“Let us turn to one problem somewhat particular to Buddhism.. the idea of non-violence. While a distaste for senseless violence is shared by many belief systems, most accept a degree of purposeful violence. However Buddhism and a couple of other Indic religions condemn all violence. This translates into people not defending themselves and not eating meat- neither of which are good for you in the long run.”
Very good points.
The last 30-odd years have seen a considerable increase in the popularity of Buddhism in western countries. While it does look quite good when compared to Judeo-Christian religions because it does not encourage things like burning heretics, killing unbelievers and believing religious books too literally, it also has some of the same major flaws as other religions and a few peculiar to it.
For one, Buddhism is fatalistic like all other religions. A feature peculiar to all religions, traditional and secular, is that they encourage believers to accept the general shit of existence for some illusory reward in the next life, grand cosmic purpose or because that is the ‘cosmic normal’. However progress can never occur unless a few believe that things can change and are willing to try. Worthless cocksuckers from ‘elite’ universities may try to argue on the definition of progress but none of them are willing to…
View original post 390 more words