Keynotes Flanagan & Wallace

Philosopher Donald Davidson valued the importance of intersubjective exchanges. He once said, “Socrates was right: reading is not enough. If we want to approach the harder wisdom we must talk, and, of course, listen.” This sentiment is evident not only in the work of Owen Flanagan and B. Alan Wallace, but in their relationship as contemporary philosophers of mind (see blog posting 12/10/05).

As dual keynotes at the upcoming Mind & Reality Symposium (Feb 25-26 at Columbia’s Low Memorial Library), Flanagan and Wallace both offer unique insights on the nature of consciousness and the role of Indo-Tibetan theories of mind in contemporary thought.

Flanagan’s presentation is slated for Saturday and is entitled “Science for Monks: Buddhism & Science” and will be based on one of the Templeton Lectures he is giving at the University of Southern California in Los Angeles.

Wallace’s address is Sunday and is entitled “Naturalizing the Mind Sciences” and will largely be drawn from a chapter in his forthcoming book Contemplative Science: Where Science and Buddhism Converge (Columbia University Press, 2006).

※ And please visit the Mind & Reality website for details on the Symposium and audio webcast.

Keynote Debate

Despite mine, and others’, outspoken criticism of George Johnson’s review of the Dalai Lama’s book The Universe in a Single Atom in The New York Times Book Review (see October 10th posting: “Is Karma Intelligent Design?”), I think Johnson’s intentions were to offer what he perceived as a “religious” alternative to the nation’s preoccupation with intelligent design and evolution.

Latching on to “hidden causality” as a surrogate for a theistic Creator, Johnson’s analysis tragically misconstrued Buddhism as superstitiously dualistic and neglected the Dalai Lama’s more provocative statements about mind and matter being “codependent” with ”no absolute division.” Instead he chose to focus on Tenzin Gyatso’s rejection of wholly materialist explanations for mind and gives no philosophical consideration to the metaphysical implications of his rationale—namely—that materialism does not seem to account for the ‘’subjective experience of the individual.”

I don’t blame Johnson for steering clear of this debate. The Dalai Lama himself has advised mind scientists to shelve their metaphysical conclusions in trying to reconcile consciousness and matter. Nevertheless, philosophy as an education is not so much about arriving at answers as it is about learning how to ask the really interesting questions. It was with this in mind that I recently posed a few questions to two of the foremost thinkers in contemporary consciousness studies: B. Alan Wallace (Buddhism) and Owen Flanagan (philosophy). Their dialogue contains insightful commentary on each other’s ideas as well as suggestions for further reading.ༀ

Click on the highlighted text to read their responses.
B. Alan Wallace: “Materialism of the Gaps”

Owen Flanagan: Response

(see also Flanagan’s “Subjective Realism and Phenomenal Consciousness”&“Reversing the Arrow of Explanation in the Relational Blockworld: Why Temporal Becoming, the Dynamical Brain and the External World are all “in the Mind.”)

B. Alan Wallace: Response

Owen Flanagan: Re: non-physical mental properties

B. Alan Wallace: Response

Please make note of their forthcoming books: The Attention Revolution by B. Alan Wallace (Wisdom Publications, 2006), and The Bodhisattva’s Brain: Neuroscience, Virtue & Happiness by Owen Flanagan (2006).

Is Karma Intelligent Design?

The Dalai Lama’s new book, The Universe in a Single Atom: The Convergence of Science and Spirituality received a mixed review from George Johnson in the New York Times Book Review (Sept. 18th, 2005). Johnson, a well known commentator on science and religion, tragically likens Buddhist causality to Intelligent Design, and asserts that Buddhist philosophy of mind was “rejected long ago by mainstream science.”

Buddhists love a good a debate and have responded strongly. B. Alan Wallace of the Santa Barbara Institute for Consciousness Studies posted this essay on the Mind & Life Research Network list-serve. Professor of Philosophy W. Teed Rockwell submitted this letter to the New York Times. I also chimed in with my own letter to the NYT Book Review that was subsequently published.

If you’ve got something to say, let us know about it. Post a comment here, or email me.

Buy The Universe in a Single Atom