Buddhism K 1 Michigan7 2013

Buddhism K BFJR 7wk
1nc
The 1acs faith in modern economics facilitates exploitation, violence
and oppression a paradigm shift is key
Sivaraksa 2 (Sulak, one of the fathers of the International Network of Engaged Buddhists
(INEB), Economic Aspects of Social and Environmental Violence from a Buddhist Perspective,
Muse)//RM
If we understand liberation as an impulse that seeks to enhance life in all forms, then the Buddhist
ahimsa (nonkilling) concept becomes a precondition for societal liberation and world peace. To generate peace
and bring about liberation requires eliminating, or at least reducing, violence. The first precept deals with direct violence but may also
encompass structural violence. Structural violence may be defined as institutionalized forms of violence
involving, for example, women, children, minority groups, low income countries, or the rest of nature. It
is the culmination of greed, hatred, and delusion. Though less visible and hence less accountable, structural violence
sets the ground for direct violence: Violence does not require direct confron- tation. The structures
of the global economy make possible exploitation and oppression on a scale that
defies comment actions that necessarily involve the loss of lives. These structures inclined the masters to violate
the poor and the environment. Partly because of vested interests , the rich and powerful do
not see these structures and their actions as violent. Besides, they have a number of ideas that help legitimize and redeem these
structures, such as progress and development. Increasingly, trade laws are legalizing the exploitation and
plunder of transnational corporations. Furthermore, the global economic structures facilitate the
concentration of wealth, capital, and especially resources in the hands of the masters, denying them to the
masses. Certainly, the masses' permission of such conduct is found wanting hence the violation of the second precept. And
if one perceives consumerism as deliberately deceptive, then one can also accuse the global economy of promoting false speech. Modern education deals
almost exclusively with the minds, not the hearts, of students. The most able (e.g., aggressive, competitive, etc.) are recognized and
rewarded, although they need not be "good" in the moral sense or aware of societal ills. Indeed many of the rich and powerful are unhappy. Directly
or otherwise, their exalted positions are built on mass poverty and ecological devastation. This is in part a result
of ignorance (avijja) or delusion (moha). Realizing the threat of ignorance or delusion, Buddhism encourages the
cultivation of right mindfulness , which directly leads to inner peace and heightened awareness
of social realities. In order to build inner peace along with an understanding of social reality, one [End Page
51] uses bhavana, the third Buddhist component to realize freedom. Often described as meditation, bhavana is better understood as
"cultivation" or "self-training." Contrary to popular belief, it does not merely mean sitting in solitude and engaging in some special form of internal
contemplation. Bhavana really entails investigating, reflecting, learningnourishing the mind in order to develop
oneself toward enlightenment. In short, it is the practice of living daily as mindfully as possible. Thus one can engage in it even while
performing daily routines. Traditionally the first part of bhavana aims at achieving tranquility (samatha), at planting seeds of peace within. The
second is comprised of the technique for understanding the true situation of one's psychophysical
constitution and of the world. This is known as vipassana, or insight meditation, which can be further developed
into a tool for analytical thinking by way of causal relations or problem solving. With the ego detached, it
becomes an internal factor of wisdom. Critical self-awareness leads to selflessness .
***Specific link
The impact is extinction
Puntasen 7 (APICHAI, Professor and Dean, Faculty of Management Science, December 12,
2007, BUDDHIST ECONOMICS AS A NEW PARADIGM TOWARDS HAPPINESS, Society and
Economy, Vol. 29, No. 2, pp. 181-200) //RM
It has now been shown clearly that the word utility as used in western economics had its origin from pleasure that leads to enjoyment and later,
especially, in the late 1950s and throughout the 1960s it was used synonymously with happiness. There is a reason explaining this happening. Most
of the so-called "economists" usually take the economic subject for granted. They do not
make any attempt to find out what the core values of this subject are, for fear that it will not be a positive
inquiry. Like it or not, mainstream economics (commonly known as capitalism) does have its own core values. The rest of economic subjects have been
developed from these values. There are two core values commonly accepted without question by economists: (1) Following self-interest is
considered to be rational behaviour for an individual. (2) Only competition can lead to economic progress (more and efficient production leads to
lower cost for a consumer). The final output of any economic process is the generation of utility for an indi-
vidual or the welfare of the society. Also, there is rarely a case of diminishing utility or even the saturation of marginal utility. If the case
arises, it is usually recommended that the consumer switch to other products or services where his/her marginal utilities from consumption of such
services or products are still higher than that of the money of that person so that the person can continue to enjoy more from more consumption of other
goods and services. While income serves only as an instantaneous constraint in the short run, in the longer run
it can be generated from more production. As a result, income has never been a true constraint. What
has never been much mentioned in economics is that production and consumption are related to
destruction of resources. In any production process, there is also waste in addition to output. The same holds to the consumption process.
More rapid production and consumption results in more rapid production of waste . Competition
will hasten the production and consumption processes further. There is a tendency for waste to be created at a more rapid
pace than the ab- sorptive capacity of the environment. The whole process would finally lead to the selfdestruction of humankind . One needs only to look at the existing problem of global warming
for present evidence. Worse still is the fact that each individual able to consume more, cannot be fully
guaranteed for having higher satisfaction or pleasure, let alone peace and tranquility. This is due to the fact that
satisfaction or pleasure is a state of mind. It can originate from many sources other than consumption. Many times the pleasure from consumption
may come from less than healthy desires, such as to show off or to maintain the status quo of the consumer without actually increasing glad- ness or
joy. Such actions only amount to unnecessary waste of resources. In fact, the concept that more consumption will lead to higher utility and more social
welfare only comes from a theoretical statement through logical deduction, without any solid proof. This is because economics operates only on a set
of assumptions rather than the reality of the very high degree of sophistication of the human mind. The fact that it tries to avoid dealing with the mind is
because it wants to protect its integrity as a scientific subject, which is in fact an illusion. The real reason is due more to the
deficiency or ignorance of economists in dealing with the mind in a more scientific way, rather than the
excuse of maintaining the scientific nature of the subject. The fact that following the two core values in
mainstream economics will eventually lead to the self-destruction of humankind is enough to
warrant the need for a paradigm shift .
The alternative is to reject the 1acs call to act in favor of mindful

reflection.
Mindfulness redraws economic frameworks creates systemic change
that reverses injustice
Magnuson 11 PhD in Economics, Professor @ PCC
(Joel, Ethical Principles and Economic Transformation A Buddhist Approach, p. 99)//BB
In a literal sense, mindfulness is a state of mind in which people become aware of their thoughts and actions,
and are fully occupied in the present moment. To be mindful is to be totally engaged in the here and the
now. With mindfulness, our minds are not cluttered with a running mental commentary or mental chatter about the millions of things that
can capture our thoughts in a state. Mindfulness is a state that is free from this chatter and thereby enables us to
openly and directly be engaged in the activities before us. With a daily practice of mindfulness, we can
break out of the treadmill of pathology of action and mind. We become awakened to the true dynamic between action and
ideality, and develop a clear understanding of the meaning of our actions and our motives. Mindfulness is thoughtfulness without superfluous baggage,
and thoughts are clear, open and directly focused on the tasks at hand. Cultivated over time with practice, mindfulness allows us to be
present in our minds and directly engaged in our daily tasks without delusion or attachment. But these tasks are
not random, they are directed toward bringing about human and ecological well-being and this will involve playing a role in institutional and systemic
change. Active social participation is part of the Buddhist way. According to the teachings of the Buddha, people are not to escape from
life, but to relate and engage to it as thoroughly as possible (Hanh 1998, 8). Such engagement is the practice of
mindfulness. With appropriate mindfulness, people can begin the hard work of restructuring key
economic institutions that direct economic activity on to a new course that leads
systemic change and healthier livelihoods. Just as the institutions of capitalism have evolved over time
to cohere into a complete economic system, the new institutions of a mindful economy , in time, will evolve and cohere into
a new system. With appropriate mindfulness, systemic change will come to pass as a result of a process
that will evolve out of, and away from, the current capitalist system, but not by overthrowing it as many critics of capitalism have
advocated. Systemic change is predicated on a kind of redrawing the institutional map . By this we
mean actively mapping out a new set of institutions that are fully integrated and cohere systemically.
Systemic change is an evolutionary process that openly seeks to redefine all aspects of economic life: the
structure of ownership, the relationships between workers and managers, how consumers and producers
interact, the nature and function of financial systems and financial instruments, public policy, clear ideas
of what fairness and justice mean, as well as ecology and peoples relationships to their natural
environment. All of these elements cohere into, and are embedded within, a broader cultural
configuration that will be the mindful economy .
Links
2nc Comprehensive
Our current solutions are DELUSIONS. They all reinforce the problems
at hand. Only through the alt can we finally awaken.
Loy 10 ( David R. Loy is a professor, writer, and Zen teacher in the Sanbo Kyodan tradition of
Japanese Zen Buddhism, 2010, Healing Ecology, Journal of Buddhist Ethics, Volume 17,
http://blogs.dickinson.edu/buddhistethics/files/2010/05/Loy-Healing-Ecology1.pdf) //RM
One way to describe this problem is that, since
the sense of self is a mental construct, it is by definition ungrounded and

insecure. It can never secure itself because theres nothing substantial or real
there that could be secured. The constructed self is better understood as a work in progress, because it is never
completedmore precisely, always unhealed. Another way to say it is that the sense of self is always shadowed or haunted by a sense
of lack. Processes are temporal, necessarily impermanent, but we dont want to be something thats changing all the time, vulnerable to illness, old
age and death. So we keep trying to secure ourselves, often in ways that just make our situation worse. This is
the core of the ignorance that Buddhism emphasizes. We often try to secure ourselves by identifying with
things outside us that (we think) can provide the grounding we crave: money, material possessions,
reputation, power, physical attractiveness, and so forth. That is because we misunderstand our sense of
lack as due to lack of such things. Since none of them can actually ground or secure my sense-of-self, it means that
no matter how much money, and so forth, I may accumulate, I never seem to have enough. The tragedy, from a
Buddhist perspective, is that such attempts to solve the problem so often end up reinforcing the actual
problemthe sense that there is a me thats separate from others. The Buddhist solution to this predicament is not to get rid
of the self. That cannot be done, and does not need to be done, because there is no separate self. There never was such a self. It is the sense of self
that needs to be deconstructed (for example, in meditation) and reconstructed (for example, replacing the three poisons
of greed, ill will and delusion with their more positive counterparts: generosity, lovingkindness, and wisdom). We need to
wake up and see through the illusion of self: I am not inside, peering out at the objective world out there. Rather, I am one
of the ways in which all the causes and conditions of the world come togetherwhat the whole world is doingright
here and now. This realization does not automatically solve all my personal problems, but it reveals how my sense of self can be
reconstructed, so that my way of experiencing the world is more permeable and I relate to others in a
less dualistic fashion. brings us to the bodhisattva path. In Buddhism that path is often presented as a personal sacrifice: a bodhisattva is
ungroundable, and therefore always
someone who is enlightened and could choose to leave this world of dukkha, yet he or she sticks around to help the rest of us. But theres another way
to understand it. If Im not separate from everyone else, can my well-being really be distinguished from the well-being of others? How can I be fully
enlightened, then, unless everyone else is as well? In that case, following the bodhisattva path is better understood as a more advanced stage of
Buddhist practice: learning to live in ways that apply this insight to our daily lives. Taking care of others, then, becomes as natural as taking care of
my own leg. To summarize: for Buddhism the sense of self is not something self-existing and real but a psychological construction, which involves a
sense of separation from others. Our deepest dukkha is that we feel disconnected from the rest of the world , and this
feeling is always uncomfortable, because insecure. We
do many things that (we hope) will make us feel more real, yet they often
reinforce that sense of separation. No matter what we have or what we do, its
never enough. While we cannot get rid of a self that does not exist, we can wake up and realize it is
delusive. This also addresses the existential question about the meaning of ones life: realizing my nonduality with the world
frees me to live as I choose, but that will naturally be in a way that contributes to the well-being of the whole, because I dont feel apart
from that whole. This Buddhist account of our individual predicament corresponds precisely to our collective
ecological predicament today.
have the opposite effect: they
Link Modern Economics

Faith in modern economics relies on impersonality and distance from
others meditation is key to releasement
Nelson 11 PhD in Economics, Professor of Economics @ UC-Davis, most known for her
application of feminist theory to questions of the definition of the discipline of economics, and
its models and methodology
(Julie, Ethical Principles and Economic Transformation A Buddhist Approach, p. 24)//BB
Many Buddhist writers on economic issues begin with the experience of meditation , of getting beyond the dualities
of self and no-self, and speak a message of radical interdependence, peace, compassion and engagement. The energy of this discussion is open-hearted,
immediate and joyful. But when the conversation turns to economic systems, it is repeatedly asserted that the
contemporary
economic system is radically impersonal and non-relational . It is claimed that

economies are things entirely set apart from societies, and from the sorts of ethical norms and behaviors
relevant to social life. The sort of system envisaged is not an organic system encompassing change,
impermanence, and evolution, but rather a locked-up system, that once set in motion runs along automatically
according to its own rules. One can see this belief reflected in the frequent use of imagery of machines,
engines and physics-like logic, laws or calculations. Undeniably, the fuel that keeps the capitalist engine running is profit, writes
Sivaraksa (2002, 135, emphasis added). Large corporations are new forms of impersonal collective self, writes Loy (2008, 88, emphasis in original).
Profitability and growth are becoming increasingly important as the engine of the worlds economic activity, he continues, and the system has
attained a life of its own (2008, 88, 90, emphasis added). Jones, in a section on transnational corporations, describes capitalism as a structure or system
driven by the logic of the market (2003, 162), while Santikaro refers to the calculations of the market (2005, 206). The assumption of nonrelationality is also reflected in metaphors of territory, whereby social or religious life is said to belong to one sphere, while
economic life belongs to another realm, set off by boundaries or confines (Santikaro 2005, 204, 206).
Personification is often used as well, treating capitalism as a distinct and permanent entity that acts on the
world on its own behalf, and which possesses an essential nature (Aitken 1984, 29).
Wanting less is a necessary corrective to western economics

Zsolnai 7 (Laszlo Zsolnai is a professor of business ethics and director of the Business Ethics
Center [1] at Corvinus University of Budapest, Society and Economy , Vol. 29, No. 2,
SUSTAINABILITY AND SUFFICIENCY: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN A BUDDHIST PERSPECTIVE
(August 2007), pp. 145-153, http://www.jstor.org/stable/41472078)
In his paper "Towards a Progressive Buddhist Economics", Simon Zadek asks the important question of whether Buddhist economics is able to penetrate
the modern economy to prevent it from driving us along a materially unsustainable path, and to uproot its growing hold on our psychological
conditions. And he concludes that we have no choice but to engage in modernisation in an attempt to redi- rect it or at least reduce its negative effects
(Zadek 1997). Today's dominating business models are based on and cultivates narrow self-centeredness. Buddhist economics points out
that emphasising individuality and promoting the greatest fulfilment of the desires of the individual
conjointly lead to destruction. Happiness research convincingly shows that not material wealth but the
richness of personal relationships determines happiness. Not things but people make people happy (Lane 1998).
Western economics tries to provide people with happi ness by supplying enormous quantities of things.
But what people need are caring relationships and generous love. Buddhist economics makes these values
accessible by direct provision. Peace can be achieved in non-violent ways. Wanting less can substantially
contribute to this endeavour and make it happen easier. Permanence, or ecological sustainability,
requires a drastic cutback in the present level of consumption and production globally. This reduction should
not be an inconvenient exercise of self-sacrifice. In the noble ethos of reducing suffering it can be a positive
development path for humanity.
The affirmatives faith in market economics is inherently marginalizing


(August 2007), pp. 145-153, http://www.jstor.org/stable/41472078)//RM
Karl Polanyi refers to the whole process of marketisation as "The Great Trans- formation", by which
spheres of society became subordinated to the market mechanism (Polanyi 1946). In the age of globalisation we can
experience this marketisation process on a much larger scale and in a speedier way than ever. The
market is a powerful institution. It can provide goods and services in a flexible and productive way; however, it has its own limitations.
Limitations of the market come from non-represented stakeholders, underrepresented stakeholders,
and myopic stakeholders. Primordial stakeholders such as nature and future generations are simply not
represented in the market because they do not have a "vote" in terms of purchasing power. They cannot represent
their interests in the language of supply and demand. Other stakeholders such as the poor and marginalised people are under-
represented because they do not have enough purchasing power to signal their preferences in the
market. Finally, stakeholders who are well represented in the market, because they have enough purchasing power, often behave in a myopic way;
that is, they heavily discount values in space and time. Market prices usually reflect the values of the strongest
stakeholders and favour preferences here and now. Because of these inherent limitations the market
cannot give a complete, un- biased direction for guiding economic activities (Zsolnai - Gasparski 2002).
Economics drives environmental destruction and social injustice

Payutto 88 (a well-known Thai Buddhist monk, an intellectual, and a prolific writer. He is
among the most brilliant Buddhist scholars in the Thai Buddhist history. He authored Buddha
Dhamma, which is acclaimed to as one of the masterpieces in Buddhism that puts together
Dhamma and natural laws by extensively drawing upon Pali Canon, Atthakatha, Digha, etc., to
clarify Buddha's verbatim speech, Buddhist Economists: A middle way for the Marketplace, pg
7) //T.C.
Ideally, the sciences should provide solutions to the complex, interrelated problems that face humanity, but
cut off as it is from other disciplines and the larger sphere of human activity, economics can do little to
ease the ethical, social and environmental problems that face us today . And given the tremendous influence it
exerts on our market-driven societies, narrow economic thinking may, in fact, be the primary cause of
some of our most pressing social and environmental troubles.
Modern economics ignores ethical and social externalities for

supposedly objective and rational thought
7) //T.C.
Like other sciences, economics strives for objectivity. In the process , however, subjective values, such as
ethics, are excluded. With no consideration of subjective, moral values, an economist may say, for
instance, that a bottle of whiskey and a Chinese dinner have the same economic value, or that drinking in
a night club contributes more to the economy than listening to a religious talk or volunteering for
humanitarian work. These are truths according to economics. But the objectivity of economics is
shortsighted. Economists look at just one short phase of the natural causal process and single out the part
that interests them, ignoring the wider ramifications . Thus, modern economists take no account of the
ethical consequences of economic activity. Neither the vices associated with the frequenting of night clubs, nor the
wisdom arising from listening to a religious teaching, are its concern.
The AFF makes assumptions based on economic theories which are

rooted in a misconception of reality creates policy failure. Also,
alternative solves.
TIDEMAN, 04, (SANDER G.TIDEMAN, Mandarin Training Center, National Taiwan Normal
University, Taipei, 2004, Gross National Happiness: Towards a New Paradigm in Economics,
http://www.bhutanstudies.org.bt/pubFiles/Gnh&dev-10.pdf)//LOH
Buddhism and in fact all spiritual traditions have long described reality in rather different terms than traditional
economic theory. While the latter are primarily concerned with a fragment of human behavior, namely
"economic" actions defined as those which can be quantified in terms of money, the former approach
reality holistically, incorporating all actions -and even thoughts - that make up our being and society. While
Newton, Descartes and classical economics define the world in things, of separate building blocks, spiritual teachings point out there is really no
independent thing there, and that the focus on things will miss the relations and the whole context that
make the thing possible. In economic textbooks human beings are isolated consumers and producers interacting at markets driven by monetary
gains. In spiritual traditions humans are viewed as being part of a larger whole with which they can communicate by
opening up their hearts and minds. This holistic viewpoint is lent credence by modern physics, which
postulate that the universe consists of unified patterns of energy. According to one of Einstein's favorite epigrams, the field
generates the object, not vice verse. That is, whole systems give rise to specific things, not the other way around. While in the Cartesian worldview we can
only know reality by knowing specific parts, Einstein discovered that in order to know things, we need to know the
whole from which they originate. In other words, we are not isolated hard and fast physical things but
more like light beings or energy-flows continuously interrelating and changing . Thus, we
are more like intangibles - exactly that which cannot be measured in classic economic models . The new
understanding of reality is a systemic understanding, which means that it is based not only on the analysis
of material structures, but also on the analysis of patterns of relationships among these structures and of
the specific processes underlying their formation. This is evident not only in modern physics, but also in biology, psychology and
social sciences. The understanding of modern biology is that the process of life essentially is the spontaneous and self-organizing emergence of new order,
which is the basis of life's inherent abundance and creativity. Moreover, the life processes are associated with the cognitive dimension of life, and the
emergence of new order includes the emergence of language and consciousness. Most economic strategies are built around the
possession of material things such as land, labor and capital. What counts is how much real estate we own, how much money
we have and how many hours we work. The ideal for many people is to own enough land and capital, so we don't have to sell our time . This
strategy, which no doubt will be recognized by many of us in developed countries, is based on the
assumption that land, labor and capital is all there is, that the real world is a closed end system. Spiritual
traditions and modern sciences claim the opposite. They recognize the unlimited potential in every
sentient being - the potential to be whole and enlightened. Our minds create and pervade everything,
hence physical reality is open for the spiritual. The concept of scarcity has also been refuted by modern
discoveries. Nuclear energy is based on breaking the seemingly closed-end system of the atom and the universe has been found to continuously
expand. Like the expanding limits of outer space, the modern business of cyber space and Internet, has created unexpected opportunities and amounts of
new wealth. Another example, while being rightfully concerned about the limited availability of the planet's fossil fuel deposits, there is no shortage of
energy in our solar system. In fact, we are surrounded by abundant energy sources: sun and wind, as well as the
earth's heat, motion and magnetism. But most renewable energy resources are not available to us, not because they don't exits, but
because we don't have the know how to tap them. The key in the modern knowledge economy is that what counts here is
not merely material possession, but know how and creativity, the domain of the mind . As many of the new ecommerce companies have found out, a company cannot "own" the knowledge that resides in the heads of the employees. Research has shown that most
successful business strategies focus less on things but more on how to manage them. It is commonly accepted that all technical and social innovation is
based on what is now phrased as 'intellectual capital'. And unlike ordinary capital, intellectual capital is not subject to physical limits. So what does all this
tell us? Clearly, the 19th century mechanistic matter only worldview has been turned on its head. And thus
we should revise long held axioms. First, the traditional concept that we are simply competitive beings
chasing scarce material resources is incorrect. Second, intangible values are equally important for our
well-being. These intangibles are stored in the mind, free from physical constraints and therefore potentially of unlimited supply. Third,
happiness is not merely determined by what we have, how much we consume, but also by what we know,
how we can manage and how we can be creative, ultimately by who we are - so not by having, but by
being. We are human beings after all. How do measure this reality? How do we account for self generation, spontaneity and consciousness in our
economic worldview? Deterministic
this new reality
logic is no longer sufficient. New ways of measuring are required to embrace
Link Problem-Solution
The alternative is to reject the 1AC solutions and reflect personally
and collectively on karma and interdependence
Hershock, 07, (Peter D. Hershock, Coordinator of the Asian Studies Development Program ,
degrees from Yale University (B.A., Philosophy) and the University of Hawaii (Ph.D., Asian and
Comparative Philosophy) and has focused his research on the philosophical dimensions of
Buddhism and on using Buddhist conceptual resources to address contemporary issues,
including: technology and development, education, human rights, and the role of values in
cultural and social change, Towards Global Transformation, proceedings of the third
international conference on gross national happiness, Oct. 7, 2009, Activating Difference:
Appreciating Equity in an Era of Global Interdependence, pgs. 1-9.)//LOH
Hers hock it is a great and. Indeed, humbling - honour to be able to open the academic sessions of the Third International Conference on Gross
National Happiness: Worldviews Make a Difference: Towards Global Transformatlon. Although the comparison is not at all warranted. It Is hard for me
not to recall the opening remark of the 9th century Chan Buddhist master, Linji. when he was invited by the provincial governor to speak before an
audience of several hundred people about the meaning of Buddhist enlightenment: As soon as I open my mouth. I will have made a mistake. Like Linji.
however. I am obliged to speak. As I understand it. ours Is a gathering that seeks to shed practical light on the means-to and meaning-of happiness, where
happiness is understood not only as a matter of subjective well being, but also as a distinctive quality and direction of relatIonships - a quality and
direction of our interdependence and Interpenetration. The hope expressed In the title of this conference and In the efforts we haire been expending in
coming together is. I think, not at all misplaced For the most part, humanity is getting things right. Globally, we now produce
enough food to feed every person on the planet. We have realised living conditions and developed medical Practices that allow us collectively to enjoy the
longest life expectancies in history. Literacy is at an historical high. Tflrnunlcatjon takes place at the speed of light. World-class rare are available to
anyone with Internet access, and the range of choices exercjsj in pursuit of lives worth leading by the ever nearly seven billion people Is wider and deeper
than it has Unjve a pursuit globally recognised as a basic and rsal human right. The devil, as the saying goes. is In the details.
More than 800 million people today are chronically hungry . One out of every five people
currently live in what the World Bank terms absolute poverty condItions so degraded and
degrading that they do not afford even the hope of a dignified life. One billion people do not have
access to clean drinking water, and 2.6 billion live without adequate sanitation. One out of every seven
people in the world are illiterate two out of every three of these being women or girls), and functional
illiteracy affects nearly one out of every four people living In many of even the most highly developed
countries. For tragically large numbers of people , the fact that they possess universal
human rights does little to offset the effects of systematically perpetrated human wrongs. The fact that
humanity Is mostly getting things right Is scant consolation to those living in absolute poverty or to those
surviving on less than whet $2 a day might buy In the United States today, a population that Is now equal
to that of every man. woman and child alive in 1965. What must be done to open spaces of hope
for these mothers, fathers, sons and daughters? How do we avaIt out fnsn present conditions, as they have come to be. to realise - at a bare mInimum dignIfied lives for all? One
place to begin. I think, Is to reflect personally
and collectively on
a key implication
of the Buddhist teachings of karma and interdependence ; all experienced realities imply
responsibility. We are all in some degree compilcit with the inequity and suffering that are no less a part
of the contemporary world than are Ita many wonders. Fortunately, 55 the Buddha insisted. it is precisely because of karma that we are able to
realise lives dedicated to the liberating resolution of all trouble and suffering. By changing the complexion of our valuesintentions-actions , we can change the patterns of outcome/opportunity that shape our personal
and public experiences. Indeed, the degree that we heed the Buddhist Injunction to see all things as Impermanent. It is clear that there
really is no question about whether change is possible. Change is already continuously underway .
The only real question Is: change by what means and with what meaning? Or to turn the question
around: since change is ongoing. why does it seem to be heading us In the direction of greater Inequity
end greater suffering for greater numbers? How do we go about effectively changing the usoy things are changing A unifying aim of
the various sessions of this conference is to reflect on., how best to answer the question just posed about opening spaces of hope and dignity for all, and
about orienting change towards greater equity and happiness. As a prelude to theta let tir oiler a few thoughts of my own. mt, it is my own conviction, that
truly dignified lives cannot be lived by any unless dignity is a reality for all . It Is my further conviction that all
will not enjoy dignified lives until the differences of each are enabled to make a difference for all.
The affirmative is problem-solution oriented this means they will never

