Quote:
Originally Posted by uke_master
There are two issues here. One is the sets of facts that science and religions respectively claim. The other is the methodologies they go about to acquire knowledge.
Now you can say that Hinduism is just doing philosophy if you will and that is fine. But it also makes very concrete claims about the nature of the universe, such as the notion of reincarnation. If you make a claim you need to JUSTIFY it. So what is the justification for this claim? Is there a any evidence of it? Any rational argument in support of it?
What you cannot do (and remain intellectually honest) is claim there is this big other domain which science does not apply to, and then give no reason why this domain even exists or how we form an epistemology in this new domain if not methodological naturalism.
Care to present evidence against reincarnation? Can I falsify the conjecture that there is no reincarnation? Isn't it obvious that this is a question to which you cannot apply the scientific method as usual?
Similarly about Karma, Destiny, the nature of the soul, Enlightenment, liberation and so on an so forth. Those are not questions to which you can apply the scientific method in its usual form. Thus, they should be tackled by other means.
Intuition is always important, but it is held that the philosophical conjectures of Hinduism and Buddhist thought become evident in the course of methodical spiritual practice.
I, for one, haven't truly reached such a level, but my intuition and logic tell me that the doctrine is (more) elegant (than any other) and very plausible. I can present you with little bits of evidence that those claims should be taken seriously; I cannot present you with anything astounding. But what's more important is that those questions are meant to be sought spiritually; they are not solvable by any scientific means as of yet and they are also very metaphysical in nature.
Last edited by Rhaegar; 07-10-2012 at 06:00 PM.