Reviews and Comments

I found Flanagan's writing clear and enjoyable, and his exploration of Buddhism from a naturalist philosopher's perspective rather elucidating. I particularly found it enlightening to find that I did not like when he calls to question whether Buddhist epistemology necessarily leads to Buddhist-style ethics, because I want to believe they do, but that's not very Buddhist of me, to be so attached to the believe that there can and should be an "ought" that everyone can find their way to. It's also not very "me," in that I actually believe people can be such different phenomena in the world that not everyone can "find their way" to the same solutions -- for example, the Buddhist "solution" to living is going to work better for someone of average mental health than for someone who struggles with the sort of chemically/physically-based depression or other psychological situations that some people struggle with.

I still feel that there's something missing in Flanagan's work, something I can't put my finger on about a "correct" view of anatman/no-self and its link with compassion. He does allow for the possibility that compassion should come up just because we happen to be the sort of beings for whom compassion and social engagement makes us flourish better -- and I think that's true -- but he's correct to point out that isn't the Buddhist argument. It should be added to the Buddhist argument, but it isn't it. I guess I think part of the reason a "correct perception" of impermanence and no-self should generally lead to compassion is that, usually, human beings who seek enlightenment are, to some degree, interested in alleviating some suffering, or dealing with some pain, and a certain understanding of impermanence and no-self can (should?) engender self-compassion, self-forgiveness, self-kindness and gratitude which can then be easily directed outward to others. One should, theoretically, not jump to sadness and nihilism because, I think, the idea of impermanence and an understanding of the origins and causes of "dukkha" is intended to be a relief. This relief allows us to be kinder to ourselves, and then to others.

In any case, I highly recommend this book to anyone with an interest in Buddhism and philosophy, especially those who lean "agnostic or atheist or naturalist" or what-have-you when it comes to spirituality or religion.

As someone who has absorbed a lot of judgemental, "superiority" attitudes regarding sports, and generally ignored it, I really appreciated this sports-lover and radical/academic's exploration of why sports matter to him and the radical possibilities available in caring about sports. The writing is a little scattershot and didn't always speak directly to me, but since one main thread of his argument revolves around embracing difference and celebrating incommensurability, in really listening to other people, I appreciated all of his efforts and would recommend this book to other sports-averse radical-leaning types like myself.

You only learn and grow in the collisions with the unknown or the unfamiliar. Give it a try!

Some of the essays in this book are truly enlightening, especially the one on Manners & Deference, and the one on Social Science as Utopia. Really, they're all excellent, but those are the two that stick with me.