be able to resolve their harms, only through the alternative framing of
predicament-resolution can real change occur
Hershock, 07, (Peter D. Hershock, Coordinator of the Asian Studies Development Program,
For most of us, having been educated to a global modern standard, it Is natural to assume that It is only through moving In the direction of greater
universalIty and equality that lnequtiy can be overcome, poverty reduced, and dignity made possible kir all. That Is. we believe that It Is through our
eonuixnialtty - not our dIfferences that we will find a happy rente to global tranafonnatlon. M I understand it, the main tille of this conference,
Woridvtews Make s Dllfererice. in.itsts otherwise. And I would like to take a few moments to press the point that global transformation for greater equity,
dignity asid happiness will not come abon I through deepening our sense of coinnionafity alone, but only to the degree that we also activate our diflrences
as the basic condition for nuituol confrthutfrwr it Is a cantraJ tenet of Buddhist Qdjtis - but one that I believe Is shared by all systems of effective religious,
social and political peaetlee - that meaningful change can only be Initiated and sustained on the basis of present circumstances, as they have corne to be.
In the present era, the any things have come to be is very much a function of the interlocking array
of pence-ses that we refer to as globalisation . Let me mention three key siflcts of these Processes, each of them in large
measure both driven by and driving sclenup ap techookigical advances. and most notably perhaps. Is accelerattp,g and Intenslfy change. Globalisation
la bringing not only nave thenge traire rapidly, but alan the advent of qualitatively distinct kinds of change Of particular Importance is the phenomenon
kflOWi1 emergence. stnicturaliy significant changes occurring in con1pie, syst that in principle could not have been nucipe, but that after the fact do
make pertaci sense.Second are homogenislng effects that led many early cnc globalisation to fear the Westernisation or Me nialdisation world, but that In
fact have fostered truly global forms of pul culture and, more Importantly, patterns of convergence that. for example. allow credit cards to be used the
world over and are beginning to enable students to take advantage of virtually borderleas higher education. Third arr pluralizing effects that hase taken the
form of resurgent national and ethnic Identities, but also niche global production networks, and such acutely uneven geography of
development that the top 2% of the worlds people now own of global wealth while the bottom 50% own
less than 1%. As a combined result. we are not only in an era of change. but a change of eras. More
specifically, I would submit that we are in the midst of a transition from an era dominated by problemsolution to one dominated by predicament-resolution. Problems arise when changing circumstances make evident the laihire of
existing practices for meeting abiding needs and interests. Solving problems Involves developing new or improved means
for arriving at ends we fully intend to continue pursuing. For example, gas/electric hybrid automobile
engines solve the problem of rising fuel costs. Predicaments occur when changing circumstances lead to
or make us aware of conflicts competition among our own values. Intereata. development sitas, and constructions of
meaning. Predicaments cannot be solved- They can only be resolved through sustaining detailed attention to
situational dynamics and realising both enhanced clarity and more thoroughly and
deeply coordinated commitments . World hunger Is not a problem. Enough food is grown to
supply adequate nutrition for all, What Is lacking Is the resolve to bring our economic. social and political
values, Intentions and practices into alignment with doing so. World hunger is a predicament . And an
increasingly significant part of the reason that we make so little headway In addressing It and other
apparently intractable issues like global climate change, illiteracy and mounting economic inequity is
because we persist in thinking about them as problems awaiting technical solution, rather than as
predicaments commanding sustained and ever deepening resolve. In sum 21st centuiy patterns of globalisation are raising
crucial questions about the owa arid riwwung difference, presenting u with a poradoxicaJ Impasse ur axnia On the other hand, we need to more
fully recognize and respect difference, going beyond tolerating differences from and among others to
enable differences to matter more, not less. On the Other hand, we nerd to engage In more robust collective action and global common
cause. ,omtrng differences within shared find deepening To Ignore
our differences now is to fail resolving current

predicaments and to foster conditions for more, and more Intense, predicaments in the future .
Link QPQ
Manipulation and coercion other others manifests itself in
environmental degradation and dualistic world-views replicates
violence
Sivaraksa 98 (Sulak Sivaraksa is an activist, economist, philosopher and the founder and
director of the Thai NGO Sathirakoses-Nagapradeepa Foundation , Buddhism and Human
Freedom, Buddhist-Christian Studies , Vol. 18, (1998), pp. 63-68, University of Hawai'i Press,
http://www.jstor.org/stable/1390436)
Human beings aspire to freedom, but the concept itself has many different meanings. The perception of freedom prevalent in
modern society is of a freedom from external limitations or restrictions, including freedom from
limitations or restrictions placed by our fellow humans or nature. Seeing freedom in this way conditions the way we see
other aspects of life-happiness, for example. If we see freedom as the ability to control or manipulate circumstances,
free from restrictions, by amassing a wealth of material possessions or controlling nature, then we will believe happiness depends on
the amount of material possessions or control we have. This kind of perception has reached an end point in
environmental degradation and deterioration and the inability of resources to support an
increasing population at certain standards of living. It has also led to a situation in which most people recognize that we are
forced to compromise with other people and nature in order to survive. A happiness dependent upon manipulating nature
without restraint leads to a dangerous situation as world resources are depleted, the
environment is damaged and our survival itself becomes threatened. This necessity has led to a kind of compromise:
we agree to forgo some personal pleasure, possession, or control in order to allow the world to continue. We agree to this compromise, but we are not
truly happy with it. It is a sacrifice made to survive and not a viable way of living.
Link Hegemony
The search for economic growth and hegemony creates inner anger
Daisaku 7 - Buddhist philosopher and president of Soka Gokkai International
(Ikeda, Restoring the Human Connection: The First Step to Global Peace, http://www.sgiusa.org/newsandevents/docs/peace2007.pdf)//BB
The world of anger is an integral aspect of human life, and in any age, unless properly positioned and restrained, it will run amok and
wreak havoc. No human society has ever been completely free from strife, but there are particular
characteristics of contemporary civilization, with its extremely high degree of capitalist and technological
development, that cause the potentials inherent in human life to manifest themselves in uniquely
problematic ways. As mentioned earlier, a rampant world of anger causes a corresponding diminution of
the other. The attenuated presence, verging on absence, of the other is an increasingly striking characteristic of modern society, particularly in
advanced industrial societies. In 1930, John Maynard Keynes (18831946), known as the founder of modern economic theory and a man with a unique
and critical perspective on civilization, published the essay The Economic Possibilities of our Grandchildren. In it, he critiqued two errors of
pessimism arising in relation to the economic depression that was then enveloping the world. These are the pessimism of the revolutionaries who
think that things are so bad that nothing can save us but violent change, and the pessimism of the reactionaries who consider the balance of our
economic and social life so precarious that we must risk no experiments.13 Keynes argued that, with appropriate government intervention and 13
adjustment, it should be possible to resolve the problem of unemployment and restart economic growth. [A]ssuming no important wars and no
important increase in population, he wrote, the economic problem may be solved, or be at least in sight of solution, within a hundred years.14
Certainly with regard to the advanced industrial societies, Keynes prediction of a solution to the economic problem has been largely on the mark.
People, according to Keynes, have both absolute needs, which must be met if we are to survive, and relative needs, which are felt only to the degree
that we seek to surpass and excel over our peers. The former have natural limits, while the latter do not. A person pursuing relative needs
finds them expanding ceaselessly ; they are, in Keynes words, insatiable. This constant desire to be
superior to others embodies the destructive essence of the world of anger . Ensuring that
absolute needs are met, especially in developing countries, is the greatest, most crucial challenge facing the world. But as the example of developed
countries shows, people will not necessarily be satisfied when their absolute needs are met. The classical ideal that people will behave with decorum
once their basic needs have been met has not proven universally true in practice. A society in which most people have been driven by the imperatives of
survival (absolute needs) may respond to sudden sufficiency with disorientation, giving rise to growing numbers of what Max Weber called
sensualists without heart15 and a general skepticism about the value of hard work itself. In human society, and in a capitalist society in
particular, there
is a strong tendency for people to attempt to assuage this insecurity by accumulating

material wealth, especially in the form of money. Money can of course 14function as a means of meeting the absolute needs of daily life. But
when it comes to relative needs, money, as capital, can easily become an end in itself, locked into a spiral of
ceaseless increase and accumulation. Keynes described the plight of people caught up in this spiral: The love of money as a possession
as distinguished from the love of money as a means to the enjoyments and realities of lifewill be recognized for what it is, a somewhat disgusting
morbidity, one of those semi-criminal, semi-pathological propensities which one hands over with a shudder to the specialists16 Karl Marx (1818
83), for his part, is well known for his detailed and precise analysis of what he termed commodity fetishismthe state of people enthralled by the
love of money. The present generation corresponds to the grandchildren in the title of Keynes essay, and evidence of the obsession with monetary
values that he dubbed the love of money is everywhere. Monetary values have ruthlessly trumped and displaced all others, whether social values or
the values of daily life. Nearly all of the disturbing problems plaguing Japan in recent yearsrepeated incidents of corruption involving major
corporations, insurance fraud, bid-rigging scandals, a money-game culture whose influence reaches even young people and childrenhave arisen from
this love of money. It seems that the life-state of the world of anger, together with its neighboring world of hunger (a state controlled by untrammeled
desire), has indeed swollen to a height of 84,000 yojanas. Its rampancy makes even Keynes descriptionsemi-criminal, semi-pathologicalappear
understated. 15The inhabitants of the world of angeralways seeking to surpass, unable to countenance inferiorityare incapable of any sense of
fulfillment. They cling to the insatiable pursuit of money to compensate for the perpetual instability of
their standing in the world. Our present-day system of values is said to be diversifying, but it is in fact
becoming more solely focused on money, which penetrates all realms of society and daily life . Within our
collective sense of ourselves there is a progressive and fundamental process of decay. This, many point out, is the true face of contemporary society.
Even if one warns against the dangers inherent in the love of money, history has proven the impossibility of eliminating currency from human society as
a medium of exchange. Any attempt to forcefully restrict the workings of money will be met with a fierce counterreaction, as the decisive failure of the
experiment of communism in the twentieth century proved. And, of course, any return to the premodern model of a communal society in which
monetary values rank below those of class and caste (as was the case in Edo-period Japan where classes were ranked in descending order as samurai,
farmer, craftsman and merchant) would be unthinkable for people who have known modern freedoms. We therefore seem to have no choice but to learn
to live with, train and tame the capitalist system.
As individuals
and as societies, we
need to develop the capacity to
control money and capital rather than sinking into commodity fetishism . Just as we need to
position the worlds of anger and hunger properly within the interrelated context of the ten worlds, it is necessary to reposition
economic values within the various hierarchies of values integral to the processes of life . In last years
proposal, I quoted Michel de Montaigne (153392) posing the question, When I play with my cat, how do I know that she is not passing 16time with
me rather than I with her?17 In the same way, we need to ask ourselves as a matter of urgencyas a first step toward the revival and recovery of our
humanitywhether, when we are playing with money and capital, we are not in fact being played by it. Our problems are man-made, therefore they
may be solved by man.18 John F. Kennedy (191763) spoke these words at a time when the world faced nuclear saturation, and we cannot afford to
regard them as mere political rhetoric. Is capitalism moral? Here I would like to discuss the issues raised by the French philosopher Andr ComteSponville in his recent work Le capitalisme est-il moral? (Is Capitalism Moral?). This title is of course intentionally ironic as most people would regard
capitalism as entirely unconcerned with questions of morality, and to look for morality in capitalism is as meaningless, as the expression has it, as
looking for fish in trees. Comte-Sponville distinguishes four different orders or domains within human society: The first is the technologicaleconomic-scientific order, which revolves on the axis of that which is possible versus that which is not possible. The second is the legal-political order,
whose axis is the legal versus the illegal. The third is the moral order, whose axis is good versus evil and obligation versus injunction. The fourth
is the ethical order, the order of love, whose axis is joy versus 17sorrow. For those upholding a faith, the next order would be that of the supernatural
or divinea fifth order with which Comte-Sponville, an atheist, does not concern himself. Comte-Sponville stresses that these are distinctions, not
divisions, and that we in fact live within the simultaneous overlapping of these four orders. What is crucial are the interrelations among
them. Each is directly controlled by the order immediately above it: the technological-economic-scientific by the legal-political, the legal-political by
the moral, etc. Society is disrupted when the functional lines between these different orders are blurred. Marx, according to Comte-Sponville, clearly
confused the first and third when he attempted to moralize economics. The result was the shift from the Marxist utopia of the nineteenth century to the
totalitarian horror of the twentieth century of which we are all aware.19 For us today it is equally a mistake to try to moralize capitalism. Capitalism
revolves on its own axis, pursuing without cease that which is possible and that which is profitable. This is its essential nature. Values such as the
assurance of employment and employee benefits will naturally take second place to the pursuit of profit. Further, those living under the
sway of the technological-economic-scientific order may be nuclear technocrats who, in

pursuit of the possible, would strive to enhance the destructiveness and lethality of weapons with no
thought to the horrors resulting from their use. Or they may be bio-technocrats who, in pursuit of the
possible, would engage without hesitation in human cloning and germline genetic engineering, which
can undermine the fundamental conditions for human dignity. Comte-Sponville lambastes these as technically
competent wretches. 18t is not my intention to paint all engaged in the economic and scientific fields with the same broad brush. There are, needless to
say, many ethical businesspeople and scientists. But so long as the basic axis is that which is possible versus that which is
impossible, there is a persistent danger that the human element will be overlooked . Looking at our world today,
we see clear signs that such negative potentialities are being realized . A purely egocentric lifestate, inflated to a height of 84,000 yojanas, marginalizes the existence of the other. Human beings, however, can exist
only through their interrelations: Where there is no other, there can be no self . Humanity, in a word, has been driven
completely from the stage. This kind of estrangement can make young people, especially, vulnerable to those who would
manipulate and prey on their need to believe. This is the crisis that contemporary civilization
confronts . The internal logic of the technological-economic-scientific order is incapable of restraining those most responsible for the crisis
technically competent wretches. This restraint must be applied from without, principally from the second, legal-political order.
Link Globalization
Globalization forces ontological estrangement creates forms of greed
and consumerism that preclude individual liberation
Sivaraksa 2 (Sulak Sivaraksa is known in the West as one of the fathers of the International
Network of Engaged Buddhists (INEB), 2002, Economic Aspects of Social and Environmental
Violence from a Buddhist Perspective,
http://muse.jhu.edu.proxy.lib.umich.edu/journals/buddhistchristian_studies/v022/22.1sivaraksa.html) //RM
As the culture of economic globalization, consumerism directly nourishes the unlimited greed of soulless
transnational corporations. It will take quite a talent to miss this observation; markets dependent on consumption and controlled by powerful
corporations cannot do otherwise. The consumers cannot be expected to know what they want; the demand must be
manipulated or generated. The Unconscious of the consumer must be "told" what to purchase . Therefore,
whereas the political and economic dimensions of globalization are marginalizing many people
worldwide, particularly the poor, consumerism seeks the active participation of all classes. As a form of
greed, consumerism obscures the path to personal liberation. In many respects, consumerism is able to
dominate much of contemporary society because individuals have become alienated from their culture
and from each other. The sense of community that led people to share scarce resources and work
cooperatively has been supplanted by the vile maxims of the masters of mankind, by an anger or
competitiveness that causes people to seek acquisitions at the expense of their neighbors. In sum, consumerism is a
consequence of using greed and violence to regulate socioeconomic relations. At the most profound level, consumerism owes its vitality to the delusion
of the autonomous individualized self; a self that exists independently of social relations and of human relations with nature: a human person is thrown
into the world. For the Buddha, it was clear that the "self" constituted only a pattern of persistently changing experiences that had no more substance or
permanence than those experiences. We are deluded into seeking some transcendental subject, something that defines experience yet lies beyond the
experience. We are exhorted to know ourselves and yet the "self" in this dualistic system remains unknowable. For the Buddhists, this delusion is
the fundamental cause of suffering. Ontologically, we become estranged aspects of our experiences of
others and ourselves. Hence we are precluded from any meaningful conception of identity. Consumerism
provides an artificial means of defining our existence by suggesting [End Page 53] that identity is realized through the process of acquisition. Put
differently, consumerism is a perverse corollary of the Cartesian proof of personal existence: "I shop, therefore I am." I have often referred to
consumerism as a demonic religion because of the manner in which individuals become mired in a cycle of behavior that is fundamentally self-defeating:
the insatiable desire for goods ultimately leads to despair or boredom. However, the Buddhist practice of mindfulness may help
the individual to realize gradually that "I breathe, therefore I am." In other words, bhavana will help us
synchronize our heads with our hearts. The primary result will not be greater intellectual powe r, which is
amoral and compartmentalized. Rather, we will achieve real understanding, or prajna. The less selfish we are, the more our prajna
will merge with karuna, or compassion. Prajna and karuna are important for leading an alternative lifestyle, for
overcoming consumerism. The two foster spirituality, which goes hand in hand with the engendering of harmony within ourselves, our society,
and our natural habitat. In turn, this would help bring about social justice, fraternity, and ecological balance.
Link More Goods / Growth

