[Buddha-l] NYTimes.com: Let Us Pray for Wealth

[L.S. Cousins]

Richard,

>That would require first establishing what counts as evidence. I am not sure
>how one can find evidence in this kind of thing that is not in some way
>question-begging.

At this level all philosophical claims are necessarily incoherent.

>  > But what I said was that Buddhism 'has a better track record in this
>>  area.' I can think of other areas where e.g. Christianity has a
>>  better track record.
>
>I suppose what I find troublesome is the very idea of talking of track records
>at all when dealing with such ill-defined subjects as Buddhism and
>Christianity. It is not entirely clear how one could decide who counts as a
>Buddhist and who counts as a Christian. If one cannot decide that, then one
>does not even have a subject about which to begin collecting data.

That would apply to any historical issue and any political issue too.

>  > There was and is no intention either to 'sew harmony' or to sew
>>  disharmony, only to establish truth.
>
>The question of whether Christians (whoever they may be) or Buddhists (whoever
>they may be) have a better track record in some area seems to me one of those
>areas in which there is no truth to the matter.

I find that simply evasive. My experience is that if one carefully 
examines historical issues one generally finds that they are not as 
black and white as one initially supposes. That for me makes 
examining them worthwhile.

>  > I think I understand where you are coming from. But I simply don't
>>  think one should deny facts just because acknowledging them might be
>>  misused by some.
>
>I think the question has been set up in such a way that there are no facts to
>be either affirmed or denied. What one is trading in here is mostly
>prejudice.

The problem for me here is that the kind of claim you are making 
seems to fly in the face of commonsense. By trying to deny manifest 
facts, you strengthen and reinforce prejudice.

Lance