[Buddha-l] What's the use of buddha-l?

[Erik Hoogcarspel]

Op 27-12-2009 13:56, Mike Austin schreef:
> Chris Fynn<cfynn at gmx.net>  writes
>
>    
>> Does everything need to fulfil a utilitarian purpose to justify its
>> existence?
>>      
> Yes: when that 'existence' is largely contingent on the effort put in by
> those asking such a question.  The real question they are asking is "Are
> my efforts benefiting anyone?"
>    
Not necessarily true, if you like what you do, you don't have to have a 
utilitarian justification. It is a very Buddhistic point of view to say 
that life in general is not useful. Perhaps you might ask yourself don't 
I have some better things to do?
> Being a central figure running a Buddhist Centre,  this sort of question
> often arises in my mind.
>    
I've been there too and my answer used to be that I had no clue 
whatsoever if the Centre was of any use to anyone, but I liked the 
region to provide the possibility for people to find out. And as long as 
people kept coming it served that purpose.
> I would vote to keep Buddha-l. Just wobble about in the middle, Richard.
>    
The same could be said of the list, as long as there's enough discussion 
going on it serves a purpose, but if nobody would bother to react any 
more, it would have become obsolete. For Richard and Jim it's of course 
a matter of personal choice if it's worth the effort.
I to would vote to keep Buddha-l.

erik


-- 
Groet

Erik

Info: www.xs4all.nl/~jehms
Weblog: http://www.volkskrantblog.nl/pub/blogs/blog.php?uid=2950
Productie: http://www.olivepress.nl