We should want less, not more shedding desire is the path to true
happiness and ecological sustainability
Zsolnai 11 - professor and director of the Business Ethics Center at the Corvinus University
of Budapest
(Laszlo, Ethical Principles and Economic Transformation A Buddhist Approach, p. 3)//BB
Buddhism and economics seemingly far from one another. Many people think that Buddhism is an ascetic religion with no interest in worldly affairs. It is
not true. Buddhism has a well-developed social facet and Buddhists are often engaged in progressive social
change. Buddhism presents a radical challenge for mainstream economics because denies the existence of
the self. The Western way of life is centered on self-interest understood as satisfaction of the wishes of
ones body-mind ego. Buddhism challenges this view by a radically different conception, that is anatta, the
no-self. Anatta specifies the absence of a supposedly permanent and unchanging self. What is normally thought of as the self is an
agglomeration of constantly changing physical and mental constituents which give rise to unhappiness if clung to as though this
temporary assemblage. The anatta doctrine attempts to encourage the Buddhist practitioners to detach themselves from the
misplaced clinging to what is mistakenly regarded as self, and from such detachment (aided by wisdom, moral living and meditation) the
way to Nirvana is able to be traversed successfully . Modern neuroscience supports the Buddhist view
of the self. What neuroscientists discovered can be called the selfless (or virtual self), a coherent global pattern, which seems to be centrally
located, but is nowhere to be found, and yet is essential as a level of interaction for the behavior. The non-localizable, non-substantial self
acts as if it were present, like a virtual interface (Varela 1999, 53 and 61). Buddhism suggests not to
multiply but to simplify our desires. Above the minimum material comfort, which includes enough
food, clothing, shelter and medicine, it is wise to try to reduce ones desires . Wanting less could
bring substantial benefits for the person , for the community and for nature .
Link Development
The affirmatives development project has a predetermined path
which dooms it to failure and shows their attempt to control the
uncontrollable
Kiessel, 09, (Amanda Kiessel, Dr. Amanda Kiessel is Program Director at Sewalanka
Foundation, a Sri Lankan non-profit development organization that focuses on increasing the
capacity of rural communities to identify and address their own needs PhD in Environmental
Studies and a background in sustainable agriculture and organizational development, Towards
Global Transformation, proceedings of the third international conference on gross national
happiness, Oct. 7, 2009, Beyond the Linear Logic of Project Aid Alternative: Understandings of
Participation and Community Vitality, pgs. 183-198)//LOH
Pre-determined project plans confine genuine participation and limit the ability of the participants to adapt to local conditions, learn from experience,
and adjust to changing Circumstances. Many donor-funded projects have supported the institutional capacity building of community based
organizations. But as long as this occurs within a rigid project framework. The CBOs rarely continue meeting and functioning beyond the end of the
project. Social transformation requires time and flexibility community groups need space to test different
strategies. learn from their mistakes. and try new ideas. Complex adaptive systems research suggests three main areas of interventions to promote
directed change in a constantly changing world: . activity and reactivity of individual agents interactions between agents . policies and institutions that
contribute to an enabling macro environment. Participatory development practitioners focus on the first two of these three. The reason is that. although
government and programmes are important, they do not affect all the people equally. In most societies, inequality is high. and
some have less influence and access then others. Participatory development practitioners focus on the first two types of Interventions in an attempt to
change network dynamics. to alter the fitness landscape. By increasing the influence and links of poorly connected agents, they hope to increase their
capacity to shape policies and institutions, access information, services. Resources, and markets and direct the process of social change. Community
workers are sometimes called catalyzers rnobilisers change agents. or motivators. Their main role is to peoples attitudes and
encourage them to be more reactive, more likely to act and interact with their network neighbors . In the Sri
l.ankan context, the primary obstacle is the dependency mentality that has been developed through decades of paternalistic policies and aid hand outs,
usually villagers complain about government organizations and they blame the systems for not solving their problems (interview, Jurie 3, 2006) The
social mobilisers explain the constraints and limitations of external assistance, and their encourage them to identify What they can do on their own. They
stimulate discussion on the nature of the overall system, our interdependence with others, potential sources of change, and the potential for personal and
collective action. According to one community worker Basically every individual has a selfish pan: they have a Concept
like mine, We have change that to we, and try to help them Work as teams This individual awakening
or personal transformation is seen at the basis of social transformation . In addition to looking at individual altitudes arid
behaviors community workers fonts on changing interactions between individuals. Most communities have what is called a small World structure (Watts,
19991. People have many local connections with similar Individuals and a few weaker connections With distant individuals (Figure 21). Forming
community organisations can be seen as a way of increasing the density of local network connections. The rationale is that If these Connected network
neighbors are able to make decisions collectively and Work together as a single agent, they will have more influence in their interactions with others than
they did as single individuals. For example, government officials and private companies tend to be more responsive to a demand from an active well
organized group than a demand from a single person. Participatory development practitioners, help increase community vitality by strengthening intercommunity links and based on the interests and the context of the community) forming new links with external agents. A project has a clear
beginning and end, but a development process is on-going. This does not mean that an indefinite intervention is needed. The
small groups and community organizations formed through the mobilization process increase villager capacity to innovate and adapt to change because
they provide a forum through the mobilsation process increase villagers capacity to innovate and adapt to change because they provide a forum dialogue:
for observing and analyzing the situation. identifying opportunities and potential constraints. and learning from mistakes. A community organization Is
Considered sustainable when the villagers are constantly evaluating and evolving and able to address whatever issues come up. What youre trying to do
Is maximize robustness. or survivability. in the face of an Ill-defined future (Watdrop. 19921. Participatory development practitioners have updated
Chinese philosopher Kuan-tnts proverb. Il you a man a fish... to reflect this understanding of community organizing and resilience- li you teach me to
fish then you have fed me until the river is contaminated and the shoreline for development. But if you teach me to organize then whatever challenge I can
join together with my peers and we will fashion our own solution. To summarize a non-linear understanding of social change
draws into question the assumptions underlying conventional development projects and offered the
following lessons: social change cannot be precisely predicted or controlled. Development Is a process or
observing, identifying opportunities and constraints learning from experience- and adapting to changing
circumstances - Each society has Its own unique historical path and dynamics, There Is no single
structure technology- or universal development formula that can be directly imported from one system to
another. Change emerges from within the system from the actions interactions of individuals. There is no
external objective - expert. Change takes time and does not proceed at a uniform predictable pace. Groups need space- to test different
strategies, learn from their mistakes and try new ideas. Social transformation cannot be forced into a
short rigid timeframe. Personal transformation is at the basis of social transformation. Change- agents influence
attitudes and behaviors through example and by providing opportunities for dialogue and experience. Change is catalyzed when mobilized agents form
strong enough ties with their network neighbors to act together on and common issues and collectively establish links with powerful individuals and
groups outside their circle. Applying these lessons to the international development require a dramatic shift in
how aid agencies channel resources evaluate accountability and effectiveness and measure success. Funding
for participatory development would need to be flexible. Process oriented, and available in smaller amounts over a longer time frame. It seems unlikely
that these changes will come without pressure from the academic community. Most evaluations of development projects are self-
assessments conducted at the end of the project period with a focus on the expected outputs and
indicators from the initial project plan. Both the implementing and the funding agency have a vested
interest in showing positive results; the projects underlying assumptions are not questioned. In contrast,
ethnographies of specific development projects like Fergusons The Anti-Politics Machine and Uphoffs Learning from Gal Oya
tend to highlight the unanticipated consequences of the intervention, the role of individual actors and the
influence of the local socio-political context and constantly changing conditions. More of these field based
long term studies of specific interventions are needed to provide insight into social change process and
inform development policy makers on which types of intervention strategies are most suitable.
Link Human Rights

The affirmatives Western conception of human rights universalizes
the world into one reality this assumption perpetuates their harms by
disregarding difference and dignity
Hershock, 2000, (Peter D. Hershock, Peter D. Hershock, Coordinator of the Asian Studies
Development Program, degrees from Yale University (B.A., Philosophy) and the University of
Hawaii (Ph.D., Asian and Comparative Philosophy) and has focused his research on the
philosophical dimensions of Buddhism and on using Buddhist conceptual resources to address
contemporary issues, including: technology and development, education, human rights, and
the role of values in cultural and social change, Philosophy East and West, Vol. 50, No. 1 (Jan.,
2000), pp. 9-33, Dramatic Intervention: Human Rights from a Buddhist Perspective,
JSTOR)//LOH
Granted, however, the difficulty of reconciling the many extant and quite disparate views of human being, it is perhaps not surprising that efforts at
reaching a universal rights accord have tended to focus on establishing agreement about the existence of a
common ground on which everyone involved can comfortably place at least one foot. For the most part, it has
been assumed that this shared ground consists of the "real" world of "objectively" observable facts-the
world most precisely described for us by Western science and most effectively shaped through its related
technologies. That is, it is assumed that as we all breathe the 'same' air, drink the 'same' water, sleep
under the 'same' stars, and suffer the 'same' ignominies of hunger, sickness, old age, loneliness, and death
as members of the species Homo sapiens, we live in essentially the 'same' world and can be minimally
defined through our coexistence in it. The Buddhist teaching of interdependence and its corollary that all
experience is karmic in nature jointly suggest that this is a dangerously misleading
assumption.
The scientifically 'real' and 'objective' world is-like all other worlds-an expression of certain consistently held values, a cultural
artifact, and not truly neutral ground. In a now almost cliched formulation, all
'facts' are theory-laden, and un- critically assuming

the contrary is to indulge in a very consequential form of prejudice . At the very least, it is to commit ourselves to realizing
only a certain kind of human being-the kind that consists of being "thrown" (to use Heidegger's wonderful term) into a world already shaped by historical
and natural forces with which each of us as individuals is only accidentally and so meaninglessly related. It is also to restrict ourselves to
imagining only certain kinds of human rights-those which can be borne by such "thrown" individuals .
Contemporary cultural relativism is not a way out of this prejudice. While the relativist denies that there is a single, true conception of human nature and
strenu- ously allows for differences in how cultures conceive what it is to be human and so what it might mean to enjoy human rights, he or she typically
does so on epistemic grounds. The belief that we live in the 'same' world and have essentially the 'same' nature,
albeit differently conceived and developed, is seldom critically addressed. The Buddhist teaching of
interdependence instructs us to refrain from seeing anything as essentially 'this' or 'that', as either
having or not having some set of fixed characteristics, or as independent of who we are and our intentions.
Indeed, the Mahdyana teaching of emptiness urges us not to see all things as somehow vacuous but rather diligently to relinquish those horizons for
relevance by means of which we identify, and hence limit and segregate, things as such. This teaching applies as much to human nature as to the world as
a whole. Whereas the cultural relativist accepts a multiplicity of (perhaps) equally apt views of human being and the world in which it takes place, the
consistent Buddhist denies that there either 'is' or 'is not' something called "human nature" or "the world" about which we all have separate, if often closely
related, views. To the contrary, the Buddhist sees all 'natures' as disambiguations of what is originally neither 'this'
nor 'that'-as creations, and not discoveries. Buddhism shifts the issue, then, from either asserting one
essential view of human being or accepting all views of human being as equally valid to doing our best to
discern which view or views are most conducive to resolving our conflicts, troubles, and suffering. Seeing
all things as interdependent and all experience as karmically conditioned is to see the world in which we
actually live-the world in which we articulate who we are-as irreducibly meaningful. That is, the world in
which we are most uniquely present can be reduced not to a bare assemblage of objective or factual states of affairs but to a
horizonless field of dramatic interdependence. It is a world for which we are intimately responsible, which already
expresses or evidences our patterns of valuation, and to which we may always and creatively contribute. In such a world, it is not possible in any nontrivial
sense to see ourselves as autonomously existing individuals. We are, and have always been, given-together. And thus, our
most basic right is not "to be let alone" but rather to see the exact nature of our always shared
responsibility and to realize the greatest virtuosity possible in responding to our situation as needed. In his
prefatory remarks, Thurman goes on to suggest that the Western discourse on human rights may well be a desperate
attempt to suture "the mortal wound to human dignity inflicted by modernity's metaphysical
materialism, psychological reductionism, and nihilistic ethical relativism" (Thurman 1988, p. 149). I would go one step
further and claim that there is a sense in which the dominant tradition of Western rights discourse is self-defeating,
presuming the very condition it ostensibly works to correct. That is, Western rights discourse situates us in
an institutionally mediated and yet essentially abstract space and time where our most unique characteristics and desires simply don't matter, are of no particular value. Thus, it promotes precisely the kinds
of profound disregard for the difference and dignity of others that constitute the primary rationale for
universal rights in the first place. In the interest of providing some justification for this claim, I want to review briefly the genesis of rights
discourse in the West as a way of revealing its metaphysical con- tingency and opening a critical perspective on its claims to universality.
2NC link ext and alt solves

JSTOR)//LOH
As formulated in contemporary political and moral discourse, human rights accords are intended to bring about globally
consistent conditions under which it is possible to minimize the sum total of unnecessary suffering. Human
rights can thus be seen as a kind of insurance against certain of the most common ways in which our integrity and dignity as human beings can be and
have been compromised, often quite systematically. Because the possibility of such insurance is itself technologically
conditioned-the possibility, for example, of realizing adequate food, clothing, shelter, medical attention,
information, access to media, and participation in national and international political and economic
practices for each and every individual-the promotion of human rights has been inextricably bound up
with establishing the base conditions of self-determination and so with development imperatives of one
sort or another. By contrast, from the sort of Buddhist perspective I've been articulating here, human rights should
enhance our capacity for making the most dramatically meaningful use we can of karmically conditioned and
therefore unavoidable trouble or suffering. That is, human rights should not have the primary function of
promoting minimal universal standards on the presumption of our equality, but that of establishing and
sustaining the conditions under which our diversity might flourish and, thus, under which each one of us
might-in our local setting-develop our greatest creative and responsive virtuosity. In a very real sense, this
suggests the need for skepticism about the long-range benefits promised by ubiquitous development and
the "technopian" path to controlling the root conditions of suffering.
The alternative must come first, the proper mindset and conception of
rights is crucial to the realization of proper human rights, anything
else turns their case
JSTOR)//LOH
In his paper on the rights-related thought of Sulak Sivaraksa and Phra Dham- mapidok (Pryudh Prayutto), Soraj Hongladarom (1994) remarks that it is
Sulak's belief that "without any attachment to the individual self, without the consciousness of 'Me' and
'Mine' ... there is no motive to violate any of the rights enshrined in the UN Declaration" (p. 4). For Sulak, the
need for formal human rights legislation can be traced to "the imposition of the ideas of consumerism,
greed, and exploitation of the environment ... perpetrated by power holders who are ... mere pawns of
Western governments and multinational corporations" (p. 6). Thus, it is natural for Sulak "to see that human
rights suffer as a result of the imposition of Western ideas rather than that human rights result because of
such imposition" (p. 6). Turning to Phra Dhammapidok's views, this radical perspective becomes even more pointed. According to Dhammapidok,
the Western conception of human rights has three major flaws: first, it "resulted from a background and
basic attitude of division and segregation, struggle and contention"; second, such rights "are a purely
human invention and do not exist as a natural condition [and so] are not 'natural rights'"; finally, the
concept of human rights is "a purely social convention, dealing with social behaviour ... [and] does not
consider the quality of mental motivation" (cited in Hongladarom 1994, p. 8). Dhammapidok's contemporary Thai Buddhist conviction
is that properly Buddhist human rights should not be formulated on the assumption of divisiveness, dissension,
and mutual disregard; they must take into account intention or karma; and they must be directed toward
promoting the fullest spiritual development of the individual. Very much in keeping with the wider net cast by the Mahayana,
Dhammapidok significantly blurs the boundaries of 'individuality' by also insisting that a proper concept of human rights must recognize social kamma
(karma), or the kamma created by a society as a whole. That is, human rights must attend to the karma being established on
the basis of commitments to particular kinds of development and technological bias, and to the ways in
which this karma conditions the realization of full and dignified personal and spiritual evolution . As
Hongladarom summarizes: if human rights "are applied without the right conditions of the mind, then they will
only lead the people astray, and will not be effective toward realizing perfection at all. The right
condition of the mind is then of primary importance" (p. 10). But with its critical emphasis
on the universality of human rights, on the a priori nature of the rights-bearing individual, and on the
importance of clearly demarcating the private and public spheres to insure against any untoward or
coercive imposition of particular ideals or values on the subjective individual, Western rights
discourse necessarily fails to meet this primary condition.
Indeed, as mentioned in the introduction, while
compassion may generally be confirmed a "great idea," from the liberal democratic perspective on rights it must remain strictly an optional one.
Their justifications matter and also skew their policy towards norms
founded on universality. This masks difference and destroys any
potential solvency, only the alt solves
JSTOR)//LOH
To say that all this reduces to an argument about justifications and not norms is to miss a crucial point. It may be that truly Buddhist
human rights and those promoted in much of the ongoing discourse about rights will turn out to be
formally similar. But precisely because their bases or justifications are not identical, we should not take
this formal similarity as proof of their essential sameness. In practice, justifications of human rights are
means for realizing their normative ends. That is, how we justify a right or rights can be seen as expressing
the deep intentional structure of the norms they establish-the structure of their genesis, the conditions of
their arising. Given this, in spite of apparent formal similarities, rights conceived on the basis of seeing
human being in terms of universally autonomous selfhood will establish a very different karma and thus
the disparate experiential and dramatic consequences from rights generated out of an understanding of
human being in terms of meaningfully narrative interdependence. Disagreements about justification are thus inevitably
disagreements about the meaning of norms as well, whether or not this is convenient or rationally comfortable to admit. Where our primary
concern is to articulate the minimum conditions of our equality, human nature can only be seen as
generic. What is excluded, as in scientific research, is all that is unexpected, uncontrollable, exceptional,
and unrepeatable. With respect to human nature, this represents a rejection of any elitist conception of human being. And in light of such
aberrations as the rise and spread of Nazi fascism, there are good reasons to endorse a moderately skeptical view of elit- ism. But, as suggested earlier,
such skepticism practiced too blindly leaves us liable to rejecting the explicitly dramatic dimension of our
relationships-in narrative terms, we are reduced from concretely and complexly diverse characters to
strictly generic protagonists and antagonists. We may achieve universal equality to some degree, but only
through the atrophy or loss of all that is virtuosic and intrinsically meaningful. Being seen as equal is, in
the end, to be treated generically. And that, damaging as it is to our presuppositions, is the root condition
of a life experienced as basically meaningless. As Kothari, Tilakaratna, Ames, Sulak, and Dhammapidok all implicitly confirm,
rights discourses founded on the assertion of both individuality and equality are self- defeating in the
sense that they at once cultivate tendencies to recognize and deny the meaningful fecundity of our
differences . Moreover, because they undermine the uniqueness of our interrelationships, such discourses
promote the absence of intimately realized compassion or care for one another . In fact, by focusing on
minimal entitlements-a minimal and universal inventory of what we can call our own- such discourses
cannot but promote the institutionalization of selfishness . Nothing could be more diametrically opposed to
the values underlying the Buddhist conception of ideal personhood. If human rights are conceived in terms of establishing the conditions under which each
of us in our unique way is able to express our buddha-nature-our character as bodhisattvas or enlightening beings- then they must serve to promote not
minimal standards but the pursuit of virtuosity. The proper orientation of rights conversations would thus be toward
developing an appreciation of contributory uniqueness and a cultivation of the harmonic possibilities
opened up by our very differences. Far from encouraging either the universal realization of generic
equality or a sterilization of our differences, human rights so conceived would foster a conservation of
diversity and the dramatic possibilities it afford.
Link Science
Rationalist approaches to environmentally sustainability are doomed
to fail
7-9) //T.C.
But is it in fact desirable to look on economics as a science? Although many believe that science can save us from the perils of life, it has many
limitations. Science shows only one side of the truth, that which concerns the material world . By only
considering the material side of things, the science of economics is out of step with the overall truth of the way things
are. Given that all things in this world are naturally interrelated and interconnected, it follows that human
problems must also by interrelated and interconnected. One-sided scientific solutions are bound to fail
and the problems bound to spread. Environmental degradation is the most obvious and dangerous
consequence to our industrialized, specialized approach to solving problems. Environmental problems have become so
pressing that people are now beginning to see how foolish it is to place their faith in individual, isolated disciplines that ignore the larger
perspective. They are starting to look at human activities on a broader scale, to see the repercussions their actions have on personal lives, society, and
the environment. Specialization can be a great benefit as long as we don't lose sight of our common goal: as a specialized study, economics allows us to
analyze with minute detail the causes and factors within economic activities. But it is a mistake to believe that any one discipline or
field of learning can in itself solve all problems. In concert with other disciplines, however, economics can constitute a
complete response to human suffering, and it is only by fully understanding the contributions and
limitations of each discipline that we will be able to produce such a coordinated effort. Unfortunately, as it stands,
economics is grossly out of touch with the whole stream of causes and conditions that constitute reality.
Economics, and indeed all the social sciences, are, after all, based on man-made or artificial truths. For example,
according to natural laws, the action of digging the earth results in a hole. This is a fixed cause and effect
relationship based on natural laws. However, the digging which results in a wage is a conventional truth
based on a social agreement. Without the social agreement, the action of digging does not result in a wage .
While economists scrutinize one isolated segment of the cause and effect process, the universe manifests itself in an inconceivably
vast array of causes and conditions, actions and reactions. Focused as they are on the linear progression of
the economic events that concern them, economists forget that nature unfolds in all directions. In nature, actions
and reactions are not confined to isolated spheres. One action gives rise to results, which in turn becomes
a cause for further results. Each result conditions further results. In this way, action and reaction are
intertwined to form the vibrant fabric of causes and conditions that we perceive as reality. To understand
reality, it is necessary to understand this process.
Link Economic Rationality

Economic rationality forecloses a more spiritual awareness
abandoning technical intricacy for a more holistic approach is vital
6) //T.C.
Perhaps a little idealism is not so harmful; but there is a danger to the purely rational approach. At its worst, it is
used to rationalize our basest, most fear-ridden responses to the question of survival. We see this tendency
in the corporate strategists, policy advisors and defence analysts who logically and convincingly argue
that arms production is in our best interests. When rationalism turns a blind eye to the irrational, unseen
irrational impulses are all the more likely to cloud our rationality. The book you are reading takes a different
approach - a spiritual approach. As such, it does not delve into the technical intricacies of economics. Instead
it examines the fundamental fears, desires and emotions that motivate our economic activities . Of all the
spiritual traditions, Buddhism is best suited to this task. As we shall see, the Buddhist teachings offer profound
insights into the psychology of desire and the motivating forces of economic activity. These insights can
lead to a liberating self-awareness that slowly dissolves the confusion between what is truly harmful and
what is truly beneficial in production and consumption. This awareness is, in turn, the foundation for a
mature ethics.
Link Non-renewable Resources

The affirmatives reliance on non-renewable fuels is itself an act of
violence violates core Buddhist principles
of Budapest
In the 1950s and 1960s British economist E. F. Schumacher was working as an economic advisor in South-East Asia. He realized that the Western
economic models are not appropriate for Buddhist countries because they are based on a different
metaphysics than that of the Far-Eastern worldviews. The main goal of Buddhist life is liberation from all
suffering. Nirvana is the end state, which can be approached by want negation and purification of the human character. In his best-selling
book Small is beautiful Schumacher states that the central values of Buddhist economics are simplicity and non-violence
(Schumacher 1973). From a Buddhist point of view the optimal pattern of consumption is to reach a high level of satisfaction by means of a low rate of
material consumption. This allows people to live without pressure and strain and to fulfill the primary injunction of Buddhism: Cease to do evil; try to
do good. As natural resources are limited everywhere, people living simple lifestyles are obviously less likely to
be at each others throats than those overly dependent on scarce natural resources . According to Buddhists,
production using local resources for local needs is the most rational way of organizing economic life. Dependence on imports from afar and the
consequent need for export production is uneconomic and justifiable only in exceptional cases. For
Buddhists there is an essential
difference between renewable and non-renewable resources. Non-renewable resources must be used only if they are
absolutely indispensable, and then only with the greatest care and concern for conservation. To use non-renewable resources heedlessly
or extravagantly is an act of violence . Economizing should be based on renewable resources
as much as possible .
Western economics and industrialization are the root cause of environmental problems
Dharmkosajarn 11 (Dr. Phra Dharmakosajarn, Venerable Professor at Mahachulalongkornrajvidyalya University, Chairman at ICDV
& IABU, Rector at MCU, Buddhist Virtues in Socio-Economic Development, p.116, May 2011, BG)
Appropriate Economic Moderation- sufficient economics' first pillar is appropriate economic moderation. Schumacher demonstrates this concept: first,
the title of his book is called 'Small is Beautiful', highlighting reduction in scale is necessary; suggesting that large programs are more harmful than
helpful. Industrial society has relied on coal, fossil fuels, and soon -nuclear energy. These 'solutions' are magnified resulting in larger, more
harmful environmental problems. His text was first published back in 1973, some thirty-plus years ago; and as one reads the pages and reflects on
world events- nothing has changed. His problems are the same problems that this current generation has been left to manage [to whatever 'greater' extent
necessary]. In Buddhism, moderation is perceived to be the 'middle-way' between the two extremes of austerity and excessively-indulgent in with sensepleasures. Schumacher suggests intermediate/indigenous technologies that yield adequate material goods while harmonizing with the natural
resources and environment. However in this worldly-politicized realm moderation has a different shade - and the middle-way has been described as
transcending the two extremes towards a higher-unity? When the government's ministers decide to politically promote moderation, flexibility and caution
in economic policies -how sincere are their efforts beyond the signature line if there is no desire to transcend corruption? Schumacher's economics
suggests the ABC's: Administrators, business-people and communicators - these people will promote the appropriate or moderate techniques to the
under-educated mass population. The agricultural-producers should grow crops or specialize in crops that respond to the demands of the market.
Schumacher identifies three problems, if the urban educated rich-elite communicate to the rural uneducated poor. Again: urban-to-rural;
educated-to-uneducated; rich-to-poor; and possibly a fourth - industry-to-agriculture. It, though, is mandatory here to interject that there must be a
channel for the lower groups to address grievances to the higher groups - ensuring that there is justice in these processes. There are many problems that
have to be communicated to the rural areas- or problems that need remedied in the urban areas, reflectively. Can every scenario become an aspect of the
national economic and social development plans- or, are planned economies worthy of additional considerations?
Demand and supply economics of fossil fuels are a system of

