Culture: Any Buddhists out there??

[Bella20]

Are you a Buddhist? Do you know a lot about Buddhism?

I have one question!

How would Buddhism respond to this claim:

To say of something that it is socially constructed is to emphasize its dependence on contingent aspects of our social life. This thing could not have existed had we not built it. If we were a different kind of society, if we had different needs, wants, values or interests, we might have built a different kind of thing, or build this one differently. Social construction is applied to worldly items and to our beliefs about them.

I'm a little confused about the Buddhist's interpretation of reality... So any help you could give, I really appreciate.

Thanks a lot guys

- Bella

[Imprecision]

First, you must understand that there are many varieties of "Buddhism"s. Each Buddhism has its own interpretation of reality.

You might want to look into the Buddhist notion of dependent origination.

I would say that some varieties of Buddhism would agree with your statement, while others would not. Your statement seems derivative of cultural Marxism. There are some Buddhist philosophers who are influenced by Marxism. You might want to look into them.

[Bella20]

I was actually thinking about disagreeing with the statement --- relating it to the extrinsic value, which is set by social construction and leads to anxiety and depression.

[Imprecision]

I say that in your statement you only mentioned that some things are socially constructed. You did not mention which specific things are socially constructed.

According to many schools of Buddhism, desire is the root of suffering. According to other schools, desire is not the problem - Instead, the misapprehension of the nature of reality, also known as ignorance, is the problem. In either case, desire is assumed to have an objective reality.

This interpretation of Buddhism would disagree with your statement.

[jul-els]

I believe the bolded statment is referring to the way in which a spirit exists within the material realm. If the two are separated, the social construct loses it's meaning. It only retains it's value in reality in the context of the spiritual force behind it from which it takes it's shape. It's from that spiritual energy that it was created and thus also ceases to be.

[tiredofvampires]

The crux of Buddhism is the study of suffering's roots, and how to eradicate them, using an observance-based system of watching one's own mind and thoughts.

Buddhism states that there are several main causes of suffering that pervade our entire thinking process, and being that we are so immersed in them and unconscious of them, we are living in a state of ignorance. And that this ignorance then generates more of the same. The goal being to arrest this process by becoming aware of what our minds are doing (especially to keep false realities going).

The notion that desire and aversion (two sides of the same coin, really) create suffering is central to all Buddhist theory on the nature of human reality.

And also:

-- that there is no such thing as a "self" which is concrete, and having its own identity; namely, it is a constant interaction of forces and moments in the mind that are fluid and dependent on all the things that are shaping it (so basically, the sense of an existent "I" is misguided as we are all aggregates that come together and dissolve; there is no inherent "self" we can hang our hats on, it's a mirage)

-- the nature of all reality is impermanence

These two aspects of reality in particular, when denied, cause us the resultant desires and aversions that create and perpetuate suffering.

I don't see that any of these theoretical definitions of "reality" are terribly relevant to your OP statement. I think Buddhism would generally say that everything we conceive is a construct, generated by the content and quality of our minds. And therefore, all social constructs would follow suit with that. As Imprecision says, "dependent origination" is the idea that all phenomena depend on other phenomena to take form, so I suppose this could relate in that social constructs follow the causes that have set them into motion as they have. And that given this, we have created that which we were set in motion to create, by our nature.

The "nature of reality" in Buddhism doesn't generally talk much about social constructs, it talks more about the nature of consciousness and the mind. Everything we create stemming from these, which may relate somewhat to your statement. Buddhism claims that our consciousness sows the seeds for what will then arise.

But since things only arise as they are set in motion to arise from their roots, it's pretty self-evident that if we were different, of course we'd have different outcomes and a different society. It's kind of like saying, "If we were equipped with different desires and different minds, would we have a different society?" Of course, yes.

[Bella20]

Thank you so much you guys!!!!!!!!