Hardcover. Columbia University Press 2006-10-06.
ISBN: 0231138342 / 0-231-13834-2
EAN: 9780231138345
A Well-Intentioned (But Limited) Effort (Rating 3 of 5)
» J. Storey
B. Alan Wallace seems to be an ideal candidate to write books on the theme of "contemplative science", having training in both Tibetan buddhism and physics for many years. His familiarity with standard Mahayana Buddhist doctrines is evident throughout his writings, which is a plus when trying to integrate Buddhism into modern science, which he is trying to do. In this sense, Wallace's writings can be seen as extensions of the Dalai Lama's excursions into science.
However, as I mentioned in my review of the Dalai Lama's efforts to "converge" Buddhism with modern science, the marriage, so to speak, has more problems than is evident in this style of writing. Yeah? Like what?, the true devotee asks...
Wallace, of course, views much of modern science as "externally" focused, with too much attention placed on the physical universe and not enough on inner, "subjective" experience, especially as accumulated over thousands of years in the great religious traditions (certainly understandable, for a devout Buddhist...). Accordingly, Wallace decries what he sees as the mental aspect being relegated to secondary status, as a mere epiphenomenon of the material world. Wallace hence is suspicious of modern theories of complexity being adequate in explaining the mental side of humans. His own ideas on consciousness seem to be based much on ideas of the great early American psychologist William James, as well as on current "hard-problem" observations by David Chalmers and others. What Wallace comes up with as a basic ontology, then, is that consciousness is actually primary in our physical universe and we need to shift our thinking (I hate to use the New-Age term "paradigm shift", so I won't).
Consciousness is, of course, a difficult subject for everyone. Physicists are trying to get it out of pure quantum mechanics, neurophysiologists are trying to determine a physical basis for it, Whiteheadians posit it must be fundamental (as Wallace does), Chalmers himself wants a physical description that goes beyond merely functional descriptions, etc. etc. So everybody has problems with consciousness. Wallace has training as a physicist, but he glosses over the problems in injecting consciousness into quantum mechanics as he tries to do. The vast majority of physicists do NOT see consciousness (human or otherwise) as important in quantum mechanics, despite some popular efforts to make it important. The word "observation" has been long misused and misunderstood in this area, and this isn't the place to rehash the sloppy use of such words. In this respect, Wallace does the reader no favor, offering as he does a viewpoint that is on the "fringe" area of orthodox physics.
Buddhism itself is problematic in regards to empirical science, despite what many "convergers" (hey! a new word I just coined, don't be stealing it) have described. I have briefly commented on some of the problems in another review and won't go over that now. Here, I would like to briefly comment on the so-called "no-self" (anatta) doctrine, which asserts that there is no such thing as a permanent ego-self. In other words, your human personality is a makeshift construction that is being replaced moment-by-moment and has no real substance. We can all agree that the topic of what the "self" really consists of is another difficult topic, but it is questionable whether the Buddhists got this right or not. Some scientists and philosophers have indeed found Buddhist ideas of the "no-self" congenial to their understanding, but many others have not. Common sense certainly seems to throw some doubt on the doctrine that your personality has no real "core". Just think back to your early childhood- honesty will tell you that you indeed have a continuous personality from square one, which seems rather mysterious if we grant the Buddhists are correct that we are looking at something that is fundamentally illusory.
That just doesn't seem to jive with personal experience.
If you stomped on the foot of the most enlightened Buddhist around, for example, despite their insistance there is no self, you will certainly see a "self" yell instantly :-).
Moreover, many Buddhists seem to be confusing subjective experiences of personal self-awareness "dissolving" in mystical experiences with questionable ontological assertions. The subjective experiences are common across humans of all cultures, and indeed, I've experienced such myself. But this kind of thing is hardly any "proof" for a "no-self", and shouldn't be used as any kind of empirical statement
A very informative read (Rating 5 of 5)
» Mary F. Obrien
B. Alan Wallace is a leading scholar and author on this subject. His way of writing in simple language about complicated concepts makes for very informative and fascinating reading. His insights can bring about a major shift in our perception of the relationship between science and spirituality
good place to start (Rating 5 of 5)
» R. Jeffrey Goldsmith
dr wallace is a sophisticated scientist who is very experienced in talking about the details of buddhism. he understands the thousands of years of studying the mind from a buddhist perspectice and how to integrate it with modern science. he has the input of the dalai lama too, having been a translator for him for years. i encourage the serious reader to take a look
Contemplative Science (Rating 4 of 5)
» Susan A. Massmann
good shape copy of a good readable book. arrived quickly
would have preferred paperback but was ok
Not quite what it suggests (Rating 3 of 5)
» MindCurious
Readers be warned: the subtitle to this book,"Where Buddhism and Neuroscience Converge" is quite misleading--there are only a few very cursory references to anything about neuroscience. Based on the title and introduction, I purchased this assuming it might explain how scientific research on the brain illuminates the practice of meditation and the contemplative tradition (and vice-versa). It does not. For those interested in the connection between meditation and Western neuroscience, you'll find little here to satisfy you.
The book you want is Train Your Mind, Change Your Brain, by Sharon Begley. The unfortunate title suggests little more than standard pop-psych self-help, but Ms. Begley's book provides a solid, readable account of neuroscience research from the last 10-15 years that relates specifically to the potential changes brought about in the brain through the practice of meditation, including recent studies on the brains of highly experienced meditators. I cannot recommend that book highly enough
(Rating 3 of 5)
(Rating 5 of 5)
(Rating 4 of 5)