exploitation that destroys the value of nature
Dharmkosajarn 11 (Dr. Phra Dharmakosajarn, Venerable Professor at Mahachulalongkornrajvidyalya University, Chairman at ICDV
& IABU, Rector at MCU, Buddhist Virtues in Socio-Economic Development, p.110, May 2011, BG)
King Bhumibol Adulyadej of Thailand, addressed transport problems, when he stated: " ... the market did not work efficiently for small farmers because
of high transaction costs including transport and vulnerability to exploitation."11 Economics is also inspired by 'demand' and 'supply' -profiting
greedily while 'provisions' avail themselves to lured-consumers- otherwise capitalists neglect investment ventures or potentials. Population
basing economic life on non-renewable fuels [ coaVoil] lives parasitically on capital, instead of income- demonstrating impermanence - exploitation
of resources should be considered an act of violence. Decentralization from a metropolis to provincial centers could encourage productivity amongst
those dwelling in the country-side. Marx has a few words: " ... capital creates the bourgeois society, and the universal appropriation of nature as well as
the social bond itself by the members of society. Hence the great civilizing influence of capital; its production of a stage of society in comparison to which
all earlier ones appear as mere local developments of humanity and as nature-idolatry. For the first time, nature becomes purely an object for
humankind, purely a matter of utility; ceases to be recognized as a power for itself; and the theoretical discovery of its autonomous laws appears
merely as a ruse so as to subjugate it under human needs, whether as an object of consumption or as a means of production. In accord with this
tendency, capital drives beyond national barriers and prejudices as much as beyond nature worship, as well as all traditional, confined, complacent,
encrusted satisfactions of present needs, and reproductions of old ways of life. It is destructive towards all of this, and constantly revolutionizes it, tearing
down all the barriers which hem in the development of the forces of production, the expansion of needs, the all-sided development of production, and the
exploitation and exchange of natural and mental forces. "12 There are too many people without the means to make money, and too many people
with capital not sharing with others that they, these others, can accomplish something.
Link Renewables
Economic growth perpetuates more environmental destruction even
with renewable energy.
Magnuson 7 (JOEL C. MAGNUSON is an Economics Professor, Social Science Department
Chair, Portland College, Octobe r 26, 2007,PATHWAYS TO A MINDFUL ECONOMY, Society and
Economy, Vol. 29, No. 2, SUSTAINABILITY AND SUFFICIENCY: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN A
BUDDHIST PERSPECTIVE, pp. 253-284,
http://www.jstor.org.proxy.lib.umich.edu/stable/pdfplus/41472084.pdf)//RM
One such systems condition is the growth imperative endemic to any capitalist system. Driven by its internal imperative for
continuous growth in production and consumption, the capitalistic institutions of the U.S. economy are
creating unprecedented levels of environmental destruction, and are rapidly depleting both renewable and nonrenewable resources on a global scale. Biologist Mary E. Clark describes this process as analogous to running up a balance on a credit card
that will have to be paid in the future: "We have been - and are - living on a one-time 'bank account' of fossil energy
and mineral deposits both formed over eons of geologic time. To have become as dependent on them as
we now are is sin- gularly imprudent . . . We are borrowing from the future" (Clark 1989: 107). This passage
resonates with Buddha's Discourse on the Son 's Flesh, which also suggests that as people over-consume their resources, they will
deny future generations the ability to feed themselves. Such over-consumption is analogous to a kind
of cannibalism in which people are "eating" their children and grandchildren (Hanh 1998: 32). Evidence of such
over-consumption of resources abounds. Geologists forecast that by 2040, U.S. oil production will fall by 90% from its production
peak that occurred in the early 1970s. As the U.S. heavily draws from global oil resources, geologists also forecast that world oil production
will decline by at least 63% by 2040 (Magnuson 2007: 206). Global oil production is peaking now or will peak
quite soon, and reserves will be seriously depleted within the lifetimes of our children and
grandchildren. Though the entire world is playing a role in bringing world oil supplies to this threshold, clearly the United States is playing a
leading role. Americans consume about 25% of the world's oil, but constitute only 5% of the world's population {ibid.: 207). As oil reserves near
depletion, the economy will turn to other fuel sources to power continuous growth. Natural gas and coal are the most likely sources as they are still
relatively abundant and inexpensive. According to geological estimates, at the current rate of consumption the life expectancy of natural gas is
somewhere between 160 and 310 years {ibid. : 208). However, if natural gas were put in place of oil to keep the economic machines running, the rate of
growth of fuel consumption would have to stay consistent at the current rate, which is about 3.5% per year. If a 3.5% annual increase in natural gas
consumption is sustained, the amount consumed will double every 20 years and the lifespan would be truncated to about 60 years. At best, natural gas is
a temporary "bridge" energy resource as the U.S. transitions away from a fossil fuel-based economy (McKibben 2004: 34). Coal is the most abundant
of all fossil fuels, and its effluents are the most toxic. If coal use increases as a replacement fuel for oil, then, inevitably, so will acid rain and global
warming thus worsen the pathological systems conditions. As the U.S. economy continues to accelerate, it also overuses
renewable resources such as topsoil and vegetation, fresh water and forests. The economic imperative
to grow, sustain higher profits and expand market share have also driven American farmers into
agricultural practices that are not sustainable. The imperative to grow overrides attempts to conserve
the integrity or fertility of soil, as industrial agriculture strives to use whatever combination of land,
water and chemicals to yield maximum output on a short-term basis. Farm- ers generally do not have much control over
the prices of the crops they produce for the market. Prices are set in global commodities markets and seem to be chronically low. Farmers must
therefore get the maximum yield from their land during the growing seasons in order to maximise revenues and profits. Each season farmers face
increasing pressure to borrow funds in order to purchase the latest version of patented seeds, chemicals, fuel and water to avoid losing their places in the
market. To pay back their loans and make their interest payments, they must get the highest yield possible on a short-run basis. Yet the following
season, the soil worsens requiring more water and chemicals and so on in a downward spiral of topsoil degradation. Many farmers have not survived
this process financially, resulting in steadily rising bankruptcies, particularly among the smaller family farms that must pay higher interest rates on
their credit, and who have the least purchasing power to pay for increasingly expensive chemicals and seeds. To increase their profitability, farmers
are allowing for shorter and shorter fallow peri- ods in which land rests and regenerates from cultivation. When the extensive use of
petrochemical fertilisers and pesticides began decades ago, it was heralded as a "green revolution" as it
contributed to significant increases in productivity and output. Yet the destruction caused by this
technology remains largely hidden. Topsoil is being hardened from the compaction caused by the
heavy machinery. Hardening decreases the rate of water absorption, causes problems of water runoff
and inadequate drainage, and increases the occur- rence of erosion. Though erosion has decreased in the last decade, it
remains high above normal levels at approximately 2 billion tons annually. (For statistics on soil erosion, see U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural
Resources Conservation Service, http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/technical/land/meta/m5848.html/.) All of the major aquifers in the United States are being
depleted. In a recent report by the U.S. Department of Geological Survey, in which they also use the analogy of drawing down a bank account
balance, ground water levels are declining throughout the United States due to excessive pumping (USGS 2004). As water tables drop, previously
productive wells go dry and farmers either must dig deeper wells and draw down water tables even further or drill new wells where the process of
depletion starts anew. In Arizona's Santa Cruz basin water tables are being depleted by half a million acre-feet every year (an acre-foot equals about
326,000 gallons). California's San Joaquin Valley, a rich agricultural region, de- pletes its groundwater supplies by 1.5 million acre-feet annually. In
addition, falling water tables cause spring-fed rivers, lakes and wetlands on the surface to dry up. This, in turn, causes ground surfaces to sink,
creating lifeless sand boxes.
Transition to green energy creates just as much destruction.

Pupavac 10 (VANESSA PUPAVAC is from the School of Politics and International Relations,
University of Nottingham, UK, December 22, 2010, The ConsumerismDevelopmentSecurity

Nexus, Security Dialogue December 2010 vol. 41 no. 6,
http://sdi.sagepub.com.proxy.lib.umich.edu/content/41/6/691.full.pdf+html) //RM
Instead, Schumacher proposes an alternative holistic people-focused Buddhist economics. Schumacher (1983: 3839) defines Buddhist economics
as cultivating the right livelihood towards a becoming existence. He wants societies to follow Buddhist concepts of
liberation as release from attachment to material things and the selfs mergence with nature (Schumacher,
1977a; 1983: 3742). Accordingly, Schumachers (1983: 2125, 42) development vision seeks to reduce desires for material
goods in order to obtain the maximum of well-being with the minimum of consumption, orientated around
basic needs. Here, Schumacher follows old philosophical concerns over alienation from God or nature as against secular social progressive concerns
with political and social emancipation (Meszaros, 1970). Schumacher (1983: 85, 120) sees humanity as a spoiler, polluter,
destroyer, and nature as a self-balancing, self-adjusting, self-cleansing life-form. He seeks natural solutions as
opposed to scientific technological innovations such as nuclear energy, which allow humanity to transcend Malthusian natural limits and expand their
material consumption (Schumacher, 1983: 117). If humanity were to escape natures limits, Schumacher fears,
materialism would have free reign (Wood, 1983: 304). Schumacher presents pre-industrial communities and labour as virtuous on
account of their more humble relationship to nature (Schumacher, 1983: 37; Wood, 1983: 271275, 312313). For Schumacher (1983: 90), a becoming
life and social peace are achieved through religious awe, humility and sacrifice. The poor, with their lower consumption
patterns, tied to necessity, are closer to his ideal existence. fThe sources of international insecurity and conflict for Schumacher
are moral failings in materialism. Peace and security are to be found in spiritualism. Schumachers spiritual
development vision identifies with traditional peasant communities and overlooks their insecurities and
violent aspects, because he associates low technology with nonviolence, and industrial technology with
violence (Schumacher, 1983: 120). He approves of agriculturally based economies for keeping people in touch with nature (Schumacher, 1983: 90
91). He warns against the risk that a green revolution will lead to agriculture becoming standardized
and suffering the same alienating tendencies of modern urban, industrial life (Schumacher, 1983: 92).
Schumacher challenges the liberal ideals of commercial pacifism expressed in Rostows model of
integrating communities into national or international markets, fearing participation in the world
economy draws populations into largescale violent conflicts (Schumacher, 1983: 43). Schumacher is sceptical about
increasing material investment or aid in the developing world, as Rostow sought, because he fears such strategies encourage its populations to adopt
Western consumption habits (Wood, 1983: 314). Schumacher does not agree with Rostow that developing countries consumption could expand as their
production expands.
Buddhist economics can correct the externalities of modern economics

questioning CONSUMPTION, not PRODUCTION, is vital
Daniels 7 (PETER DANIELS is a Senior Lecturer, Griffith School of Environment, Griffith
University, December 12, 2007, BUDDHISM AND THE TRANSFORMATION TO SUSTAINABLE
ECONOMIES, Society and Economy, Vol. 29, No. 2, pp. 155-180) //RM
To some extent, human societies are already acting to ameliorate these sources of environmental stress. Many
positive socioeconomic and technological changes are underway. Efforts include well-established policy and regulation to
reduce waste emissions plus new activities encouraging environmental management systems (under ISO-14001) and carbon emissions trading. There
have also been profound changes in terms of voluntary, economic and regulation-induced conservation behaviour by citizens (in their production and
consumption roles), and the widespread adoption of the importance of triple bottom line, eco-efficiency and social responsibility goals for productive
and governance enterprise.
These trends are promising.
In particular (and in accordance with neoclassical economics),
attitudes and related demand aspects that represent a more environment-oriented "consumer sovereignty" are pivotal requirements for effecting
sustainability. However, it seems that the dominant world views and motives of the globalising socioeconomic
system present formidable barriers to a transition to sustainable resource use. Satisfaction, status,
progress and success are still primarily defined and pursued through material and energy-based
accumulation and control of resources (and, in some way, people). While this drive to accumulate and achieve does have gratis
environmental effects (for example, in driving eco-efficiency gains and ecological modernisation processes - Simonis 1989), the positive
trends and outcomes are largely directed towards the material environment and its control, and the
ongoing ability for individuals and their supporting kin to consume more. Hence, there is a tension or
dissonance between the development of positive environmental attitudes and knowledge, and the
structural influences that drive the global consumer/market economy. This tension is not well-addressed
by most existing paradigmatic solutions such as ecological modernisation with its tendency to retain
consumption maximisation imperatives (Carolan 2004). A major premise of this paper is that Buddhism
provides a logic and means to help resolve this tension between in-grained economic system imperatives
and the changes actually required for achieving environmental sustainability. In this simple depiction, we examine
the logic inherent within Buddhism's Four Noble Truths, and the means proffered in the Eightfold Path, and extend upon these basic ideas with
knowledge and experience available from 21st century environmental science, economics and technology fields. The ultimate goal is to illustrate how
this ancient wisdom can help inform and facilitate the successful transformation to sustainable human economies. While a focus upon
Buddhism to help guide this process may seem idealistic, its world view is subject to increasing interest,
relevance and feasibility with respect to contemporary global challenges such as sustainable
development. This claim is supported by recent developments such as ) the widespread and profound
respect and influence of the Dalai Lama and other Buddhist leaders and institutions; (b) the growth in
affiliation with Buddhism; (c) increasing interest in Buddhist activities, literature, internet resources,
cele- brations and practices (including meditation, retreats, development assistance, community work
and interest groups); (d) the substantive inputs of Buddhism to the strong "new age", spiritual-holism
lifestyle and Eastern philosophy shift in Western economies; and (e) a surge in academic study on the
socioeconomic application of Buddhist principles and in economic progress, and welfare measures on
the basis of ethical foundations and the deeper analysis of "ultimate ends".
Link Competitiveness
Competitiveness is irrationally derived from selfishness rethinking is
key to avert negative externalities of economic self-preservation
5) //T.C.
If we are to honestly discuss economics, we must admit that emotional factors - fear and desire and the
irrationality they generate - have a very powerful influence on the market place. Economic decisions
about production, consumption and distribution - are made by people in their struggle to survive and
prosper. For the most part, these decisions are motivated by an emotional urge for self-preservation fear and
desire drive us to our worst economic excesses. The forces of greed, exploitation and over-consumption
seem to have overwhelmed our economies in recent decades. Our materialistic societies offer us little choice
but to exploit and compete for survival in today's dog-eat-dog world. But at the same time, it is obvious that
these forces are damaging our societies and ravaging our environment.
Link Fear
The affirmative actions is rooted in fear and desire, emotions which
are based on ignorance, and a misconception of reality limiting the
potential for happiness and true understanding of the world
*we do not support the gendered language this author uses
Several modern scientific disciplines, such as biology, psychology and medical science, have started to
study the effects of empathy on the human mind, body, health and relationships . Not surprisingly, they have
ascertained that compassion is of tremendous help to our well-being. A compassionate frame of mind has a positive effect on our
mental and physical health, as well as on our social life, while the lack of empathy has been found to cause or aggravate serious social, psychological and
even physical disorders18. Recent research on stress shows that people who only seek short term pleasure, are more prone to stress than those who seek a
higher purpose, who seek meaning rather than pleasure.19 Meaning generally is derived from values such as serving others, going beyond short term
selfish needs. The fact that disregarding short term selfish needs is actually a source of longer term happiness,
turns the classical economic notion of selfish individualism upside down . As economist Stanislav Menchikov observes:
The standard, neoclassical model is actually in conflict with human nature. It does not reflect prevailing
patterns of human behavior. [..] If you look around carefully, you will see that most people are not really maximizers, but instead what you
might call satisfyers: they want to satisfy their needs, and that means being in equilibrium with oneself, with
other people, with society and with nature. This is reflected in families, where people spent most of their time, and where relations are
mostly based on altruism and compassion. So most of our lifetime we are actually altruists and compassionate What does all this mean for our economy ?
Here we are entering unchartered territory, as is always the case in a paradigm shift. But some things are clear. The
debate is not simply on government versus markets. As noted earlier, I believe it is about deeper, spiritual issues. Economic thinking is
primarily focussed on creating systems of arranging matter for optimal intake of consumption. It assumes
that the main human impulses are competition and consumption, and it has sidestepped spiritual and
moral issues because it would involve a qualitative judgment on values and other intangibles that go
beyond its initial premises. But by assuming that the more we consume, the happier we are, economists
have overlooked the intricate working of the human mind. At the root of this belief in the market lies a
very fundamental misconception. That is, we have not really understood what makes us happy. Blind faith in
economics has led us to believe that the market will bring us all the things that we want. We cling to the notion that contentment is obtained by the senses,
by sensual experiences derived from consuming material goods. This feeds an emotion of sensual desire. At the same time , we are led to believe
that others are our competitors who are longing after the same, limited resources as we are. Hence we
experience fear, the fear of losing out, the fear that our desire will not be satisfied . So we can observe that the
whole machine of expanding capitalism is fuelled by two very strong emotions: desire and fear .
They are so strong that they appear to be permanent features of our condition. Yet Buddha taught that
since these emotions are based on ignorance, a misconception of reality, they can be removed by the
understanding of reality, which is the prime object of Buddhist practice. According to Buddhism, happiness is an
inner experience, available to anyone, regardless of wealth or poverty . Further, fundamentally there is nothing that we lack.
By developing the mind, our inner qualities, we can experience perfect wholeness and contentment. Finally,
if we share with others, we will find that we are not surrounded by competitors. Others depend on us as
we depend on them. I believe that if Buddha would be alive today, he would probably recreate economic theory based on a correct and complete
understanding of what is a human being and what makes him happy. As long as economics is based on a partial or wrong image
of man and his reality, it will not produce the results we need.
Anxiety and fear preclude inner peace

Yeshe 83 Lama Thubten Yeshe
(Anxiety in the Nuclear Age, http://www.lamayeshe.com/index.php?sect=article&id=128)//BB
Whats the good of worrying about things twenty-four hours a day, disturbing your mind and preventing yourself
from having a peaceful and joyful life? Its a waste of time . Nothings going to change just because youre worrying about it. If
somethings already broken, its broken. Worrying wont fix it. This earth has always been destructive by nature, nuclear age or not. Theres always blood
flowing someplace or another. Look at world history. Its always been like this. Buddhism calls this interdependent origination, and thats how the human
mind works. Take Americas war in Vietnam, for example. That brought people together in a movement for peace. Thats also interdependent. Some
people saw the horrible suffering, confusion, misery and destruction wrought by others, so they went the other way, thinking, Thats not right, and
despite the difficulties, created a movement of peace and love. But the right way to eliminate harm from this earth is to first
free your mind from the emotional disturbances that cause irrational fear of destruction, and then
educate yourself and others in how to bring peace to the world. The first thing you must do is to control your own mind and
commit yourself: From now on, no matter what happens, Im never going to use weapons to kill any human being. Thats where world peace starts.
Human beings can control their minds and actions such that they will never kill others; people can learn to see that harming others destroys not only the
others pleasure and happiness but their own as well. Through this kind of education, we can prevent nuclear energy from destroying the world. We cant
just campaign for the complete abolition of nuclear energy. Like electricity, nuclear energy is useful if employed the right way. If youre careless with
electricity, it can kill you too, cant it? With right knowledge and method, we should campaign to ensure that everybody on earth determines, I will never
use nuclear weapons to kill human beings. If that happened, a nuclear conflagration could never occur. Not that it matters, but personally, I dont believe
that nuclear energy is going to destroy the earth. I do believe, however, that human beings are capable of making a program to ensure that people
everywhere, irrespective of whether they live in communist or capitalist societies, determine not to use nuclear weapons to kill other human beings. If we
were to undertake such an effort to educate people, I think we could achieve our aim within ten years. Here, Im not talking from a Buddhist point of view;
Im not talking from any religions point of view. Im talking from a humanist point of view, a realistic point of view. If peoples minds are out of control,
theyre going to use nuclear weapons. But irrespective of whether people are religious or non-religious, communist or non-communist, believers or nonbelievers, I believe every human being is capable of understanding the difference between harmful and non-harmful actions and the benefit of everybodys
being peaceful and happy. Since its a universal reality, we can educate people to see it. With respect to fear and worry, the Buddhas solution is to analyze
the object of fear and worry. If you do this correctly, youll be able to recognize that youre seeing the object as fundamentally permanent, which has
nothing to do with its reality. Look at it and ask yourself, Is this really worth worrying about? Is worry a solution or not? Analyze the object: is it
permanent or changeable? As the great saints have said, If its changeable, why worry? If its not, whats the use of worrying? When youre afraid,
analyze the object of your fears. Particularly when youre emotionally disturbed and anxious, youll find that theres a
concept of concreteness in your mind, which causes you to project a concrete object externally. Neither
concept has anything to do with reality. Buddhism asserts that the mind of fear and worry always either
overestimates or underestimates its object and never sees its reality . If you can perceive the fundamental, universal reality
of your object of fear and worry, it will become like a cloudit comes; it goes. When you are overcome with worry, you sometimes say, Its always like
this. Thats not true. Things never stay the same; they always come and gothats the reality. Also, when youre occupied by anxiety and fear, you
might mean well, but you automatically have a tendency to generate hatred. Hatred has nothing to do with peace and
happiness, does it? Buddhist psychology teaches that fear and anxiety tend to produce anger, aversion and hatred. You
say you want peace and

happiness but your very mental state causes hatred. Its contradictory . People who demonstrate for peace and other causes
have to watch out for this, but you have to judge for yourself how far you can go without generating hatred. Everybodys different. Lets say were out
there campaigning for peace but then the president says something with which we disagree. Should we get angry? Should we hate the president? I dont
believe so; that would be a mistake. If our concern for peace and happiness makes us angry, theres something wrong. The president is a human being. He,
too, wants peace and happiness. At the bottom of his heart, he wants to be happy; he doesnt want to be miserable. This is the universal reality. Therefore,
all of us in the peace movement should make sure that we dont hate any human being. This is the most important thing. When we demonstrate, we should
be true to our word. Being a politician is not easy. Even being a wife or a husband is not easy. Most situations come with responsibility and obligation. We
can look outside and blindly criticize people who work as administrators and so forth, but realistically, their position can be very difficult. To be
successful, the peace movement should be selfless. If we who campaign for peace are coming from a place of selfishness, a basic concern for, Me, me,
me, we have little chance of success. If, instead, we have a broad view based on concern for all human beingsunderstanding that everybody wants
happiness and nobody wants to be miserableand can educate others to see this, if we work towards this goal continuously, ultimately well achieve it.
There are many meditations you can do to eliminate anxiety. But meditation doesnt mean going off to the mountains. You have the key to
change your mind at any time, wherever you are. You can learn to switch your mind from emotion to peace and, each time you get
distracted, gently bring it back to peace again. Practice this over and over again. You can do this; its human nature. You have to realize what youre
capable of. Check your own life, from the time you were born up to nowhow many times have you changed your mind? Who changed it for you?
Buddha didnt change it. Jesus didnt change it. Who changed your mind? Analyze this for yourself. That is the beauty of being human. We have the
capacity for liberation within us; we come with that ability. If we utilize our energy and intelligence correctly, we can discover that liberation and
happiness are already there, within us. The fundamental principle of Buddhism is not to kill. As Buddhists, this is our main obligation. I think most of you
could promise never to kill another human being. That makes me very happy. We all have same aim; we think alike. Even though Im a Tibetan monk, an
uneducated mountain man, and youre educated people from industrialized, capitalist societies, we have the same understanding. We dont know each
other, but we can still work together. Thats the most beautiful thing about being human. We can communicate with others. We should try to educate
people all over the world to the point where everybody says, For the rest of my life, I will never kill another human being. If every human being on earth
could agree to that, what would there be to worry about? Who could possibly be paranoid? In one way, the peace movement is beautiful, and if we act
according to its ideas, therell be no more racism, no more nationalism. Well be equally concerned for all people. Therell be no more fanatical religious
concerns; we wont even care if people are religious or not. Our only concern will be peace. All that will matter will be that people everywhere love and
take care of each other. Who cares whos communist or non-communist? Whats in the human heart is whats important, not whether people are
communist or capitalist. If we talk to each other, we can change the human heart. At present, we might be located in a non-communist country, but we
shouldnt project that communists want kill people who arent. Thats not true. People in communist countries are ladies and gentlemen, too. Like us, they
want to be happy and desire not to be miserable. Therefore, together we can reach conclusions without involving the dogma of philosophy, the dogma of
religion, the dogma of nationality, the dogma of racism; we can come together without any kind of dogma. That is beautiful. That is the beauty of the
human beingto bring human unity and understanding without being blinded by categories. If you go to Russia and ask people, Do you want to be killed
by nuclear missiles? theyre going to say No! For sure, they dont want that to happen. Therefore, we have to educate people to understand the difference
Buddha
stressed the importance of generating loving kindness for all people irrespective of race, nationality, creed or anything else; he
taught that all human beings and even animals were the object of loving kindness. This is the best guarantee against
between what is beneficial for humanity and what is destructivefor the individual and for all. Its simply a matter of education. Lord
nuclear war , because each individual has to maintain control and take personal responsibility for the
welfare of the all beings in the universe. Taking universal responsibility is the guarantee. If e ach individual doesnt
take personal responsibility for the welfare of all, it wont work . To bring happiness and peace to earth, we have to eliminate
every situation leading to hatred and anger. That means totally eradicating our own hatred and anger. We have to
make our own lives peaceful and happy. This is the way to work for peace twenty-four hours a day. If our minds harbor destructive, angry thoughts, any
talk of peace is just a joke. Its merely artificial; theres no guarantee. The only guarantee is to fertilize our minds with peace and loving kindness towards
all; thats the way we should do it. The question remains, is it possible to spread these ideas throughout the whole world? Can we get everybody in the
world to agree to abandon the use of nuclear arms and not to kill any human being? Can you make that determination yourself? We can spread this
philosophy or not? What do you think? Were not using religion in this; were not using Buddha, were not using Christ, were not using religion or nonreligionwere just concerned for the welfare of all human beings. What do you think? Do you think its possible to make this kind of program and reach
that point reach or not? Im not talking nationalistically or making any philosophic argument; Im just talking about feeling secure, taking care of each
other, loving each other, bringing peace and happiness to each other. Its a very simple thing. Therefore, in our daily lives, each of us should all dedicate
ourselves to bringing peace and happiness to all beings, and this determination itself is a powerful way of bringing peace and success into our lives. But
this doesnt mean not to act, either; to just be passive. But when
you do act, act with wisdom and without selfishness, hatred or
emotional fear . In that way, you will educate yourself and others. Dont worry. Any talk of nuclear destruction of the earth
is still speculation. Its just a mental projection; its not yet reality. Therefore, relax and enjoy the rest of your life as much as possible. Be happy and
peaceful, and dont waste your time with pessimistic thoughts, fear or worry. Thank you so much.
Impacts
Impact Extinction
Only an infusion of Buddhist economics solves extinction
of Budapest
(Laszlo, Ethical Principles and Economic Transformation A Buddhist Approach, p. v)//BB
This book presents new insights of Buddhist ethics applied to economics and business. Buddhism suggests an
approach to economic life , which is radically different from what mainstream Western
economics offers. Buddhism promotes want negation and selfless service of others for achieving
happiness, peace and permanence. These ideas might seem irrational or at least naive for the Western mind
which is preoccupied by cultivating desires and the instrumental use of the world. However, the
deep ecological and financial crisis of our era renders alternative solutions worthy for consideration.
The economic crisis of 20082010 produced financial losses of billions of USD in the form of poisoned debts, decline of
stock prices and value depreciation of properties. Formerly fast growing economies such as Ireland, Spain, Singapore and Taiwan experienced 510%
decline in their GDP. The fundamental cause of the crisis is the avarice of investors fueled by irresponsible
financial institutions. The prospect of future economic growth supposed to be the guarantor of the indebted- ness of households, companies and
economies. Today we experience a considerable downscaling of our economic activities. The present scale of economic activities of
humankind is ecologically unsustainable . The so-called ecological footprint calculations clearly show
this. The ecological footprint of a person is equal with the land and water that is required to support his or her activities indefinitely using prevailing
technology. The sustainable ecological footprint also called earthshare is the average amount of ecologically productive land and sea available
globally per capita. According to the latest available data the ecological footprint of humankind exceeds the ecological capacity of the Earth by 200250%.
It means that we would need 22.5 Earths for continuing our present lifestyle. The ecological footprints of the most industrialized
countries are shocking. These countries are ecologically overshot by 250600% (See Table 1). Ecological economists
argue that the material throughput of the economy should be drastically reduced in the industrialized countries and also
globally. We need to undertake an economic diet by introducing more frugal production and consumption patterns.
Frugality , that is, reduced material activities, is crucial for our survival .
Realizing nonduality will prevent extinction.

