An overlap in “Buddhism and the Brain”

23.
Full Name
Instructor’s Name
Course Info
Date

Summary
Religion and science adhere to different systems of beliefs. The separate identification of religion
and science is in the practice of the former in relation to the concept of humanity and the purpose of
existence, which differs significantly from the knowledge of verifiable and reliable explanations of
the latter. However, David Weisman’s 2011 article “Buddhism and the Brain” argues that Buddhism and
neuroscience overlap in principle as the Buddhist concept of anatta or self is as impermanent and
illusory as the neuroscience concept of the mind, self, or soul.
Although scientific finds are usually not consistent with a religion’s beliefs, neurology and
neuroscience do not exactly contradict Buddhism. Buddhists believe in an impermanent and illusory self
made of shifting parts (Weisman) such that their word for self, anatta, is also translated as “non
self” (Weisman). This language effectively suggests that in referring to the self it is as effectively
implied that “there is no such thing” (Weisman). Based on this claim, there is a disconnect between
religious teaching and perception in Buddhism as in the temple, the self is an illusion, but is
unified, in control, and unchanged from moment to moment when the Buddhist goes shopping (Weisman). The
case of a specific stroke victim who was aphasic, able to understand perfectly but unable to get a
single word out, and with no movement of the right face, arm, and leg (Weisman) proves neurology and
its dealings with the same illusion of the self. The case of the stroke patient who remained able to
understand but could only use simple words (Weisman) a few days after the incident demonstrates how as
different parts of the brain have been changed by the condition the unified and indivisible language
appears to be an illusion (Weisman). Buddhism’s close association with neuroscience is linked to the
use of empirical data of its founders in noting the natural world, noting the constant change, shifting
parts, and impermanence and calling it anicca, a central dogma of Buddhism (Weisman). Buddhism
understood the nature of change and of divided parts, and then applied it to the human mind (Weisman).
Overcoming egocentrism and recognizing the connection between the world and humans (Weisman), and the
part humans play in the constantly changing natural world are key to Buddhism. The belief of Buddhism
in that an immaterial thing survives brain death and is reincarnated (Weisman) is not as foreign from
the concept that during life, consciousness changes as mental states replace one another (Weisman),
making each moment a reincarnation from the moment before (Weisman). Brain involvement produces the
mind which if combined with human exceptionalism becomes the concept of the soul and of vain fantasy,
but which if associated with Buddhism’s rejection of vanity becomes less of an error and of the sin of
pride (Weisman); thus fulfilling Buddhism’s intention of promoting the impermanence of the human
condition.
David Weisman presents “Buddhism and the Brain” in a formal and positive style. Attention is
paid to writing as proven by the use of the varied properly structured sentences, the choice of words,
and the good flow of thought. The almost compare-and-contrast manner by which the ideas are presented
lends to what appears to be an objective and logical composition for a specific targeted audience.
“Buddhism and the Brain” introduces issues on neurology and neuroscience, and even presents a
scientific case as a contribution towards this aim. However, the compare and contrast presentation is
more on the discussion of Buddhism that although science is one of the intended subjects of the
article, issues on Buddhism dominates the article, making the work more of a material to convince the
audience of the value of Buddhism.
Response
“Buddhism and the Brain” by David Weisman is on the overlap of neurology and neuroscience and
Buddhism in the concept of the impermanence of the illusion of the self. The argument is well-presented
in a compare and contrast manner that contributes significantly to the revelation of the said overlap.
The article draws attention in its examples as in the case of the stroke victim, and in the emphasis on
the Buddhism dogma. The article with its objective and direct wording make its understanding easier.
However, despite that “Buddhism and the Brain” is a well-written article that appears to be one
on which much time was devoted. The article simplifies rather complex processes such that, although it
is true that language is unified and indivisible (Weisman) and that language is the work of different
parts of the brain, comparing said process to the concept of the self in Buddhism is a flimsy
correlation. The work of the different parts of the brain is physiological such that it takes more than
simply willing oneself to that make it effective. The work of the different parts of the brain is
physiological that results in a ripple effect with all other physiologic functions that comprises the
complicated concept of the self. On the other hand, defining Buddhism as simply the impermanence and
illusory self does not give much credit to the religion. Buddhism has a rich culture and is a practice
that goes beyond the mere impermanence of the self such that discrimination is essential in determining
the overlap of Buddhism and the brain.
Work Cited
Weisman, David. ”Buddhism and the Brain.” SeedMagazine.com. Web. 2 Nov. 2015.
TO HAVE YOUR ASSIGNMENTS DONE AT A CHEAPER PRICE, PLACE THIS ORDER OR A SIMILAR ORDER WITH US NOW.