From a self that controls to self-control : paradigm shifts in early Buddhism and in cognitive science
This thesis describes two similar paradigm shiftsââone between Brahmanism and Buddhism and the other between Cartesian and non-Cartesian perspectives in contemporary mind-science. These shifts are characterized by a similar transition from the view that there is a Self that exercises ultimate control, to the view that the entire person engages in limited self-control. Both the Cartesian and the Brahmanical perspectives accommodate notions of ultimate free will, immaterial souls, a âSelfâ that transcends mundane causality and bears similitude to the divine; control is seen metaphorically as the power of an absolute monarch. On the other hand, both the Buddhist and the cognitive-scientific perspectives reject ultimate free will, ultimate Selves and divine transcendence. Instead, they promote the idea that self-control is possible within causally regulated reality, and that people have limited free will; control is seen as a property of the whole agent, not as an ultimate power of an internal monarch. These similarities may explain why Buddhism appeals to cognitive science: both systems are situated at similar positions within similar paradigm shifts. For different reasons, and reflecting different motivations,
Federman, Asaf
BF Psychology
From a self that controls to self-control : paradigm shifts in early Buddhism and in cognitive science. This thesis describes two similar paradigm shiftsââone between Brahmanism and Buddhism and the other between Cartesian and non-Cartesian perspectives in contemporary mind-science. These shifts are characterized by a similar transition from the view that there is a Self that exercises ultimate control, to the view that the entire person engages in limited self-control. Both the Cartesian and the Brahmanical perspectives accommodate notions of ultimate free will, immaterial souls, a âSelfâ that transcends mundane causality and bears similitude to the divine; control is seen metaphorically as the power of an absolute monarch. On the other hand, both the Buddhist and the cognitive-scientific perspectives reject ultimate free will, ultimate Selves and divine transcendence. Instead, they promote the idea that self-control is possible within causally regulated reality, and that people have limited free will; control is seen as a property of the whole agent, not as an ultimate power of an internal monarch. These similarities may explain why Buddhism appeals to cognitive science: both systems are situated at similar positions within similar paradigm shifts. For different reasons, and reflecting different motivations,
self_control self_control paradigm_shift early buddhism cognitive_science describes similar paradigm_shift buddhism cartesian non cartesian perspective contemporary mind science shift characterize similar transition view_self exercise ultimate control view entire person engages limit self_control cartesian perspective accommodate notion ultimate free immaterial soul self transcend mundane causality bear divine control see metaphorically power absolute monarch hand buddhist cognitive scientific perspective reject ultimate free ultimate divine transcendence instead promote idea self_control possible within causally regulate reality people limit free control see property whole agent ultimate power internal monarch similarity may explain buddhism appeal cognitive_science system situate similar position_within similar paradigm_shift different reason reflect different motivation