Does this solution involve returning to nature? That would be like getting rid of the self: something neither desirable nor possible. We cannot
return to nature because we have never left it. Look around yourself: even if youre inside a windowless
room, everything you see is derived from nature: not only wood from trees, but plastic from oil and concrete from sand and stone.
The environment is not merely an environmentthat is, not only the place where we happen to be located. Rather, the biosphere is the ground from
which and within which we arise. The earth is not only our home, it is our mother. In fact, our relationship is even more intimate, because we can never
cut the umbilical cord. The air in my lungs, like the water and food that enter my mouth and pass through my digestive system, is part of a greater
holistic system that circulates through me. My life is a dissipative process that depends upon and contributes to that never-ending circulation. The same
is true collectively. Our waste products do not disappear when we find somewhere else to dump them. The
world is big enough that we may be able to ignore such problems for a while, but what goes around
eventually comes around. If we befoul our own nest, there is nowhere else to go. According to this understanding,
the problem is not technology itself but the obsessive ways that we have been motivated to exploit it.
Without those motivations, we would be able to evaluate our technologies better, in light of the ecological
problems to which they have contributed, as well as the ecological solutions to which they might
contribute. Given all the long-term risks associated with nuclear power, for example, I cannot see that as
anything but a short-sighted solution to our energy needs. In place of fossil fuels, the answer will have to
be renewable sources of natural power (solar, wind, and so forth), along with a reduced need for energy. As long
as we assume the necessity of continuous economic and technological expansion, the prospect of a steep
reduction in our energy needs is impossible, but a new understanding of our basic situation opens up
other possibilities. This points to a very simple (although not necessarily easy) solution to our energy problems: instead of asking how can we
get all the energy we need? I propose that we turn that around by determining how much renewable energy is available and restructuring human
civilization accordingly. But - this is my last pointhow does such an understanding resolve the basic anxiety that haunts us now, when we must create
our own meaning in a world where God has died? Like it or not, today our individual and collective self-consciousness
distances us from pre-modern worldviews and the natural meaning-of-life they provided. Nor would we
want to return to such constrictive worldviewsoften maintained by forceeven if we could. But what other alternatives are possible for us? This is
really to ask what collective parallel might correspond to the individual awakening that Buddhism promotes. The Buddha attained
individual awakening. Now we need a collective enlightenment to stop the course of destruction (Thich Nhat
Hanh). I conclude with some reflections on what a collective enlightenment might mean. Perhaps the important issue is how we understand evolution,
which seems quite compatible with Buddhist emphasis on impermanence (process), insubstantiality, and interdependence. If religions are to remain
relevant today, they need to stop denying (or ignoring, or minimizing) evolution and instead refocus their messages on its meaning. According to Brian
Swimme the greatest scientific discovery of all time is that if you leave hydrogen gas alone (for fourteen billion years, plus or minus a few hundred
million years) it turns into rosebushes, giraffes, and humans. I believe that is also an important spiritual discovery, and furthermore it seems to me
that even fourteen billion years is a short period of time [!] for the cosmos to develop from the Big Bang to a Buddha or an Einsteinunless hydrogen
gas is something quite different from the reductionistic way it is usually understood. What we normally think of as evolution is only one of three
progressive processes: the fusion of Big Bang particles into higher elements (in the cores of stars and supernovas), followed by the origination of
selfreplicating life and the evolution of plant and animal species, and last but not least the cultural developments necessary to produce highlyevolved
human beings such as kyamuni Buddha and Einstein. The later (higher?) processes depend upon the earlier ones: life as we know it requires
elements such as carbon and oxygen, and of course human culture is the development of a particular species that depends upon many other species to
survive and thrive. How shall we understand these three nested processes? Theists tend to see a Being outside these processes who is directing them.
Many scientists see these developments as haphazard, including the evolution of life due to random DNA mutations. Is there a third alternative?
According to the evolutionary biologist Theodore Dobzhansky, evolution is neither random nor determined but creative. Of what? The tendency towards
increasing complexity is hard to overlook, and greater complexity seems to be associated with greater awareness. From a Buddhist perspective, this
opens up interesting possibilities. Can we understand this groping self-organization as the universe struggling to become more selfaware? Is my desire to
awaken (the Buddha means the awakened one) the urge of the cosmos to become aware of itself, in and as me? In The Universe Story Brian
Swimme and Thomas Berry offer a similar claim: The mind that searches for contact with the Milky Way is the very mind of the Milky Way galaxy in
search of its inner depths. What does this imply about Walt Whitman, for example, admiring a beautiful sunset? Walt Whitman is a space the Milky
Way fashioned to feel its own grandeur. Is that how Buddhist enlightenment should be understood today? What did kyamuni Buddha realize when he
looked up and saw the morning star? How did Dogen describe his own awakening? I came to realize clearly that mind is no other than mountains and
rivers and the great wide earth, the sun and the moon and the stars. Every species is an experiment of the biosphere, and according to biologists less
than one percent of all species that have ever appeared on earth still survive today. Our super-sized cortex enables us to be cocreators (created in the
image of God), and with us new types of species have become possible: knives and cities, poetry and world wars, cathedrals and concentration camps,
symphonies and nuclear bombs. As these examples suggest, however, there is a problem with our hyperrationality. Nietzsches Zarathustra says that
man is a rope across an abyss: are we a transitional species? Must we evolve further in order to survive at all? In Thank God for Evolution Michael
Dowd describes our collective problem as systemic sin: The fundamental immaturity of the human species at this time in history is that our systems of
governance and economics not only permit but actually encourage subsets of the whole (individuals and corporations) to benefit at the expense of the
whole. Again, we bump up against the delusion of separate selves that pursue their own benefit at the cost of the whole. In Buddhist terms, I wonder if
such delusions are haunted by too much dukkha dis-ease, which motivates us (both individually and collectively) to do too many self-destructive
things. Perhaps figures like the Buddha and Gandhi are harbingers of how our species needs to develop, in which case the cultural evolution that is
most needed today involves spiritual practices that address the fiction of a separate self whose own well-being is distinguishable from the well-being of
others. Perhaps our basic problem is not self-love but a profound misunderstanding of what ones self really is. Without the compassion
that arises when we realize our nondualityempathy not only with other humans but with the whole
biosphereit is becoming likely that civilization as we know it will not survive the next few centuries. Nor
would it deserve to. If my speculations are valid, it remains to be seen whether the Homo sapiens experiment will be a successful vehicle for the cosmic
evolutionary process. To conclude, does this give us another perspective on our collective relationship with the biosphere? Is the eco-crisis a spiritual
challenge that calls upon us to realize our nonduality with the earth? Remember what was said earlier about the bodhisattva path. Although living
beings are innumerable, the bodhisattva vows to save them all. This commitment flows naturally from
realizing that none of those beings is separate from oneself. This suggests a final parallel between the
individual and the collective. Will our species become the collective bodhisattva of the biosphere? Today humanity is challenged to discover
the meaning and role it seeks in the ongoing, long-term task of repairing the rupture between us and mother earth. That healing will
transform us as much as the biosphere.
Only by confronting our self away from outside solutions can we

realize our role in the world, preventing inevitable ecological
destruction.
In other words, part of the
rich cultural legacy that the Greeks bequeathed to the Westfor better and worseis an
about who we are and what it means to be human. Loss (or reduction) of faith in God has left
us rudderless, collectively as well as individually. Thanks to ever more powerful technologies, it seems like we can
accomplish almost anything we want to doyet we dont know what our role is, what we should do. What
increasing anxiety
sort of world do we want to live in? What kind of society should we have? If we cannot depend on God or godlike rulers to tell us, we are thrown back
upon ourselves, and the lack of any grounding greater than ourselves is a profound source of dukkha, collective as well as individual. To sum up, our
modern sense of separation from the natural world has become an ongoing source of alienation and
frustration. (This corresponds to points one through three, above.) What has been our collective response to this predicament? Remember how we
usually react to our individual predicament. I try to make my anxious sense of self inside more real by becoming
attached to (identifying with) things in the outside world, such as money, fame, and power. No matter
how much of them I may acquire, however, I never seem to have enough, because they cannot allay the basic anxiety,
which stems from the inherent insecurity of my constructed sense of self. Believing that something outside myself is the solution
to my sense of lack is the fundamental delusion. Such solutions actually reinforce the problem, which is
the sense of separation or distance between myself and others. Is there a collective parallel to these sorts of compulsions? When we ask the question in
this way, I believe that the answer becomes apparent: its our obsession with never-ending progress and growth. What
motivates our attitude towards economic and technological development? When will our Gross National
Product be large enough? When will we collectively consume enough? When will we have all the
technology we need? Why is more always better if it can never be enough? My point is that technology and
economic growth in themselves cannot resolve the basic human problem about what it means to be
human. They may be a good means to accomplish something but they are not good as ends-in-themselves. Since we are not sure
how else to solve that problem, however, they have become a collective substitute, in effect: forms of secular salvation that we
seek but never quite attain. Since we dont really know where we want to go, or what we should value, we have become demonically
obsessed with ever-increasing power and control. Notice the parallel with ones individual predicament: lacking the security that comes from knowing
our place and role in the cosmos, we have been trying to create our own security. Modern technology, in particular, has become our collective attempt to
fully control the conditions of our existence on this planet. In effect, we have been trying to remold the earth so that it is
completely adapted to serve our purposes, until everything becomes subject to our will, a resource we
can use. This is despite the fact, or rather because of the fact, that we do not know what those purposes should be. Ironically, if predictably, this has
not been providing the sense of security and meaning that we seek. We have become more anxious and confused, not less. If these parallels
are validif they are an accurate description of our collective situationsomething like the ecological crisis is inevitable.
Sooner or later (now?) we must bump up against the limits of this compulsive project of endless growth and never-enough control. And if our
increasing reliance on technology as the solution to such problems is itself a symptom of this larger
problem, the ecological crisis requires more than a technological response (although technological developments are
certainly necessary, of coursefor example, more efficient solar panels). Increasing dependence on sophisticated, ever more powerful
technologies tends to aggravate our sense of separation from the natural world, whereas any successful
solution (if the parallel still holds) must involve recognizing that we are an integral part of the natural
world. That also means embracing our responsibility for the welfare of the biosphere, because its well-being ultimately cannot be distinguished from
our own well-being. Understood properly, then, humanitys taking care of the earths rainforests is like me taking care of my own leg. (Sound
familiar?)
Impact Nuclear War

Nuclear war is inevitable absent human solidarity INNER peace is the
only way to transform society
Daisaku 7 - Buddhist philosopher and president of Soka Gokkai International
(Ikeda, Restoring the Human Connection: The First Step to Global Peace, http://www.sgiusa.org/newsandevents/docs/peace2007.pdf)//BB
The challenge of preventing any further proliferation of nuclear weapons is 8 just such a trial in the quest for
world peace, one that cannot be achieved if we are defeated by a sense of helplessness. The crucial element is to ensure that any
struggle against evil is rooted firmly in a consciousness of the unity of the human family, something only gained
through the mastery of our own inner contradictions . It is this kind of reconfiguration of our thinking
that will make possible a skilled and restrained approach to the options of dialogue and pressure. The
stronger our sense of connection as members of the human family, the more effectively we can reduce to an absolute minimum any application of the
hard power of pressure, while making the greatest possible use of the soft power of dialogue. Tragically, the weighting in the case of Iraq has been
exactly the reverse. The need for such a shift has been confirmed by many of the concerned thinkers I have met. Norman Cousins
(191590), the writer known as the conscience of America with whom I published a dialogue, stated with dismay in his work Human Options: The
great failure of education not just in the United States but throughout most of the worldis that it has made
people tribe-conscious rather than species-conscious. 8 Similarly, when I met with Mohamed ElBaradei, director general of the
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), in November of last year, he declared powerfully: we continue to emphasize our differences instead
of what we have in common. We continue to talk about us versus them. Only when we can start to talk about us as including all of humanity will
we truly be at peace. In our correspondence, Joseph Rotblat posed the question, Can we master the necessary arts of global security and loyalty to
the human race?9 Three months after writing these words to me, Dr. Rotblat passed away. I believe his choice to leave this most crucial matter in the
form of an open question 9 as an expression of his optimism and his faith in humanity. When our thinking is reconfigured around loyalty to the human
raceour sense of human solidarityeven the most implacable difficulties will not cause us to lapse into despair or condone the panicked use of force.
It will be possible to escape the snares of such shortsighted thinking. We will be empowered to engage in the kind of persistent exertion that Max Weber
viewed as the ideal of political action, and the door will be open to the formation of consensus and persuasion through dialogue. The function of anger
When my mentor Josei Toda used the words a devil incarnate, a fiend, a monster, he was referring to a destructiveness inherent in human life. It is
a function of this destructiveness to shred our sense of human solidarity, sowing the seeds of mistrust and
suspicion, conflict and hatred. Those who would use nuclear weapons capable of instantaneously killing
tens of millions of people exhibit the most desperate symptoms of this pathology . They have lost all sense of the
dignity of life, having fallen prey to their own inner demons. Buddhism classifies the underlying destructive impulses that give rise to such behavior as
the three poisons (Jpn: san-doku) of greed, anger and ignorance. The world of anger can be thought of as the state of life of those in whom these
forces have been directed outward toward others. Buddhism analyzes the inner state of human life in terms of the following ten categories, or worlds:
Hell, Hunger, Animality, Anger, Humanity, Rapture, Learning, Realization, Bodhisattva and Buddhahood. Together these worlds constitute an
interpenetrating functional whole, referred to as the inherent ten worlds. It is the wisdom and compassion of the world of Buddhahood that bring out the
most positive aspect of each of the other 10 worlds. In the Buddhist scriptures we find the statement anger can function for both good and evil,10
indicating that just and righteous anger, the kind essential for countering evil, is the form of the world of anger that creates positive value. The anger
that we must be on guard against is that which is undirected and unrestrained relative to the other nine worlds. In this case, anger is a rogue and
renegade force, disrupting and destroying all in its path. In this form, the world of anger is a condition of always seeking to surpass, unable to
countenance inferiority, disparaging others and overvaluing oneself.11 When in the world of anger, we are always engaged in
invidious comparisons with others, always seeking to excel over them. The resulting distortions prevent
us from perceiving the world accurately; we fall easily into conflict, locking horns with others at the
slightest provocation. Under the sway of such anger, people can commit unimaginable acts of violence and bloodshed. Another Buddhist text
portrays one in the world of anger as 84,000 yojanas tall, the waters of the four oceans coming only up to his knees.12 A yojana was a measure of
distance used in ancient India; there are various explanations as to what the specific distance may be, but 84,000 yojanas represents an immeasurable
enormity. This metaphor indicates how the self-perception of people in the life-state of anger expands and swells until the ocean deeps would only lap
their knees. The inner distortions twisting the heart of someone in this state prevent them from seeing things in
their true aspect or making correct judgments. Everything appears as a means or a tool to the fulfillment
of egotistical desires and impulses. In inverse proportion to the scale of this inflated arrogance, the existence of otherspeople, cultures,
natureappears 11nfinitely small and insignificant. It becomes a matter of no concern to harm or even kill others
trivialized in this way. It is this state of mind that would countenance the use of nuclear weapons;
it can equally be seen in the psychology of those who would advocate the use of such hideously cruel
weapons as napalm, or, more recently, depleted uranium and cluster bombs. People in such a state of life are blinded,
not only to the horrific suffering their actions wreak but also to the value of human life itself. For the sake of human dignity, we must never succumb
to the numbing dehumanization of the rampant world of anger. When the atomic bomb was dropped on the city of Hiroshima, not only military
personnel but also many scientists were thrilled by the success of this new weapon. However, the consciences of genuinely great scientists were filled
with anguish. Einstein greeted this news with an agonized cry of woe, while Rotblat told me he was completely overcome with hopelessness. Their
feelings were no doubt intensely resonant with the sentiments that motivated Josei Toda to denounce nuclear weapons. When Toda spoke of
declawing the demonic nature of nuclear weapons, he had in mind the struggle to prevent the inner forces of anger from disrupting the ten worlds and
going on an unrestrained rampage. He was calling for the steady and painstaking work of correctly repositioning and reconfiguring the function of anger
in an inner world where wisdom and harmony prevail. This is the true meaning of declawing. For SGI members in particular it is thus vital we
remember that not only our specific activities for peace and culture but the movement for human
revolution based on the daily endeavor to transform our lives from within is a consistent and essential
aspect of the historic challenge of nuclear disarmament and abolition. 12 unless we focus on this
inner, personal dimension , we will find ourselves overwhelmed by the structural
momentum of a technological civilization, which in a certain sense makes inevitable the birth of
such demonic progeny as nuclear weapons .
Impact Value to Life

Buddhist ethic is key to value to life
of Budapest
(Laszlo, Ethical Principles and Economic Transformation A Buddhist Approach, p. vi)//BB
Today happiness is a top priority in economic, psychological and sociological research. In the last several decades the
GDP doubled or tripled in Western countries but the general level of happiness the subjective well-being of
people remained the same. Happiness research disclosed evidences, which show that the major determinant of happiness is not the
abundance of material goods but the quality of human relationships and a spiritual approach to
material welfare. Buddhist countries perform surprisingly well in this respect. There is a growing interest in
Bhutan, this small Buddhist kingdom in the Himalayas, where the King of Bhutan introduced the adoption of an alternative index of social progress, the
so-called Gross National Happiness (GNH). This measure covers not only the material output of the country but also the performance of education, the
development of culture, the preservation of nature and the extension of religious freedom. Experts attribute to the adoption of GNH that while Bhutans
economy developed, the forestation of the country and well-being of people also increased. Thai Buddhist monk and philosopher, P. A. Payutto once said
that one should not be a Buddhist or an economist to be interested in Buddhist economics. Buddhist ethical principles and their
applications in economic life offer a way of being and acting, which can help people to live a more
ecological and happier life while contributing to the reduction of human and non-human
suffering in the world.
Our economic market cultivates more desire for materialistic values

