I personally 
don't know anyone who believes that hell exists (except as a country presided 
over or illegally invaded by George W. Bush), so this shows that my 
perceptions of what is commonly believed are heavily conditioned by the 
excellent company I keep. (One thing I have always taken very seriously is 
the Buddhist teaching that the secret to happiness is associating with good 
people. That's why I stay away from ballparks filled with people who believe 
that tribal affiliation, religious identity and gender are permanent 
realities rather than impermanent, provisional and arbitrary, not to mention 
delusional, constructs.)

-- 
Richard