Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.
Nathan
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
Posts: 34,538
|
|
« on: January 13, 2015, 12:24:49 PM » |
|
I know this was just her example and not her point itself, but I have to interject here to say that politicus is betraying a common oversimplification in her understanding of Buddhism. While it's true that most of the forms of the religion with which somebody from outside East and Southeast Asia would be reasonably familiar are relatively short on outwardly behavior-modifying strictures, there are sutras that prescribe incredibly specific and restrictive psychological rigors, which are intended to modify the way the practitioner's mind works on an even more fundamental (pun intended) level than the changes in worldview and emotional state that the rigors of Orthodox Judaism and legalistic Islam are intended to bring about. This admittedly less frequently leads to political problems, primarily because it's mostly internal and secondarily because the tendency of early Buddhism to support specific kinds of political structures over others has been attenuated over the millennia, but it can come across as something akin to self-brainwashing (highly spiritually accomplished Buddhist practitioners will sometimes develop a lack of concern for other people's individuality and adopt behaviors that are difficult to distinguish from mild antisocial tendencies). Also, there very much have been and are societies inflexibly based on Buddhism.
|