1. Hinduism and Buddhism offer much more sophisticated worldviews (or philosophies) and I see nothing wrong with these religions.

Comment #108109 by davidwelsh on January 6, 2008 at 3:36 am

I'm a Buddhist, and I personally see Hinduism as having much more in common with the monotheistic faiths than with Buddhism - aside of course from the many superficial similarities that arise from the fact that both religions have their origin in Indian culture. I think it's rather misleading to discuss them lumped together.

With regards to Buddhism though, there was almost nothing I found in "The God Delusion" that is incompatible with Buddhism. (The only thing I couldn't agree with was the wholly materialist view of consciousness - but as I understand it, that's still a point of significant debate amongst scientists anyway.)

The important thing about Buddhism which distinguishes it from other religions (and leads some not to want to label Buddhism a "religion" at all) is the basis on which Buddhists are supposed to believe things or not believe things. The Buddha said explicitly that people should not believe in anything because of tradition or because a religious teacher has said it to be so. The Buddhist criterion for deciding whether to believe in something or not is essentially consequentialist. If a belief makes you more greedy, hateful and deluded then you should abandon it, if a belief makes you less greedy, hateful and deluded, then you should embrace it. (The full text, called The Kalama Sutta, can be read here: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/soma/wheel008.html )

Buddhism is, therefore, wholly compatible with science - in that when science proves a Buddhist belief to be false Buddhists will, in general, abandon it. The Buddha, for example, clearly believed that the world was flat - because that was the accepted cosmology of his time. No Buddhist today, I hope, maintains this belief. Similarly, although I do not share Dawkins' belief that consciousness can be explained entirely materially, if science proves that it is so, I will simply have to change my belief in the face of the evidence - just as I'm sure Dawkins will if the evidence goes the other way.

No less prominent a Buddhist than the Dalai Lama has said exactly the same thing - that if science proves the materialist view of consciousness, Buddhists will simply have to change their religion (abandoning, for example, belief in rebirth.)

This attitude to belief is absolutely central to the Buddhist way of thinking and makes Buddhism, I feel, one attractive option for those of us for whom faith in unprovable assertions is not an option, but who still yearn for a way of embracing beauty and finding meaning in our universe.