How come there are no Buddhist scientists?

[Moonbear]

The few people who I've known for a fact are Buddhist, I knew for YEARS before learning what their religion was. So, it's quite possible that Buddhist scientists just have no particular reason to advertise their religion to others.

 

[Zdenka]

Sorry, I didn't mean to border on the 'race issue', but simply pointing out the fact the overwhelming number of Buddhists are Asians.

I believe the answer is the Buddhists are simply VERY content in their own way of thinking and are less likely to pursue other schools of thoughts such as Science, quantum physics etc. Being Buddhist takes up a lot of their time and energy!

On another note, I do NOT think true Buddhists are living a 'divine' life. They aren't allowed to marry or fall in love, create offspring, nor experience profound human emotions, etc.

A divine/desirable life would be to live life to the fullest, be kind, find love with a beautiful woman (if a male), have children, experience such human emotions as pure joy, laughter etc. This is the ultimate essence of what it means to be a human being, a while buddhists can wax philosophy about life, they have yet to experience life the way it was meant to be.

 

[TheStatutoryApe]

Sorry, I didn't mean to border on the 'race issue', but simply pointing out the fact the overwhelming number of Buddhists are Asians.

I believe the answer is the Buddhists are simply VERY content in their own way of thinking and are less likely to pursue other schools of thoughts such as Science, quantum physics etc. Being Buddhist takes up a lot of their time and energy!

On another note, I do NOT think true Buddhists are living a 'divine' life. They aren't allowed to marry or fall in love, create offspring, nor experience profound human emotions, etc.

A divine/desirable life would be to live life to the fullest, be kind, find love with a beautiful woman (if a male), have children, experience such human emotions as pure joy, laughter etc. This is the ultimate essence of what it means to be a human being, a while buddhists can wax philosophy about life, they have yet to experience life the way it was meant to be.

There is a difference between buddhist monks and buddhists. There are also differing schools of thought on buddhism and what you are describing is only one.

 

[Zdenka]

There is a difference between buddhist monks and buddhists. There are also differing schools of thought on buddhism and what you are describing is only one.

Yes, I'm talking about those who strictly adhere to Buddhism.

 

[Gold Barz]

Sorry, I didn't mean to border on the 'race issue', but simply pointing out the fact the overwhelming number of Buddhists are Asians.



I believe the answer is the Buddhists are simply VERY content in their own way of thinking and are less likely to pursue other schools of thoughts such as Science, quantum physics etc. Being Buddhist takes up a lot of their time and energy!

On another note, I do NOT think true Buddhists are living a 'divine' life. They aren't allowed to marry or fall in love, create offspring, nor experience profound human emotions, etc.

A divine/desirable life would be to live life to the fullest, be kind, find love with a beautiful woman (if a male), have children, experience such human emotions as pure joy, laughter etc. This is what being a human being really comes to.

Buddhism can talk the talk, but they don't walk the walk. :)

What are you talking about?, Buddhism is actually one of the few religions that try to incorporate science to the religion and not push it away, check Mind & Life conference. The Buddha was heavily against blind faith and Buddhism is far from being dogmatic religion, even the Dalai Lama said if that if science proves something about Buddhism is not true then they would have to accept it as fact.

Buddhists DO live normal lives, you are generalizing EVERY Buddhist as a monk while the majority are actually layman and live normal lives..."can talk the talk but don't walk the walk"?, what does that even mean?

 

[ideasrule]

Yes obviously a joke since none of the IQ of religions overlap. Eg the graph shows that Hindus have an IQ of exactly 85 to 100, but Atheists are 110 to 115. What about those in between?

The graph may be ********, but that's not the reason. Look at the caption. It says: "AVERAGE IQ of world religions". Average, not range.

 

[hamster143]

On another note, I do NOT think true Buddhists are living a 'divine' life. They aren't allowed to marry or fall in love, create offspring, nor experience profound human emotions, etc.

I'd like to point out that there's no prohibition against marrying or creating offspring for lay Buddhists. The prohibition only applies to Buddhist monks. In this aspect, Buddhists are not substantially different from Christians (in fact, many branches of Christianity are far more severe than Buddhism: one of the most influential Zen Buddhist teachers in the West, D.T.Suzuki, was happily married, whereas even lowly Catholic priests are required to remain celibate.)

With regard to human emotions, that is also a severe misrepresentation of the teaching. Buddhists are encouraged to deconstruct their emotions and identify them for what they are. The doctrine is that, if you approach the question objectively and impartially, most emotions can be traced to some form of attachment (maybe desire for attachment or fear of loss of attachment). Since, as Buddhism teaches, attachments can't be permanent, simple recognition of that fact makes many emotions (be it negative or positive) go away.

The graph appears to be fake: there's no such thing as "Int Journ Soc Rel". There's an International Journal of Religion of Society, which was first printed in 2007.