DESTROYS value to life
(August 2007), pp. 145-153, http://www.jstor.org/stable/41472078) //RM
The prospect theory developed by Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky un- covers the basic empirical features of the value function of decision-makers.
The central finding of prospect theory is that the value function is concave for gains and convex for
losses (Kahneman - Tversky 1979). A salient characteristic of people's attitudes to changes is that losses loom larger than gains. "The
aggravation that one experiences in losing a sum of money appears to be greater than the pleasure
associated with gaining the same amount. Indeed, most people find symmetric bets of the form (. x , 0.50; -x, 0.50) distinctively
unattractive. Moreover, the aversiveness of symmetrically fair bets generally increases with the size of the stake. That is, if* >y > 0, then (y, 0.50; -y,
0.50) is preferred to (jc, 0.50; -x, 0.50)" {ibid.: 279). The main statement of prospect theory is that the value function is
steeper for losses than for gains. This means that decision-makers are more sensitive to losses than to
gains. Experiments show that the ratio of the slopes in the domains of losses and gains, the "loss aversion coefficient", might be estimated as about 2 :
1 (Tversky - Kahneman 1992). Since humans (and other sentient beings) display loss sensitivity, it does make sense trying to reduce losses for oneself
and for others rather than trying to increase gains for them. Losses should not be interpreted only in monetary terms or applied only to humans. The
capability of experiencing losses, i.e., suffering, is universal in the realm of both natural and human kingdoms. Modern Western economics
cultivates desires. People are encouraged to develop new desires for things to acquire and for activities to
do. The profit motive of companies requires creating more demand. But psychological research shows that ma-
terialistic value orientation undermines well-being. "People who are highly focused on materialistic
values have lower personal well-being and psychological health than those who believe that materialistic
pursuits are relatively unimpor- tant. These relationships have been documented in samples of people ranging from the wealthy to the
poor, from teenagers to the elderly, and from Australians to South Koreans." These studies document that "strong materialistic values are
associated with a pervasive undermining of people's well-being, from low life satisfaction and happiness,
to depression and anxiety, to physical problems such as headaches, and to personality disorders,
narcissism, and antisocial behavior" (Kasser 2002: 22)
Buddhist economics create a shift away from traditional economic

theory towards a more holistic understanding of the mind and what
truly drives our intentions and actions to achieve happiness
The notion of Gross National Happiness (GNH) as first conceived by the King of Bhutan - presents a radical paradigm
shift in development economics and social theory. GNH can be regarded as the Buddhist equivalent to Gross National Product
(GNP), which is the conventional indicator for a nations economic performance. But GNH can also be regarded as the next
evolution in indicators for sustainable development, going beyond measuring merely material values such
as production and consumption, but instead incorporating all values relevant to life on this planet,
including the most subtle and profound: happiness. The definition of happiness needs further clarification. In the Buddhist
view, which generally corresponds to those of other spiritual traditions, happiness is not simply sensory pleasure, derived from physical comfort. Rather ,
happiness is an innate state of mind which can be cultivated through spiritual practice, overcoming
mental and emotional states which induce suffering. In the Buddhist tradition this is a path of
liberation; other spiritual traditions call it self-transformation. This definition of happiness is absent
from conventional western sciences, on which modern economic theory is based. In fact, conventional
economics and its indicators such as GNP, deliberately leave human happiness outside its spectrum, tacitly
assuming that material development, as measured by GNP growth, is positively correlated to human wellbeing. Further analysis of the relationship between material development and human psychology has been outside the scope of economic and social
theory. Yet this is changing: breakthrough research in quantum physics, medicine, biology, behavioral science, psychology and cognitive science is
now making the science of the mind relevant to economics. Conversely, as the current discussion on GNH indicates, from within the profession of
economics, attempts are made to broaden the scope of economics into the domain of psychology. While this allows us to find a common basis for GDP
and GNH, it is important to note that this change constitutes a paradigm shift in our thinking. GNP and GNH are
rooted in very different (and even opposing) views we have of the world and ourselves. Once we recognize this, we can
embark on a coherent journey finding the possible content and meaning of GNH. So lets first review the foundations of GNH and GNP, respectively.
Impact Ethics
Ethical economics are a prior question
15) //T.C.
To be ethically sound, economic activity must take place in a way that is not harmful to the individual,
society or the natural environment. In other words, economic activity should not cause problems for oneself,
agitation in society or degeneration of the ecosystem, but rather enhance well-being in these three spheres .
If ethical values were factored into economic analysis , a cheap but nourishing meal would certainly be
accorded more value than a bottle of whiskey. Thus, an economics inspired by Buddhism would strive to see
and accept the truth of all things. It would cast a wider, more comprehensive eye on the question of ethics. Once
ethics has been accepted as a legitimate subject for consideration, ethical questions then become factors to
be studied within the whole causal process. But if no account is taken of ethical considerations, economics
will be incapable of developing any understanding of the whole causal process, of which ethics forms and
integral part. Modern economics has been said to be the most scientific of all the social sciences. Indeed, priding
themselves on their scientific methodology, economists take only measurable quantities into consideration. Some even
assert that economics is purely a science of numbers, a matter of mathematical equations. In its efforts to be scientific,
economics ignores all non-quantifiable, abstract values. But by considering economic activity in isolation
from other forms of human activity, modern economists have fallen into the narrow specialization
characteristic of the industrial age. In the manner of specialists, economists try to eliminate all noneconomic factors from their considerations of human activity and concentrate on a single perspective, that
of their own discipline.
Impact Root Cause

The ego is the root cause
De Silva, 98 (Padmasiri de Silva, Research Fellow in the Philosophy Department at Monash
University, Environmental Philosophy and Ethics in Buddhism, pg 37-38)//DH
The Buddhist analysis of ego-centricism may be explained in relation to a number of doctrinal strands. The roots of unwholesome
motivation are greed, aggression, and delusion; and non-greed, non-aggression and non-delusion are the roots of wholesome
motivation. Of these, as mentioned earlier, what is referred to as delusion is basically an existential confusion
about the usage of conventional terms like the self and ego. What we call the ego instincts in
Buddhism is one of the forms of craving. The three forms of craving are the craving for sensuous gratification, craving for egotistic
pursuits and the craving for self-annihilation. The craving for egotistical pursuits has its deeper spring in the dogma of
personal immortality. This is the belief in an ego entity independent of the physical and the mental
processes that constitute life. The ego illusion (atta-ditthi) may also be related to an annihilationist belief,
where the ego-entity is associated with the mental and physical processes that are assumed to come to an
end at death. Such annihilationist views may be closely related to hedonistic and materialistic lifestyles,
destructive behavior and even suicide. The Buddhist middle path accepts only the processes of physical and mental phenomena, which
continually arise and disappear. This process, which is referred to as dependent origination, provides the basis for understanding the nature of the humansocial-nature matrix within which we live. The ego illusion is not merely an intellectual construction, but is fed by
deeper affective processes. Human traits like acquisitiveness, excessive possessiveness, the urge to hoard
and acquire things more than needed, the impulse to outdo other, envy, and jealousy are reciprocally
linked to the belief in an ego. Beliefs influence desires and desires influence beliefs. Some of the social, economic and
political structures that people build collectively may turn out to be more subtle expressions of their ego,
while other human creations may be expression caring and sharing. Apart from the tendency to construct a pure ego and the related expressions of
excessive craving, there are also more subtle conceits(mana) which are only transcended at a later stage on the path to liberation from suffering. The
Buddha in fact mentions twenty forms of wrong personality beliefs (de Silva, 1992b, 119-27).
Mindfulness overcomes all suffering

If Buddhists understand structural violence and its roots in dosa, hatred, and learn how to eliminate it mindfully and nonviolently, Buddhism will
not only be relevant to the modern world but also be a source of liberation. In a parallel with structural
violence and dosa, consumerism is linked, directly and indirectly, with lobha, greed, and raga, lust. One can see
this clearly in advertising and the mass media, which exploit women's bodies to seduce people into attempting to
meet artificially created needs. Again, modern education deals almost exclusively with the heads and not the hearts of students;
cleverness is recognized and rewarded materially, and generosity or awareness of social evils is not necessary for success. Indeed, it may be an
impediment. Students are led to pursue wealth and power, rather than to understand that these do not lead to happiness, especially where, as in modern
society, wealth and power rest on mass poverty and ecological destruction. This is indeed the fostering of
avijja, ignorance, and moha, delusion, rather than real education. If Buddhists are to make a
meaningful contribution to world peace and liberation of the modern world from violence and
oppression, they must confront these three root causes of evil: greed, hatred, and delusion, not only in
the individual person but also in their social and structural dimensions. All practicing Buddhists, not only specialists,
must develop the right mindfulness that allows them to deal with these issues at their deepest levels. Bhavana, mindfulness, and
samadhi, concentration, indeed bring liberation from the mental sufferings caused by greed, hatred,
and delusion, mental sufferings which corrupt the mind and cause people to commit all forms of evil.
Bhavana can be cultivated at any moment, within any activity in daily life: breathing, eating, drinking, washing the dishes, gar- dening, or driving the
car (this may be especially useful when driving in Bangkok traffic). Bhavana and samadhi directly cultivate seeds of peace within the mind, developing
peace and happiness that can then be shared with others.
Solves the root cause of war

Dharmakosajarn 11 (Dr. Phra Dharmakosajarn, Venerable Professor at
Mahachulalongkornrajvidyalya University, Chairman at ICDV & IABU, Rector at MCU, Buddhist

Virtues in Socio-Economic Development, p.71, May 2011, BG)
The solution for this suffering lies in the practice of spirituality . Buddhists Middle Path balances both spirituality and
materialism to lead the contended life on the principles of sharing and caring. Buddhist virtues, precepts and principles focus on
establishing peace and harmony through spiritual and socio-economic development in the society.
The virtue regulates the behavior, strengthens the meditation, meditation in turn develops wisdom. The Virtue tend to elevate the man
which all can cultivate irrespective of creed, color, race, or sex, the earth can be transformed into a
paradise where all can live in perfect peace and harmony as ideal citizens of one world. The Buddhists
four sterling virtues act as building blocks of spiritual and socio-economic development are- Metta, Karuna, Mudita, Upekka, which are collectively
termed as Brahamaviharasin Pali are means to develop friendship, harmonious relationship, removing discord, establishing peace within oneself. The first
sublime state is universal love (Metta). It is defined as the sincere wish for the welfare and genuine happiness of all living beings without exception (Ven.
Narada Thera, 1997). The second virtue is Compassion (Karuna). It is defined as that which makes the hearts of the good quiver when others are
subjected to suffering or which dissipates the suffering of others. It removes the woes of others. The third virtue is Sympathetic joy or appreciative joy
(Mudita), which tends to destroy jealousy, its direct enemy. The fourth virtue is Equanimity (Upekka). It is discerning rightly, viewing justly or looking
impartially, that is without attachment or aversion, without favour or disfavor. These virtues are the foundations of socio-economic development.
Impact Resource Wars

Solves resource wars and environmental scarcity
Daniels 11 PhD in Economics, Senior Lecturer, Griffith School of Environment
(Peter, Ethical Principles and Economic Transformation A Buddhist Approach, p. 57)//BB
Global society must move away from a model that is not only having profound and unsustainable
negative externality and resource impacts upon nature, but has also generally failed to deliver perceptible
gains in life satisfaction. With Buddhisms universal interdependence context and karmic law depiction of existence and action, the
changes required are, in some ways, simply a matter of getting our preferences right so that we demand and
pursue activities and goals to a level and in a form that genuinely yield life satisfaction. Choices that
reflect non-violence, moderation of demands, minimum intervention and disruption with regard to natural world, are quintessential features of a sustainable, Buddhism-inspired economy (Payutto 1994). Appropriate
production activity flows from such changes in consumption patterns but would also require an ethics of interconnection to
guide motives and decisions of people in their livelihood roles as the managers and workers in productive
enterprise. Although an adaptive value system required to support sustainable human communities into the future may not be uniquely
Buddhist in nature, it is reasonable to propose that such as system will share many of the key features described in our exploration of Buddhism and
economics. A mix of the lessons of the ancient philosophies and ethical views of the lower income nations and the technological capabilities, tolerance and
adaptability of the West may provide an effective means of coping with the critical 21st century problems of
scarcity , environmental pressure and cultural conflict .
Impact Structural Violence

Transforming our inner selves reverses the harmful effects of
mainstream economics
Tideman 11 - founder and managing partner of Global Leaders Academy in the Netherlands
and a Senior Fellow of the Garrison Institute in New York
(Sander, Joel, Ethical Principles and Economic Transformation A Buddhist Approach, p.
150)//BB
While this may be a distant ideal, we can be inspired by a fact of historic signif- icance: the new emerging scientific paradigm of nonmaterial interconnectedness everything being an integral part of the larger whole, with human
consciousness at its source is in agreement with central tenets of Buddhism. As Buddha has taught, once we fully
understand the implication of the interdependent nature of reality, breakthrough insights will emerge.
These will indicate the best way forward for managing our planetary household, which triggers hope for
our future. The economic models of the future will no doubt account for a reality much closer to the totality of the human
experience. They will be more aligned with mankinds deeper aspiration, in which the mind, emotions and other
intangible values play such an important role. By being so aligned to the emerging scientific worldview, the philosophy of Buddhism can
play an important role in this endeavor. It takes the inner experience as starting point of the
inquiry into reality , as opposed to conventional science, which takes outer reality as starting point. The power of the Buddhist
approach is that it does not intend to exclude the conventional scientific approach, but expands it . The reverse
is more difficult. By expanding the outward oriented approach of science, and taking a more holistic, inclusive and systemic approach to understanding
reality, Buddhism can help defining and explaining a comprehensive understanding of human life, human experience, human motivation and human
behavior. In addition, Buddhism has also much to say how we can
free ourselves from the systemic , structural
violence that mainstream economics is bringing about.
Impact Social Justice

Buddhist economics are key to social justice and environmental
sustainability
Essen 11 PhD in Cultural Anthropology, Professor @ Soka
(Juliana, Ethical Principles and Economic Transformation A Buddhist Approach, p. 61)//BB

Ecofeminist Vandana Shiva asks the pointed question: What should be the objective of the global economy: freedom of
trade or freedom for survival? If the latter, changes are necessary in our conception of
economics. Mainstream economic thought and practice has resulted in widespread socioeconomic
disparity and environmental devastation in all corners of the world, unmitigated by a multi-billion
dollar development industry informed by these same economic models . To reverse this trend, the dominant forms of
economic thought and practice must be reunited with ethics that are more caring of the human-nature base. Such ethics may be found in
alternative economic models based on religious, spiritual, environmental, or feminist values. This essay considers
one such alternative: Buddhist economics. Though Buddhism is principally concerned with individual enlightenment, it offers guide- lines
for householders economic activities that give rise to a more environmentally sustainable and
socially just way of being in the world.
Impact Environmental Sustainability

Buddhist ethics are key to environmental sustainability
(Peter, Ethical Principles and Economic Transformation A Buddhist Approach, p. 41-42)//BB
So, what are primary general linkages between the Buddhist world view and the concept of sustainable consumption? Consumption is a major engine of
human intervention and extraction from the external world; at least in societies where markets and economic output are hegemonic
in motives, status and time use. While it may not have been so directly potent in pre-industrial times or arguably in the European neo-imperialism of
the first half of the 20th century, there is little doubt about the powerful and disruptive impact of consumer
demands in the growing suite of high energy and throughput fossil carbon societies . It is true that production and
technology systems have led to supply creating demands, but ultimately consumer demands are a prime source of the
formidable environmental challenges now faced by humanity . Consumption is upheld as a key driving force influencing, and
reflecting, the way humans relate to each other and nature. Decisions in this realm are assumed as a primary determinant of well-being and sources of
impacts on an interconnected reality. They are a product of our beliefs and knowledge about the path to real well-being, and consumption motives and
patterns, and related societal outcomes, structure and reproduce behaviors that have, to date, continued the preva- lence of human suffering and
attachment. Buddhism, as a theory of well-being (but espousing the need for experiential validation), focuses on thoughts, motives and
material and social consequences and has much in common with the perspectives and prescriptions
underlying sustainable consumption. An important phenomenon tying consumption and the Buddhist world view is that the existing
nature and levels of consumption do not seem to be maximiz- ing long-term welfare for societies . The relevance
of consumption to sustainability and welfare are reaffirmed in the unfortunate well-being-environment double whammy in consumer market economies
(Daniels 2007). Firstly, demanded goods and services are failing to induce sustained welfare satisfaction . For
example, the oft-cited modern studies of subjective well-being (SWB) suggest that, within nations, growth measured by traditional yardsticks has
little impact upon the proportion of people who consider themselves very satisfied. This is clear in the
societies are caught
in a treadmill of production where the relentless efforts to satisfy, via impermanent material
acquisition, increase pressure on nature as the essential material and energetic source (Schnaiberg 1980). In a posUnited States and Japan over a period of more than 50 years of spectacular growth in consumption. Secondly, consumer
itive but adverse relationship, the damage and loss in nature feed back to reduce welfare and require yet more intervention and disturbance to satisfy
world is facing unprecedented environmental instability from the scale of human

the existence of the economic welfare and environmental double whammy strongly implies that at least
two of the three pillars of sustainable development are not in place .
even given levels of demand. The
activity, and
Buddhist economics solves the internal link to environmental

destruction.
Puntasen 7 (APICHAI PUNTASEN is a Professor and Dean, Faculty of Management Science,
December 12, 2007, BUDDHIST ECONOMICS AS A NEW PARADIGM TOWARDS HAPPINESS,
Society and Economy, Vol. 29, No. 2, pp. 181-200) //RM
Buddhist economics also advocates for this level of sukha. While mainstream economics (also known as
capitalism) considers capital as the mode of production, Buddhist economics suggests that paa, or
the ability to understand everything in its own nature is the mode of production. The economy under this mode
of production is known as paa- ism. Buddhist economics, argues that sukha is the result of the emergence of paa. Those who have paa are persons
who understand everything in its own nature. Such persons will understand that the higher level of sukha is from peace and tranquility that will
finally lead to complete emancipation or freedom known as vimuttisukha. In opposition to the teaching in mainstream
economics that higher levels of utility can be gained from having more wealth and hence more
resources being used, higher level of sukha in Buddhist economics can only be gained from paa that
neither requires additional consumption nor resources. Therefore, Buddhist economics is the most
efficient economics in term of resources used. It is the kind of economics that advocates sustainable
development on a world level, for the Earth is now close to the blink of catastrophe from global warming
due to inefficiency in consumption. The concept that cannot be clearly understood in the frames of mainstream economics.
Ecological overshoot leads to extinction

Brown 11 MA in Agricultural Economics, Professor @ Chinese Academy of Sciences, the
most foundational environmentalist of the 20th century

(Lester R., World on the Edge, Google Book)//BB
The signs that our civilization is in trouble are multiplying. During most of the 6,000 years since civilization began we lived on
the sustainable yield of the earths natural systems. But in recent decades humanity has overshot the level that those
systems can sustain. We are liquidating the earths natural assets to fuel our consumption.
Half of us live in countries where water tables are falling and wells are going dry. Soil erosion exceeds soil formation on one third of the worlds cropland,
draining the land of its fertility. The worlds ever-growing herds of cattle, sheep, and goats are converting vast stretches of grassland to desert. Forests are
shrinking by 13 million acres per year as we clear land for agriculture and cut trees for lumber and paper. Four fifths of oceanic fisheries are being fished
demand is overshooting supply . Meanwhile,

with our massive burning of fossil fuels, we are overloading the atmosphere with carbon dioxide (CO2), pushing the earths
at capacity or over- fished and headed for collapse. In system after system,
temperature ever higher. This in turn generates more frequent and more extreme climatic events, including crop-withering heat waves, more intense
droughts, more severe floods, and more destructive storms. The earths rising temperature is also melting polar ice sheets and mountain glaciers. If the
Greenland ice sheet, which is melting at an accelerating rate, were to melt entirely, it would inundate the rice-growing river deltas of Asia and many of the
worlds coastal cities. It is the ice melt from the mountain glaciers in the Himalayas and on the Tibetan Plateau that helps sustain the dry-season flow of
the major rivers in India and Chinathe Ganges, Yangtze, and Yellow Riversand the irrigation systems that depend on them. At some point, what
had been excessive local demands on environmental systems when the economy was small became global
in scope. A 2002 study by a team of scientists led by Mathis Wackernagel aggregates the use of the earths natural assets, including CO2 overload in
the atmosphere, into a single indicatorthe ecological footprint. The authors concluded that humanitys collective demands first
surpassed the earths regenerative capacity around 1980. By 1999, global demands on the earths natural systems exceeded
sustainable yields by 20 percent. Ongoing calculations show it at 50 percent in 2007. Stated otherwise, it would take 1.5 Earths to sustain
our current consumption. Environmentally, the world is in overshoot mode . If we use environmental indicators
to evaluate our situation, then the global decline of the economys natural support systems the environmental decline that will lead to
economic decline and social collapseis well under way. No previous civilization has survived the
ongoing destruction
of its natural supports. Nor will ours.
Yet economists look at the future through a different lens.
Relying heavily on economic data to measure progress, they see the near 10-fold growth in the world economy since 1950 and the associated gains in
living standards as the crowning achievement of our modern civilization. During this period, income per person worldwide climbed nearly fourfold,
boosting living standards to previously unimaginable levels. A century ago, annual growth in the world economy was measured in the billions of dol- lars.
Today, it is measured in the trillions. In the eyes of mainstream economists, the world has not only an illustrious economic past but also a promising future.
Alternative
Alternative Spills Over

INDIVIDUAL and LOCAL decisions to embrace mindful economics spill
up
Our vision of a mindful economy is not rooted in revolutionary ideology. It is practically inconceivable that a massive $11 trillion dollar economy can be
fundamentally altered in a peaceful or meaningful way through a sudden revolutionary catharsis. Bringing our vision of a mindful
economy to reality will also require much hard work and patience. What is more conceivable and practical than
cathartic revolution is a process of implementing real economic change in small steps beginning with the
development of locally-based alternative institutions. Capitalism and all other major economic systems that
have existed historically were originally small and localized systems . In a mindful economy, smaller-scale local
economic systems are not enclaves of economic utopias or communes, they are merely the starting
places from which a broader and more comprehensive system can evolve and
grow .
Citizen compassion drastically transforms economic systems their

belief that economics runs OUTSIDE of personal decisions is a new link
Nelson 11 PhD in Economics, Professor of Economics @ UC-Davis, most known for her
application of feminist theory to questions of the definition of the discipline of economics, and
its models and methodology
(Julie, Ethical Principles and Economic Transformation A Buddhist Approach, p. 28)//BB
If we take off the blinders of mechanical thinking and look at economic life as it is actually lived,
we can see that far from being locked-up it provides numerous interstices for wise and
compassionate response . The sorts of gaps or flexible areas in the functioning of actual businesses that allow some CEOs to take
excessive compensation out of profits, for example, also create the space for other CEOs to make authentic movements towards better labor or
environmental standards to be the good and honest businessperson mentioned by the Dalai Lama (2002, 133). The opportunity to sell can be an
opportunity to meet needs; the opportunity to buy can be an opportunity to support worthy ventures; the
opportunity to work can be an opportunity to right livelihood. The system can
also
be shaped
through citizen action and cultural mores : the capitalism of France, Japan or Sweden, for example, is quite different
from the capitalism of the United States or the United Kingdom, and capitalism of one era is different from that of another. Commerce has the
potential to be an act of participation and compassion (Fischer 2005, 221222).
Alt solves Movements that begin on the personal level spillover onto
the global scale
Ariyaratne, 98 (Dr. Sri Lankabhimanya Ahangamage Tudor Ariyaratne, Doctor of Lit from
Vidyodaya University and leader of the Sarvodaya Shramadana Movement an experiment in
Buddhist Economics, Schumacher Lectures on Buddhist Economics, pg. 21)//DH
The central concept of Development as conceived, accepted and implemented by Sarvodaya is based on Buddhist spirit. Yet
it has within its followers people of all religious faiths. Sarvodaya is not opposed to any religion. On the
contrary in the same Buddhist spirit Sarvodaya respects all religions. According to Sarvodaya,
Development is an awakening process. This awakening process should begin with human personalities
and extend to families, peer groups, village and urban communities, national communities and the world
community. As the idea spreads and the movement expands each of these awakening processes
enhances the others slowly building up a critical mass which is needed for a real social
transformation. So we put down the Objective of the Sarvodaya Movement as follows: To generate a non-violent total revolution towards the
creation of a Sarvodaya Social Order, which will ensure the total awakening of: - Human Personalities (Purna Paurushodaya), Human Families
(Kutumbodaya), Village Communities (Gramodaya), Urban Communities (Nagarodaya), National Communities (Deshodaya) and the World Community
(Vishvodaya).
Every individual reflection on interconnection is crucial to recognize

compassion and empathy, social change is the product of individual
change and personal liberation
Finally a GNH framework highlights the role of the individual agents in system level change. Happiness
cannot be experienced at a national level. This means that GNH has to be more than a compilation of existing national-level statistics
and indices that hide the individual and village level disparities. Participatory action research will be needed to
understand happiness in context and from the bottom up and analyze how peoples definition of ancient
teachers and our modern scientists happiness emerges from the type of personal transformation that
leads to social transformation. It comes from recognizing the incessant motion, unity, and
interdependence of all things and from widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living
creatures and the whole nature in its beauty. Einstein reminds us that even if we are unable to achieve this completely, striving
for such achievement is in itself a part of the liberation and a foundation for inner security .
(Einstein 1954).
Alternative Reflection FIRST Sequencing

