... but it's all the same idea.
When I was reading Chapter 8 "Immanuel Kant's Copernican Revolution", I did not really get the idea that his theories were quite unique. This is because many of his theories and ideas reminded me of the Hindu and Buddhist religions. An example of this is on page 126 in the text, "For every change there is an antecedent event which is necessarily connected with it." Karma, anyone? The Law of Karma (in the Hindu religion) has to do with moral justice and reincarnation. In the Buddhist religion it is simply a cause and effect action; every action has a an effect: bad action= bad effect, good action=good effect; but there is no reincarnation. So, when Pojman discusses Kant's view of the above quote, he is implying that Kant thought of that theory all by himself. However I suppose this could be the idea of 'people thinking of similar thoughts/theories at different/same time in different parts of the world' deal. I just don't understand that if his idea is so 'revolutionary', why don't people think that the Buddhist/Hindu aspects of religion are as well if they are so similar?
No comments:
Post a Comment