Having watched the two videos and thought about some of the arguments, you should be in a place where you can give a reasoned response to the question posed by the cases of Tony Nicklinson and Diane Pretty.
In the midst of the Korean wilderness, a Buddhist master patiently raises a young boy to grow up in wisdom and compassion, through experience and endless exercises. Once the pupil discovers his sexual lust, he seems lost to contemplative life and follows his first love, but soon fails to adapt to the modern world, gets in jail for a crime of passion and returns to the master in search of spiritual redemption and reconciliation with karma, at a high price of physical catharsis… (IMDB)
Click on the speech bubble (above and right) to paste in your review. Same rules as usual: use your school email and put initials for your name (unless you want your post to be what comes up when people google you)…
Every so often i get a really good question emailed to me… Here’s the latest… Hope it helps and pleas keep them coming….(email@example.com)
You know the five skhandas are they there the Buddha’s way of proving there is no self and that the the five skandas are things which people argue make you who you are and the Buddha is saying that is rubbish in his own holy buddhist way?
And here’s the reply:
Ye you’ve nailed it. The skhandas are five of the things that the Buddha thought most people wud say make as the same over time. But all five are IMPERMANENT and so cannot be the thing in me that’s the same today and tomorrow. Because of this, he thinks that people who believe in a permanent self have got it wrong.
The worst thing about this is that belief in the self leads to some pretty strange behaviour and usually increased DUKKHA suffering. Hatred, greed and delusion usually all stem from not just believing in a self but that ‘I’ am better/more deserving of things than other people.
Hope your having a good weekend, in the quiz the other day you knew loads so you’ll be totally fine…
See ya Monday
For those of you all who have prelims coming up and are starting to notice that there is a lot of jargon in the medical ethics section. Quite often there are questions that require you to understand one of these terms (or more). If you don’t know what they mean, you’ll really struggle – so flashcards are the order of the day….
Euthanasia – a person kills another or allows her to die for her own benefit
Active Euthanasia – a person does something that intentionally results in the others death
Passive Euthanasia – a person allows the other to die, even though keeping them alive is a possibility that is open. this usually involve withholding a treatment or food.
Voluntary Euthanasia – euthanasia where the person dying is able to, and does, express his wish to die
Non-voluntary Euthanasia – euthanasia where the patient is not able to express a preference (even if it may seem fairly obvious)
Involuntary Euthanasia – the death of the person is against their compentent wishes, this is usually where people mention the Nazis’ use of the word ‘euthanasia’. There are, however, cases where it is arguable that euthanasia against the person’s wishes, may be in their best interest. We usually use ‘Involuntary Euthanasia’ in this sense.
Suicide – someone intentionally kills themselves
Assisted Suicide – one person helps another to kill themselves (when they wish it)
Physician Assisted Suicide -as above, where the agent is a doctor.
The idea to write these down in one place came from ‘The Very Short Introduction to Medical Ethics’. It has a really good chapter on Euthanasia that should be useful for revision… It could have been written for Higher/Int 2 RMPS.
Today we had a revision lunch for int 2 rmps students about to sit their prelims after the holiday. It was focussed on the Buddhism section of the course and we talked about the eightfold path, meditation and the unit as a whole…
First of all I gave you the page numbers and questions (from the Joe Walker book Buddhism) to practice on your weak areas:
Then we looked at my (purposely incomplete) mindmap of the whole unit:
And the talked quickly through an easy way to remember the eightfold path…
Click on any of the images above to get the files….
here are some excellent resources that you could use to aid you in your RMPS (Religious, Moral & Philosophical Studies) revision… especially when your getting bored of writing… First is utilitarian philosopher talking about the use of embryos on bigthink.com:
The above would be perfect for Int 2, this one might be better for those of you doing advanced or higher… Baroness Warnock on Radio 2 (I haven’t listened to this yet but hear it’s very useful):
I haven’t watched this but imagine it would be useful for someone revising / interested in atheism, agnosticism and humanism….
To post your opinion on the view you signed up for in class just press comment below. Usual options (initials) apply and make sure you make your answer balanced and clear. We can all use each others answers for revising for the NAB… If you want to see a bigger version of the slide above just click on it… [Make sure you submit your answer to the correct post]
Here are two examples of what you were asked to make in class for revision….
To post your opinion on the view you signed up for in class just press comment below. Usual options (initials) apply and make sure you make your answer balanced and clear. We can all use each others answers for revising for the NAB… If you want to see a bigger version of the slide above just click on it…
Sign up sheet:
Hiyaaa and good luck for tomorrow’s exam. I’m sure you’re all going to do wonderfully. I was just doing a final check through the SQA arrangement documents (click for link) and I’ve included the bits you need to know here. You should find this list of outcomes pretty reassuring as we have covered far more than the minimum necessary.
And on Philosophy of Religion:
In terms of advice, read your booklet (available here), answer the question, stick to your timings and (almost) always give both sides in Analysis and Evaluation type questions…
And as always:
Explain why you think what you think.
Get a good sleep tonight and Good Luck! – I’ll see you outside tomorrow.
[THIS MAY ALSO BE HELPFUL FOR THOSE OF YOU STUDYING IB PHILOSOPHY – THE CORE THEME]
One criticism often directed at Buddhism is a questioning of the relationship between the doctrines of atatman (no soul) and reincarnation. Some question the two teachings compatibility completely where others, more thoughtfully, question why I should seek to accumulate good karma in there is, in reality, no ‘me’.
The answer to this oft-repeated conundrum is, to my limited knowledge, most clearly explained in the conversations of Nagasena and King Milinda. The dialogue begins in the second chapter of Book II. The King jumps in at the deep end by asking it it is the same or another who be reincarnated and is frustrated by the monks answer that it is in fact neither of these suggestions.
To explain further Nagasena establishes that we have some sense that we are the same person as the younger version we remember ‘being’. To explain this idea he give the following example:
‘Suppose a man, O king, were to light a lamp, would it burn the night through?’ ‘Yes, it might do so.’ ‘Now, is it the same flame that burns in the first watch of the night, Sir, and in the second?’ ‘No.’ ‘Or the same that burns in the second watch and in the third?’ ‘No.’ ‘Then is there one lamp in the first watch, and another in the second, and another in the third?’ ‘No. The light comes from the same lamp all the night through.’
‘Just so, O king, is the continuity of a person or thing maintained. One comes into being, another passes away; and the rebirth is, as it were, simultaneous. Thus neither as the same nor as another does a man go on to the last phase of his self-consciousness’
Melinda then requests another example. And it is this one I find most helpful for it explains something of the nature of karma as action (the lit. translation), preserving the notions of cause and effect associated with samsara.
‘It is like milk, which when once taken from the cow, turns, after a lapse of time, first to curds, and then from curds to butter, and then from butter to ghee. Now would it be right to say that the milk was the same thing as the curds, or the butter, or the ghee?’‘Certainly not; but they are produced out of it.’‘Just so, O king, is the continuity of a person or thing maintained. One comes into being, another passes away; and the rebirth is, as it were, simultaneous. Thus neither as the same nor as another does a man go on to the last phase of his self-consciousness.’
In each of these processes the transition is slow; so slow it might not be noticed. That the process happens, however, in undeniable. Like this, we are changing all the time, we are continued from another self but we are not the same as that self. This is true throughout our wanderings of the wheel of life. Once reincarnated the change is identical. No more different, no less.