Meditation and reflection is the first step to teaching ethical actions
Forge, 97, (Paul G. La Forge, Divine Word Missionary and professor in the Business
Management Department of Nanzan University, Nagoya, Japan, Masters Degree in ClinicalCounseling Psychology, he holds a third class black belt in Kodokan Judo, Journal of Business
Ethics, Vol. 16, No. 12/13, From the Universities to the Marketplace: The Business Ethics
Journey: The Second Annual Internationa Vincentian Conference Promoting Business Ethics
(Sep., 1997), pp. 1283-1295, Teaching Business Ethics through Meditation, JSTOR)//LOH
Business Ethics taught only from books and textual materials may occupy an important place in education, but my purpose is different. My goal is to help
the students become ethical persons. This requires an ability to perform three seemingly simple tasks: First, to recognize ethical issues; second, to analyze
them; and third, to act upon them. The ethical principles derived from textual materials covered in a Business Ethics course have their place, but only as a
tool or a standard used by an ethical person. The purpose of this article is to show how meditation can be used to help the student to
become an ethical person. My purpose in using meditation to teach Business Ethics is to produce people with an "Ethical Vision".
Meditation gives students an awareness of ethical issues in their lives and leads to the discovery and
application of models of ethical conduct to serve as guides to behavior in general and to ethical decision
making in particular. In effect, I use meditation to stop the world. There are many ways to stop the world and many kinds of meditation. I will
restrict myself to two forms, namely, discursive and non-dis cursive meditation. The classroom communica tion process between the instructor and the
students is slowed down by both non-discursive and discursive meditation so that students can learn to use meditation to accomplish the three tasks
mentioned above. Non-discursive meditation greatly contributes to the process of constructing a vision because it
gives people a sense of themselves and their place in the world. Discursive meditation, in its many forms, gives
substance to an ethical vision because it leads to an awakening to the existence and importance of ethical
issues in life. In part one, I will describe how the students are led through non-discursive meditation to discover themselves as ethical persons. They
are also given the tools to explore ethical issues through non-discursive meditation. In part two, I will discuss a transition state between non-discursive and
discursive medita tion. After discovering themselves as ethical persons, the students are led to use non-discur sive meditation as a technique to construct
their own ethical value system and apply it to their own lives. At this transition stage, an art medium is extremely useful for discovering and analyzing
meanings, especially ethical meanings. Through non-discursive meditation, the indi vidual is taught to become aware
of him/herself and his/her place in the world. However, non discursive meditation is not an end in itself.
Discursive meditation, as is explained in more detail in part three, gives the participant a chance to compare who he/she is
with what he/she should be. Here the student is encouraged to compare the values he/she has discovered
about him/herself during non-discursive meditation with an ideal, and construct a system of ethical
principles for him/herself using discursive meditation. Textual materials are recommended here and the student is encouraged to
search for the ideal. The result is the development of a person with an ethical vision through meditation in both
non-discursive and discursive forms. I. Discovering ethical issues through non-discursive meditation An ethical person must
become aware of his/her self, his/her ethical values, and his/her place in the world. Non-discursive
meditation can be a powerful device to teach students how they can stop their world and take
stock of their lives because the body itself participates in the meditation as the locus of experience
and insight, inseparably one with the mind (Takeuchi, 1993, p. xx). At this point, the process is entirely self centered and
observational, without the con straint of reference to any system of ethics or values. Thus viewed , it is only a first step, but a very
necessary first step to becoming an ethical person . Because this step is only a means to an end, virtually
any school of non-discursive meditation will suffice. There are many kinds of non-discursive meditation techniques, such as Taikyokken, Zen, and Yoga;
these teach people to look at and reflect on their place in the world. The goal is to teach students a way of stopping and reflecting, to provide a context for
devel oping and applying their own values. Therefore, non-discursive meditation is not used as an end in itself. Taikyokken, Yoga, or Zen all have their
proponents, but in an ethics class, they serve only as a tool, not as a philosophy. Non-discursive
meditation serves to stop the
world . Students, like business people, lead busy, active, stressful lives. Non-discursive meditation serves
to put a brake on the activities of a busy day. The ethical person must be able to stop this world and
reflect upon life. This is an ability to step aside from normal activities in order to recognize ethical issues
that arise in business or personal life.
Alternative Shed Ego

Mindfulness allows us to shed the ego - this creates a realization of
our unity with all living things
Snauwaert 9 - Associate Professor of Educational Theory and Social Foundations of
Education; Chair of the Department of Foundations of Education, University of Toledo

(Dale, The Ethics and Ontology of Cosmopolitanism: Education for a Shared Humanity,
Current Issues in Comparative Education 12.1, Directory of Open Access Journals)//BB
Cosmopolitans assert the existence of a duty of moral consideration to all human beings on the basis of a
shared humanity. What is universal in, and definitive of, cosmopolitanism is the presupposition of the shared inherent dignity of humanity. As
Martha Nussbaum states: [Human good can] be objective in the sense that it is justifiable by reference to reasons that do not derive merely from local
traditions and practices, but rather from features of humanness that lie beneath all local traditions and are there to be seen whether or not they are in fact
recognized in local traditions. (Perry, 1998, p. 68) If a shared humanity is presupposed, and if humanity is understood to possess an equal inherent value
and dignity, then a shared humanity possesses a fundamental moral value. If the fundamental moral value of humanity is acknowledged, then a universal
duty of moral consideration follows, for to deny moral consideration to any human being is to ignore (not recognize) their intrinsic value, and thereby, to
violate their dignity. The duty of moral consideration in turn morally requires nations and peoples to conduct
their relations in accordance with ethical principles that properly instantiate the intrinsic value and
dignity of a shared humanity. If valid, the fundamental aims of the education of citizens should be based
upon this imperative. In order to further explicate this cosmopolitanism perspective, the philosophy of one of historys greatest cosmopolitans,
Mohandas K. Gandhi, is explored below. Reflections on Gandhis Cosmopolitan Philosophy While most commentators focus on Gandhis conception
and advocacy of nonviolence, it is generally recognized that his core philosophical beliefs regarding the essential unity of
humanity and the universal applicability of nonviolence as a moral and political ideal places Gandhi in
the cosmopolitan tradition as broadly understood (Iyer, [1973] 1983; Kumar Giri, 2006). At the core of Gandhis philosophy are the
interdependent values of Satya (Truth) and Ahimsa (nonviolence). Gandhis approach to nonviolent social transformation, Satyagraha, is the actualization
in action of these two values (Bondurant, 1965; Iyer, [1973] 1983; Naess, 1974). Gandhis Satya is multifaceted. Its most fundamental meaning
pertains to Truth as self-realization. Satya is derived from sat, Being. Truth is Being; realizing in full awareness
ones authentic Being. Truth, in this sense, is the primary goal of life. Gandhi writes: What I want to achieve . . . is self-realization . . . I live and
move and have my being in pursuit of that goal. All that I do by way of speaking and writing, and all my ventures in the political field are directed to this
Self-realization , for Gandhi, requires shedding the ego , reducing one self
to zero (cited in Naess 1974, p. 37). The ego per se is not the real self; it is a fabrication. This egoic self must be
transcended. As the egoic self loosens and one becomes increasingly self-aware, one deepens the
realization of ones authentic being, and that being is experienced as unified with humanity and all living
things. Scholars normally understand human identity in terms of personality, which is a socially constructed self-concept constituted by a complex
same end. (Naess 1974, p. 35)
network of identifications and object relations. This construction is what we normally refer to as the ego or self-identity. Our egoic self-identity is literally
a construction, based upon psychological identifications (Almaas, 1986a, 1986b; Batchelor, 1983). From this perspective, the ego is a socially
constructed entity, ultimately a fabrication of the discursive formations of culture ; from this point of view, the self is
exclusively egoic. This perspective has its origins in the claim that consciousness is solely intentional: the claim that consciousness is always
consciousness of some object. From this presupposition, the socially constructed, discursive nature of the self is inferred. If consciousness is solely
intentional, then the self is a construction, and, if the self is a construction, then it is always discursive a prediscursive self cannot exist. It can be argued,
however, that intentionality itself presupposes pre-intentional awareness. A distinction can be made between intentional consciousness and awareness.
Intentional consciousness presupposes awareness that is always implicit in intentional consciousness. If intentional consciousness does not presuppose a
pre-intentional awareness, if there is only consciousness of, then there is always a knower-known duality, and that duality leads to an infinite regress. To
be conscious of an object X, one has to be conscious of ones consciousness of X, and one would have to be
conscious of ones consciousness of ones consciousness of X, and one would have to be conscious of ones consciousness of
ones consciousness of ones consciousness of X . . . ad infinitum-reductio ad absurdum. Therefore, there must be implicit
in intentional consciousness a level of awareness that is pre-intentional, pre-discursive, and non-positional
(Forman, 1999). To be conscious of anything presupposes pre-intentional self-awareness, and being pre-intentional, awareness must be in turn prediscursive and non-positional (Almaas, 1986a, 1986b; Aurobindo, 1989, 2001; Batchelor, 1983; Buber, 1970; Forman, 1999; Fromm, 1976). When
the ego is shed, a pre-discursive, nonpositional self-awareness is revealed . One can be reflexively aware of ones
consciousness. Gandhi held that pre-discursive self-awareness, the core of our being, is unified and
interdependent with all living things. He writes: I believe in the essential unity of man and, for that matter, of all that lives (Naess 1974,
p. 43). In an ontological sense, Gandhi maintains that Satya, Truth, is selfrealization, a realization of ones self-awareness as essentially unified with and
thereby existing in solidarity with all human beings and with all living things. Pre-discursive self-awareness is experienced as non-positional,
and, being non-positional, it is unbounded; it exists
as a field of awareness that is interconnected with all sentient beings .

This state is an experience and is only known experientially. Therefore, the assertion of a shared humanity is based upon a
common level of being. Human intentional consciousness is expressed in a vast plurality of cultural expressions; implicit within this plurality, existing as
its ground, is a shared level of awareness of being that unites us. From the perspective of ontological Truth, nonviolence
follows from the unity and interdependence of humanity and life; violence damages all forms of life,
including ones self. Nonviolence uplifts all. Gandhi writes: I do not believe . . . that an individual may gain
spiritually and those who surround him suffer. I believe in advaita (non-duality), I believe in the essential
unity of man and, for that matter, of all that lives. Therefore, I believe that if one man gains spiritually, the whole
world gains with him and, if one man falls, the whole world falls to that extent. (Naess 1974, p. 43) In this
experience, one becomes aware of the interrelated and interdependent nature of being. On an existential level, there exists a fundamental
interconnection between ones self and other beings. As Buber suggests, we live in the currents of universal reciprocity
(Buber, 1970, p. 67). From the perspective of this experienceand this is a direct experienceto harm the
other is to harm ones self. From the perspective of existential interconnection, nonviolence, the essence of
morality, rests upon an awareness of our fundamental interconnection .
Alternative MRI Studies Prove

MRI studies reveal that reaching enlightenment fundamentally
changes brain function and generates an experience of unity with the
world
Ritskes 3 - MRI Research Centre, Aarhus University Hospital Skejby, Denmark, Biomedical
Laboratory University of Southern Denmark, and Institute of Psychology University of Aarhus
(Rients, MRI Scanning During Zen Meditation: The Picture of Enlightenment, Constructivism
in the Human Sciences, 8.1, http://zen.nl/nieuws/artikelen/hersenscan.pdf)//BB
This study demonstrates, consistent with earlier findings, that a higher activity in the gyrus frontalis
medius arises during the initial phase of Zen meditation. The gyrus frontalis medius is part of the frontal lobe, this area,
sometimes called the Attention Association area, is held responsible for more complex human feelings. Austin* concludes, based on studies of people
with frontal lobe lesions, that increased activity in this area is thought to be associated with enhanced insights and
attcntiveness, heightened interests, sharper mental focussing, and deepened emotional resonances . In the
famous case report on Phincas Gage-, it is reported that the gyrus frontalis medius in the prefrontal cortex was damaged due to an accident. Consequently,
he lost his personality, developed blunted emotions and lost social interest. Presumably, this outcome can be summarized as a loss of compassion. Other
research has shown that electrical stimulation of the prefrontal cortex is associated with positive feelings*. This study reports that one-quarter of the group
that received electrical stimulation of this area of the brain, reported positive changes in the mood as well. Additionally, a PET-studyiohas demonstrated
decreased frontal-lobe activity in murderers (there may after all have been a good scientific reason for the New York State prison to have started a Zen
meditation group in 1984 -an example that is followed by many prisons world wide). Increased activity in the basal ganglia during meditation conforms to
what one would expect during certain Zen practices. For example, the tea-ceremony and Zen-archery are just two examples of rituals that need optimal use
of the main functions of the basal ganglia, namely the making of precisely controlled movements. Moreover, activation of the basal ganglia appears to be
stimulated by counting the breadth, thereby possibly resulting in improved control of movements by the conscious breathing process. Decreased activity
in the gyrus occipitalis superior and the anterior cingulatcd suggests that, during meditation, there is less interference of our will and less awareness of
where we are. In summary, current
research is suggestive of a state of mind , which may have resemblances to
the experience of an enlightenment state, where time and place limits have disappeared, and a
great feeling of love/unity is experienced .
Neuroplasticity proves
Begley 7 Yale graduate, former science columnist @ Newsweek
(Sharon, Train Your Mind, Change Your Brain: How a New Science Reveals Our Extraordinary
Potential to Transform Ourselves, p. 13-14)//BB
The discoveries of neuroplasticity, in particular, resonate with Buddhist teachings and have the potential to
benefit from interactions with Buddhism. The reason gets to the very core of Buddhist belief "Buddhism defines a person as a
constantly changing dynamic stream, says Matthiew Ricard, a French-born Buddhist monk. A veteran of the scientific dialogues with the Dalai lama, he
is anchoring the "Buddhist side" of the 2004 meeting. Even scholars who were not involved in the meetinghut who have followed the dialogues
closelypoint
out the consonances between Buddhist teaching and the idea, and potential, of
neuroplasticity. "There are many strong parallels between the neuroscientific findings and the Buddhist
narrative," savs Francisca Cho, a Buddhist scholar at George Washington University. "Buddhism's is a story of how we are in pain
and suffering and how we have the power to change that. The scientific findings about neuroplasticity
parallel the Buddhist narrative of enlightenment because the) show that, although we have deeply
ingrained ways of thinking and although the brain comes with some hardwiring, we also have the
possibility of changing . The idea that we are constantly changing means there is no intrinsic nature to the self or
the mind, which is what Buddhism teaches. Instead, both self and mind are extremely plastic . Our activities inform who
we are; as we act. so we shall become. We are products of the past, but because of our inherently empty nature, we always have
the opportunity to reshape ourselves." The discovery that mere thought can alter the very stuff of the brain is another natural point of
connection between the science of neuroplasticity and Buddhism. Buddhism has taught for twenty-five hundred years that the
mind is an independent force that can be harnessed by will and attention to bring about physical change .
"The discovery that thinking something produces effects just as doing something does is a fascinating consonance with Buddhism," says Francisca Cho.
"Buddhism challenges the traditional belief in an external, objective reality . Instead, it teaches that our reality is
created by our own projections ; it is thinking that creates the external world beyond us. The
neuroscience findings harmonize with this Buddhist teaching."
Alternative Solves Globalization

The alternative allows us to DIG DEEPER creates understandings of
webs of economic relationships
10) //T.C.
Yet this is precisely the trouble with modern economic thinking. Lacking any holistic, comprehensive insight and
limited by the narrowness of their specialized view, economists single out one isolated portion of the
stream of conditions and fail to consider results beyond that point . An example: there exists a demand for
a commodity, such as whiskey. The demand is supplied by production - growing grain and distilling it into
liquor. The whiskey is then put on the market and then purchased and consumed. When it is consumed,
demand is satisfied. Modern economic thinking stops here, at the satisfaction of the demand. There is no
investigation of what happens after the demand is satisfied. By contrast, an economics inspired by
Dhamma would be concerned with how economic activities influence the entire process of causes and
conditions. While modern economics confines its regard to events within its specialized sphere, Buddhist economics
would investigate how a given economic activity affects the three interconnected spheres of human
existence: the individual, society, and nature or the environment. In the case of the demand for a commodity
such as whiskey, we would have to ask ourselves how liquor production affects the ecology and how its
consumption affects the individual and society.
Only in the space opened by the alternative reflection can we find

kusala and go beyond the affirmatives
Hershock, 07, (Peter D. Hershock, Coordinator of the Asian Studies Development Program
sTo pass through the aporta posed by the complex realities of the 21 centuly. we must oriwale our dijfererwiea as the very basis of all mutual
contribution. As a way of fleshing out what titis activation might Izacan, let me distinguish between variety and diversity as two means-to and meanings-of
difference two qualities and directions of differentiation processes, Variety is function of simple co existence, s quantItative index of factual
multiplicity, (t connotes (hinge beiri-dfffcrerw a surface characteristic that is visible si a glance. Diversity Is a function of complex intrrtlrprwiencc. a
qualitative Index of self-sustaining and difference-appreciating patterns of mutual enninibunon Lo shared welfare. Diversity connotes things b omLrtgdffeient a process of meaningful dlfferentimion. a relational aclijevenient that becomes evident, If st ail, only over time. To make this distinction more
concrete. consider the ranges of plant and animal species and the InterrelatIonships among them in a zoo and in a naturally occurring ecosystem. An idea]
ZiXi. for Instance, might include representatives of every relevant Plant and animal species In a given ecosystem. tut these species Would bevase of the
nature of zoos, have vy little relevance for tue another. They wuulct be tri little or no position to contribute to OIi OiiOthe?s welfare as they do In the
environments within, and along with which, they have evolved. Zoos are high In varlety are high In diversity. In this room today, there is Tharkable
variety In terms of cultural backgrounds, histories] experiences academic training, and religious or spiritual alb1liUes. Whether or not this gathering
begins to exhibit dbersity will depend on how well we are able to go beyond how much we dfffcrfrovrt each another to how best we might differ.J cine
another. To resolve the predicaments arising with complex globalization interdependence and to break
through the aporia of difference they bring Into focus, we must go beyond recognizing the co existence of
different world views - the variety of ways In which humans conceive the meaning of the good: a good
life, a good environment or s good political economy. To bring about truly equitable global
transformation, we must begin realising and continuously enhancing social, economic, political, cultural.
technological, and -l wpuld argue - spirItual diversity. This means going beyond modem universalism that would
deny our differences In celebration of dreamed for equality. But It also means going beyond postmodern
relativisms that would hold differences to be critically incommensurable and that would warrant the
validity of fundamentalist tribalism. The former are likely to result In a world In which everyone Is
exactly like me the latter, one in which we live adjacent to one another In enclaves of mutually enforced
moral apartheid. There Is no doubt that tolerance Is better than intolerance. But tolerating the differences of others Is no
longer good enough. An na of predicament- resolution compels: first, developing capadUra foe hsnnonitjng distinctively differing worldvlews
and conceptions of the good: and, secondly. generating commitments of sufficient intercultural gravity to reconfigure the dynamics cf our globally
complex Interdependence across both sectors and scales. DiversIty Itself, I would argue. should be seen as an Indispensable global commons and public
good. A crucial entailment of enhancing diversity Is moving beyond dichotomous thinking. The self other
dichotomy Is perhaps the most basic and virulent expression of this, but no less entrenched are our
tendencies to split the world Into what Is attractive or aversive, pure or Impure. right or wrong. good or
evil. in s phrase drawn from Mahaysna Buddhism (but with resonances in other spintual and religious traditions sa weill. we must begin engaging our
circumstances no-duallstlcally. This does not mean ignorinS differences. Rather, sa proposed by the Huayrn Buddhist thinker. Fazang. It means seeing that
all things are the same. precises Insofar as they differ meaningfully from one another. Non.dti&tSO means renlisng that thlng ultimately ore only what
they neon for one another. Given this, changing the way things are changing ran be seen sa a process of opening, within present realities, new courses vI
meaning making Itere. the early Buddhist contrast between alms and cncieavuurs that have kusoio results and those thai have aku,sciki resulta la quite
useful- Kusoio and ctktiscrla arr normally translated as wholesome and unwholrsiinw. inri lii tari kusolo s a superlative it dors not mean good as
tipirrsrd r had killed as opposed to unskilled. wholesotne as opposed io unwholesome. or something that Is just good enough Rather. kiisoin ercmtnotes
heading In the direction of excellence or virumosity. Conducting ourselves in a kusala manner is the Buddhist meaning of
going beyond good and evil. It Is the expression of resolutely appreciative karma intentions and conduct
that continuously result in adding value to or enriching our situation. but also lo our becoming ever iriree valuably
situated. Acnwdlng to the Sakkapanlia butta. It is only by both decreasing the akusala and Increasing the kusala that we
stop proliferating impediments to liberation (pcipnncnl) dissolving the root conditions of conflict and
suffering. To break through the aporia of difference with which we now flnd ourselves confronted, we must go beyond being non-judgmental or
averring the ultimate equality of one and ail- fliese may perhaps help decrease the okwmla effects of dichotomous thinking: but they will not generate
kuanlo patterns el outcome and opportunity. For that. we must conserve our dillernien rather than disarming them Perhaps surpnsingly. then, if we are to
orirmtl global Interdependence toward greater equity. we most refrain from the temptation to conceive of equity In terms of equality of opportunity.
Equality is a very useful fiction - the pursuit of which has done much. for example. to positively reframe gender discourse and political practice but it is
a fiction nonetheless .and One that can hardly ring true in a world of fabulously widening Income gaps Equity can only be enhanced to the extent that the
dynamics of our interdependence enable and encourage all present to contribute to furthering their own interest in ways that are deemed valuable by
others. In short. equity is rooted in activation of our differences to be able to make a difference for ourselves
and for others. ultimately there is no equity without diversity. One of the insights about diversity afforded by the natural aorid is that diversity is
highest. not within any wven ecosystem. ini rather In the ecotone or zone o overlap between them. That s. diversity tends to br highest where the
potentiatl for conflicts among values, aims and interests is greatest. it is not coincidental hat our era of increasingly broad and deep predicaments is also
an eta of historically unprecedented potendail for both diversity and equity. Realising this potential would surely bring about a happier world csng so.
however, will require that wr work together to create social. economic. political, cultural and rhnobogicai conditioru under which we can realise and
deepen our diversity as a crucial global relational commons and pubLic good. This can he accomplished only 1w deepening our capacities for and
commitnients- o rgntributing tu shared iloiirisliiiig. realising ktisala ores of choiwje. mtimeiiFbymumdnit trois wherever each of us happens to br sitting.
standing. walking or lying dnwn. Some might object that as good as titis sounds. surety It is a path that could br travelled only by the extraordinary few.
Global transInrinatioi has a heroic ring. and it is tempting to insist that it can only be spurred and guided by those chosen by heaven. To this. I would
respond by invuking the Confucian response of Mcncius when asked about tite difference between the human and the animai. The difference, he admitted.
is infinitesimal. What distinguishes the human is a dispositiOn for enchanting the ordinary: taking eattng atad turning it into culinary and social art. taking
cries of fear and pain and turning them into poetry and sonw taking the act ol procreation and translormink it Into romantic Love and family, It is our
human nature to take thln. as they have cane to be. and to dtstirlctltiell, enchant nr appreciate them. And given this. although some freedom of
choice is certainly better than none at all, human freedom cannot be exhausted by the exercise of choice .
That would be to root freedom in dichotomotic thinking - a matter of getting what I want and avoiding what I do not want.
Freedom finally becomes then only a means to further want or lack. Expressing our deepest human
nature is expressing our disposition for entering into appreciative and liberating relationships . Riere la a
passage in the Dicwmond Sainz where the Buddha is asked what he attained with complete, unsurpassed
enlightenment and liberation. His answer was: Not thing. Liberating happiness is not something
achieved or gained: it is a quality of relationship through which our entire situation is suffused with
compassion, equanimity, loving-kindness and joy in the good fortune of others ultimately, there is no
freedom or happiness to be attained. There is only the happiness of relating freely in deep and mutual
enrichment. Although the dynamics of 21st century globalization are generating ever greater and deeper
predicaments they are also generating ever more potent opportunities for realizing global meaning of
happiness and human flourishing. Let me nid 1w voicing hope that the academic sessions lit folles will eontnbute, in distinctively
differing and concrete ways. to the wise and kusaln activation of these opportunities.
The alternatives path of individual liberation opens spaces for

compassion insight tolerance and happiness
These Buddhist principles provided the ground for some 21st century authors to define the concept of Buddhist economics . But Buddha himself made it
very clear: real happiness does not come from acquiring or consuming material things. Happiness is
essentially a state of mind or consciousness, and mind/consciousness is distinct from matter. Thus, Buddhism considers the path
of mental or spiritual development superior to that of material development. What really matters is to
psychologically detach oneself from matter, and strive for liberation and enlightenment, which is
considered the ultimate state of happiness and fulfillment. This is achieved by the cultivation of values
within ones mind, such as insight , compassion, tolerance and detachment . Only this
will bring true happiness, both for the individual and society.
Meditation can reveal the no-self and eventually reveal that there
was never a self in the first place
Purser 12 {Ronald E. Purser, PhD in organizational behavior from Case Western Reserve
University and a BA in psychology from Sonoma State University, Tamara Journal for Critical
Organization Inquiry, Vol 10, No 4 (2012), Deconstructing Lack: A Buddhist Perspective on
Egocentric Organizations} //DTB
The sense of self is constructed and sustained through the interactions of the five skandhas. In other
words, the skandhas are physical-perceptual-cognitive-affective eventsconstantly changing
configurationsthat appear to the untrained observer to be continuous and substantial. Buddhist insight
meditation trains the mind of the practitioner in powers of concentration, observation and contemplation
with the intent of fostering the growth of insight into anatman(no-self)that what appears as a
substantial, enduring and independent entity is rapidly constructed moment-by-moment, with no real
sense of permanence or ground. Thus, Buddhist practice aims to foster a deeply embodied insight into the
nature of the self, cutting through the delusion in a fictitious and illusory self that we normally represent
and mistakenly take to be real (Brown and Engler, 1986). Such insight or realization is not a one-time affair, but is continuously deepened
and stabilized through repeated and disciplined meditative practice. Describing the advanced stages of insight (vipassana) practice, Engler (2003) states:
I can observe how individual, discrete moments of consciousness and their objects arise and pass away together, are constructed and deconstructed
moment by moment without remainderwithout any subject or self, even an observing self, existing apart from the process, enduring behind it, or
carrying it forward to the next moment (75). Buddhist meditation practice weakens attachment and identifications with
such false constructions of the self, revealing the self as being empty of any self-nature, essentially
exposing the groundlessness of identity. Insights into no-self nature may come gradually or suddenly (in
Zen, kensho or satori). The goal of Buddhist practice is not to attain some sort of extraordinary mystical
experience, nor does it result in regressive return to primary narcissism by basking in oceanic feelings of oneness (Bion, 1963; Epstein, 1998), for
example, warned such pursuits could lead to a catastrophe (Bion, 1963), triggering psychic fragmentation or disintegration, or even touch what Eigen
describes as the psychotic core within each individual. However, most psychoanalysts, until recently, have not practiced nor studied Buddhismand
such criticisms and misconceptions are misleading. Clearly, recognition of no-self is often profoundly disturbing, evoking
feelings of terror, anxiety and fear (Epstein, 1995; 2007:30; 2008). Preliminary concentration practices are first employed to develop a
strong somatic foundation of stability in order to counterbalance the effects of these destabilizing insights. As pointed out earlier, insight
into selflessness does not eliminate nor annihilate the selfbut only reveals that it never existed in the
first place. As Gyatso (1984:40) clarifies, Selflessness is not a case of something that existed in the past becoming non-existent; rather, this sort of
self is something that never did exist. What is needed is to identify as non-existent something that always was non-existent . The true self of Buddhist
awakening is, as Magid (2003:270) points out, more of a recognition of an absence rather than a presence of something.
Personal reflection transcends existential shackles

Zadek 93 (Simon Zadek writer and advisor focused on business and sustainability. He is
Senior Visiting Fellow at the Centre for International Governance Innovation and Senior Fellow
at the Global Green Growth Institute,The Practice of Buddhist Economics? Another View
The American Journal of Economics and Sociology , Vol. 52, No. 4 (Oct., 1993), pp. 433-445
Published by: American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Inc.,
It is wrong to conclude, therefore, that the practice of Buddhism does not offer insights into the matter of social organization, even if Pryor is right in
arguing that the canonical texts do not suggest that the Buddha advocated one or other form. In particular, the form of social organization of the Sangha
described by Chakravarti suggests that communal, non-hierarchical forms of decision-making were seen as offering an
aid in discarding the pressures of desires rooted in the Self (ego), and thus an aid to achieving nibbana
(nirvana). Thus, while the Buddha saw the process of production (and reproduction) as key elements in the
generation of greed and the loss of compassion (Chakravarti, 1992:16), he also saw that the actual structure of
decision-making could support or impede a transcendence of these existential shackles. Pryor certainly rec-
ognizes this. So, although he insists that the Buddha understood that social conditions could never be fundamentally bettered,
he agrees that they "might help or hinder humans in their search for nibbana" (1991:20).5 However, Pryor's
decision to focus on the texts rather than practice draws him away from exploring this in more detail.
The alternative challenges self-identity as a motivating factor

Psychoanalysts have shown a great deal of interest in Buddhism, going back to the early dialogues with Eric Fromm and D.T. Suzuki (Fromm, Suzuki, and
Demartino, 1960). Buddhist practice is aimed at seeing through the mechanism of mind that perpetuates a belief in an ontological self. Buddhist meditative
inquiry is concerned with seeing into the illusory ontology of the self (Hanley, 1984:255). Even Freud recognized that the ego (das ich)
can impute to itself its own independent existence and treat itself as an object (see Sterba, 1934:120). Thus,
Buddhism does not attempt to annihilate or denigrate the psychologically differentiated self of
psychoanalytic theory, nor the Western conception of the self as a highly autonomous individual (Engler,
2003:50). Rather, Buddhist insight into anatman, or no self, is a transformation of awarenessan
internal revolution in consciousnessbased on a deeply embodied insight that reveals the belief in an
independent, substantial, and enduring sense of self is a misperception. Stolorow and Atwood (1992) refers to as the
myth of the isolated mind, the notion that each human being is a separate from the world. This is a fundamentaldualism, a myth which perpetuates an
alienation from nature, society, and estrangement from oneself. It is the basis for both self-centeredness and egocentricity (Magid, 2003:268). The
Buddhist path of insight meditation challenges our habitual sense of having a self-identity which
appears as permanent and unchanging. Engler (2003:88) states that our so-called normal sense of self has the tendency to regard
every object of experience or perception as a separate entity or thing having its own separate concrete existence and identity and only secondarily related
to other things. Insight or mindfulness meditation is a Buddhist method which trains practitioners to observe their moment-to-moment elements of
psycho-physical experienceadvancing to stages where attention is focused on seeing directly the essenceless of self. Mindfulness meditation develops
and refines the ability to discriminate and observe the successive arising and dissolution of the contents of the mind.
Mechanics
FW
Purely technical knowledge is useless must be tied to INTERNAL selfawareness in order for education to retain transformative power
Snauwaert 9 - Associate Professor of Educational Theory and Social Foundations of
Education; Chair of the Department of Foundations of Education, University of Toledo
(Dale, The Ethics and Ontology of Cosmopolitanism: Education for a Shared Humanity,
Current Issues in Comparative Education 12.1, Directory of Open Access Journals)//BB
The Ghandhian perspective is not foreign to Western philosophy and education. It was the dominant paradigm of Ancient
philosophy. For the Greeks and Romans, philosophy did not primarily concern the construction of
abstract theoretical systems; philosophy was conceived as a choice of a way of life, a justification for that
choice, and the articulation of the path or curriculum leading to the realization of the ideals of that way of
life. The focus of philosophy and education was the transformation of ones life as a mode of Being . As a path,
philosophy included sets of spiritual exercises necessary for the transformation of ones being in accordance with the spiritual vision of the philosophy.
Schools were formed out of the chosen way of life of the philosophy and those attracted to the philosophy. In these schools, the way of life defined by the
philosophy and the understandings and exercises necessary to live that life were developed, taught, and experienced. Philosophy and inner transformation
are linked in such a way that the discovery of the true and the good is contingent upon the transformation of the truth seekers being. Education is
thus devoted to the internal transformation of the consciousness of the student (Foucault, 2005; Hadot, 1993, 2002;
Hadot & Davidson, 1995; Hadot & Marcus, 1998). The necessity of internal transformation was not only pertinent to the search for truth; it had great
relevance for morality as well. The moral response to others was thought to be contingent upon the quality of the moral agents character. Character was
understood as a structure of virtues or capacities that enabled one to morally respond to others. The care of the self was thus thought to be interconnected
and interdependent with care for others. However, as Michel Foucault demonstrates, at the beginning of modernity (referred
to as the Cartesian moment), modern
epistemology divorces the true and the good from the subject, resulting in
the separation of knowledge and wisdom. Knowledge becomes merely the technical discovery of truth
divorced from the subjectivity of the knower; education in turn becomes the transmission of technical
knowledge with little or no concern for the internal subjectivity of the student . In addition, care of the self is
disconnected from care of others. In this separation, modern knowledge, ethics, and education lose their
transformative power (Foucault, 2005). The cosmopolitan perspective calls for a reclamation of the ontological
perspective of Gandhi and Ancient Western philosophy. If we are to be capable of responding to the
inherent value and dignity of all human beings, we must undergo an internal self-transformation . The
following developmental hypotheses elaborate further the interconnection between a universal duty of moral consideration and internal transformation: 1.
Self-transformation (i.e., decreased egoic attachment, increased pre-discursive, nonpositional self-awareness, and the realization of the Unity of Being)
increases the capacity for empathy and, in turn, compassion. The more self-aware I am, the more I can be aware of the
subjectivity of others, and thus, the more empathetic and compassionate I can be . 2. Self-transformation
increases ones capacity for tolerance. As egoic attachment decreases, holding on to ones own truth decreases; openness to falsification
and dialogue increases; hearing and understanding the others truth increases. One becomes less rigid, decreasing the tendency to impose and thereby
increasing ones capacity for tolerance. 3. Self-transformation increases ones capacity for restraint from doing harm .
One gains a more heightened awareness of internal contradiction and disharmony. This awareness prevents one from doing harm and/or withholding
charity to others. 4. Self-transformation decreases fear. Fear is born of duality, and it drives violence. If valid, these hypotheses can be
translated into educational aims focused on internal selftransformation. These aims define the core of a
cosmopolitan education grounded in internal self-transformation.
Only a focus on consciousness converts critical thinking to problemsolving its a pre-requisite to coherent action
Zajonc 6 Professor of physics at Amherst College
(Arthur, Contemplative and Transformative Pedagogy, Kosmos Journal 1.1,

http://www.arthurzajonc.org/uploads/Contemplative_Pedagogy%20Kosmos.pdf)//BB
I approach the question of shaping worldviews as an educator and as one who, like so many, is moved by
widespread violence and global economic inequities. What is it about worldviews that results in the identity politics of Iraq where
Shiites, Sunnis, and Kurds all act along ethnic and religious lines, or in Darfur where issues of identity cut deeper, leading to Arabs perpetrating mass
killing and rape against their Muslim brothers and sisters who are 'black Africans' from non-Arab tribes? What is it about worldviews that leads to a large
and growing divide between the rich and the poor? In the face of increasing per capita GDP, the global median income is decreasing, and 100 million more
are in poverty today than ten years ago.1 What can I as an educator offer in the face of these tragic realities of today's world? To offer an alternative or
'better' worldview is to no avail. In fact, efforts to promote that better viewpoint may initiate or aggravate conflict. In this article I advance a view of the
human being in which the individual develops the capacity to move among worldviews, transcending particular identities while simultaneously honoring
each of them. Even more, we can learn to live the complexity of diverse identities that are in truth everpresent in us as well as in the world. In reality, the
interconnectedness of the world has its reflection in the connections among the diverse aspects of ourselves. When we find peace among the component
parts of our own psyche, then we will possess the inner resources to make peace in a multicultural society. Only in this way will the crises I have
mentioned be addressed at their roots. I see educationformal and informalas the sole means of developing this remarkable human capacity for interior
harmony, which in the end is the capacity for freedom and love. The Function of Frames The content of education is infinite in extent. Every day
more information is available, new research is published, political changes occur, and businesses collapse.
All of these demand our attention. Education is largely comprised of acquiring and organizing such
information, and for this purpose students are taught the skills needed to assimilate and transmit
information through reading, writing, and mathematics. But such simple input-output functions are but
one dimension of education. Something more is needed to convert information into meaningful
knowledge. Surrounding and supporting the information we receive is the 'form' or structure of our
cognitive and emotional life that goes largely unobserved. To understand how information becomes meaningful, we must turn
our attention to this hidden container or 'frame of reference,' as Jack Mezirow termed it.2 A frame of reference is a way of knowing or making meaning of
the world. Enormous quantities of sensorial and mental data stream into human consciousness, but somehow
that stream is brought into a coherent meaningful whole. At first sight it may seem that such meaning-making is an entirely
natural and universal process, and to some degree it certainly is. Evolution has incorporated reflexes and drives deep into the human psyche. But the
way we make sense of the world is also conditioned profoundly by societal forces, among them education.
That is to say, we are socialized into a worldview that operates largely unconsciously and behind the
scenes, but which affects the way we understand what we see, hear, and feel. According to the Leo Apostel Centre for
Interdisciplinary Studies in Belgium, "A worldview is a map that people use to orient and explain the world, and from which they evaluate and act, and put
forward prognoses and visions of the future." In the course of a lifetime we may shed one worldview and adopt another. In other words, we can change the
structure that makes meaning for us. Thus while worldviews can be understood as deep cognitive structures, they are
not immutable. The solutions to Darfur and economic inequality (among many other problems) will
ultimately not be found through more information or better foreign aid programs, but only here at
the level where information marries with values to become meaning. Human action flows from this source, not from data
alone. An education that would reach beyond information must work deeper ; it will need to
transform the very container of consciousness , make it more supple and complex. For this, we educators
need pedagogical 2 tools other than those optimized for information transfer. At its most advanced stage, we will need to help our students and ourselves to
create a dynamic cognitive framework that can challenge established intellectual boundaries, and even sustain the conflicting values and viewpoints that
comprise our planetary human community. Challenging Conventional Divisions In recent years I have spent time with members of the Native American
Academy, a group largely comprised of academics who are also Native Americans. In our meetings we have explored the character of Native knowledge
systems and research methods in comparison to those of orthodox Western science. From the first, the differences were marked. The place of our meeting
was of special consequence, Chaco Canyon. It is the site of an ancient indigenous settlement whose remaining structures are clearly aligned according to a
detailed astronomical knowledge. Following a long drive we turned onto the approach road, stopping in the middle of nowhere to make a small offering of
bee pollen and tobacco. The first evening included a long ceremony performed by a knowledge-keeper from the local Native population, which concluded
with a sensitive presentation of the problems we were likely to encounter in our endeavors. The sacred and the secular so seamlessly blended in the
indigenous mind contrasts strongly with the conventional division between science and spirituality in the modern West. In the Western worldview, science
is often defined in opposition to spirituality. My work with Native American colleagues challenges that presupposition at its root. Our time is one in which
such unreflective assumptions must increasingly be challenged. Last year I was seated among over 10,000 neuroscientists listening to the fourteenth Dalai
Lama address them concerning the interaction between Buddhist philosophers and Western scientists. The occasion was the annual meeting of the Society
for Neuroscience, and the Dalai Lama was the keynote speaker because of his groundbreaking collaborative work to bridge the traditional cultural divide
between science and the contemplative traditions. Because of his openness and that of a growing number of scientists, Buddhist meditative insights have
been joined to scientific research in ways that are very fruitful for the fields of cognitive science and psychology.3 This is a second example in which
traditional divisions have been challenged with fruitful consequences. Contemplative Pedagogy One
of the most powerful
transformative interventions developed by humanity is contemplative practice or meditation . It

has been specifically designed to move human cognition from a delusory view of reality to a true one: that
is, to one in which the profound interconnectedness of reality is directly perceived . Global conflict has its deep source
in the privileging of worldviews, in the reification of our particular understanding and the objectification of the other. Such ways of seeing our world are,
at root, dysfunctional and divisive. Contemplative practice works on the human psyche to shape attention into a far suppler instrument, one that can
appreciate a wide range of worldviews and even sustain the paradoxes of life, ultimately drawing life's complexity into a gentle, non-judgmental
awareness. The usefulness of secular contemplative practice is being increasingly appreciated by educators at hundreds of North American universities and
colleges. For example, in collaboration with The Center for Contemplative Mind in Society, the American Council of Learned Societies has granted 120
Contemplative Practice Fellowships to professors over the last ten years, supporting them in designing courses that include contemplative practice as a
pedagogical strategy.4 At conferences and summer schools at Columbia University and Amherst College and elsewhere, professors have gathered to share
their experiences in the emerging area of contemplative pedagogy. Their efforts range from simple silence at the start of class to exercises that school
attention; and most recently, to innovative contemplative practices that relate directly to course content. The 2005 Columbia Conference focused
specifically on the role of contemplative practices in "Making Peace in Ourselves and Peace in the World." Courses are offered that range from theater to
economics, from philosophy to cosmology, in which university teachers are experimenting with a wide range of contemplative exercises, thus creating a
new academic pedagogy. I have become convinced that contemplation 3 benefits both students and faculty, and that secular contemplative practices should
assume a significant place on our educational agenda. Contemplative practices fall into two major classes, those that school cognition and those that
cultivate compassion. We are well aware that our observation and thinking require training, but we often neglect the cultivation of our capacity for love. In
his letters to a young poet, Rainer Maria Rilke wrote, "For one human being to love another, that is perhaps the most difficult of all our tasks, the ultimate,
the last test and proof, the work for which all other work is but a preparation. For this reason young people, who are beginners in everything, cannot yet
know love, they have to learn it. With their whole being, with all their forces, gathered close about their lonely, timid, upwardbeating heart, they must learn
to love." 5 We are well-practiced at educating the mind for critical reasoning, critical writing, and critical
speaking as well as for scientific and quantitative analysis. But is this sufficient? In a world beset with
conflicts, internal as well as external, isn't it of equal if not greater importance to balance the sharpening
of our intellects with the systematic cultivation of our hearts? We must, indeed, learn to love. Educators should join with their
students to undertake this most difficult task. Thus true education entails a transformation of the human being that, as Goethe said, "is so great that I never
would have believed it possible." This transformation results in the human capacity to live the worldviews of others,
and even further to sustain in our mind and heart the contradictions that are an inevitable part of
engaging the beautiful variety of cultures, religions, and races that populate this planet . We can sustain the
complexities of the world because we have learned to honor and embrace the complex, conflicting components of ourselves. Our inner
accomplishments, achieved through contemplative education, translate into outer capacities for peacebuilding. From there it is a short distance to the perception of interconnectedness and the enduring love for others, especially for those different from
us. We are increasingly becoming a world populated by solitudes. When Rilke declares that the highest expression of love is to "stand guard over and
protect the solitude of the other," he is expressing his respect for and even devotion to the uniqueness of every person and group. If, however, we are to
avoid social atomization or the fundamentalist reaction to this tendency, we will need to learn to love across the chasms that divide us. Only a
profoundly contemplative and transformative education has the power to nurture the vibrant, diverse
civilization that should be our global future. As Maria Montessori wrote, "Preventing conflicts is the work
of politics; establishing peace is the work of education."6
Only a re-education solves extinction

Khisty 7 (C. Jotin Khisty, Ph. D., 2007. Professor emeritus in the department of civil,
architectural, and environmental Engineering at the Illinois Institute of Technology. He has

published extensively in the areas of urban planning, transportation engineering, and systems
science. The Marriage of Buddhism and Deep Ecology,
http://www.theosophical.org/publications/quest-magazine/1670.)
In 2005, people all across the world sat up in their seats to watch Al Gores film An Inconvenient Truth. They were stunned to see the environmental
degradation and destruction that has occurred and the profound threat it poses to all life on the planet. Then, in October 2007, many of us jumped with joy
when Gore and the U. N. Panel on Climate Change were jointly awarded the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize. This recognition gave us hope of a way to work
through our political, economic, and environmental systems in order to reverse the effects of decades of indifference and damage to our planet. One of the
paramount reasons for this degradation is not hard to find. The organizing principle of society for at least the last hundred
years has been: What will make the economy grow larger and produce greater profit? But with a new
consciousness on the horizon and a transformation of the human heart all around the world, it is very
likely that for the next hundred years, the organizing principle may be: What will make the planet more
sustainable? This has to be the new lens through which we look at the world. After all, the voyage of discovery lies not in seeking new vistas but in
having new eyes. This article aims to explore the connections between two important disciplines: spiritual systems, particularly Buddhism, and deep
ecology. Spiritual systems are more than a belief in a transcendental deity or a means to an afterlife. They are a way of understanding both the cosmos and
our role in its preservation. In this way they are closely connected with ecology, which embraces a cultural awareness of kinship with and dependence on
the natural environment for the continuity of all life. Buddhism, one of the worlds great spiritual systems, offers a well-developed philosophy of our
connection with nature. Deep ecology is focused on the survival and self-renewal of all living beings. (It is so called in contrast to shallow ecology,
which is essentially anthropocentric and technocratic.) Celebrating the marriage of spiritual systems and deep ecology fosters a moral and cultural
awareness of the kinship of the natural environment and the continuity of life. We hear of ecological disasters occurring around
the world almost on a daily basis. Almost all of these crises are a result of human neglect, apathy, and
greed. They range from resource depletion, species extinction, pollution growth, climate change, to
population explosion and over consumption. As far back as 1992, the Union of Concerned Scientists, consisting of over 100 Nobel
laureates and 1600 other distinguished scientists from seventy countries, warned us of the deepening ecological crisis caused by human activities on this
planet. They warned that a great change in the stewardship of the earth and the life on it is required if vast misery is to be avoided and our global home on
this planet is not to be irretrievably mutilated (Uhl, 124). Almost all such warnings have been ignored and ridiculed by our politicians. One prominent
source of disinformation about global warning, for instance, has been the Bush-Cheney administration. It has silenced scientists working for the
government about the extreme danger we are facing, and has appointed skeptics recommended by oil companies to government positions as our
principal negotiators. The world has been thunderstruck by the arrogance and ignorance of such political leaders and their cronies (Gore, 264). The
reasons for this disconnection from nature, especially in the West, are not hard to detect. Spiritually and
psychologically we live inside a bubble of the self, as though we are in here and the rest of the world
is out there. According to Buddhist thought, this sense of separation manifests itself in the form of the
Three Poisonsgreed, ill will, and delusion. Examples of these poisons can be seen everywhere in the
current ecological crisis. Greed rooted in untrammeled economic growth and consumerism is the secular
religion of advanced industrial societies. Similarly, the military-industrial complex promotes ill will, fear, and terror, while propaganda
and advertising systems are well known for deluding the public about everything under the sun. A fundamental question of our time is whether we can
counter these forces by developing attitudes of respect, responsibility, and care for the natural world and so create a sustainable future. From its origins in
India about 500 years before the birth of Christ, Buddhism spread throughout Asia and is now exerting an ever-increasing influence on Western culture.
We in the West are awakening to the fact that there is a more ancient science of mind than our own. The well-known philosopher Alan Watts
pointed out that historically the Buddha (563-483 BCE) was the first great psychologist and psychotherapist.
He not only recognized the meaning of existential anxiety or suffering that we all experience but offered ways of treating it. Many psychologists,
psychiatrists, and scientists regard the discovery of Buddhist philosophy in the West today as a kind of
second renaissance (Varela, 22). Contrary to popular belief, Buddhism is in essence a philosophy and not a religion. Buddhist
philosophy over the centuries has been very carefully thought out and documented by some of the best
scholars and practitioners across the world. A starting point is the central tenet concerning the
interconnectedness of all lifehuman beings, animals, plants, birds. Buddhist ethical teaching emphasizes that this interdependence comes
with a moral component. For humans, that means maintaining a sense of universal responsibility in whatever we
do. The cornerstone of all Buddhist teachings is the Four Noble Truths. The first truth is that of suffering (or existential anxiety), starting with birth and
continuing on through aging and then on to the inevitability of death. The second truth is the realization that human craving and greed are at the very root
of our suffering. The third truth stresses that it is possible to eliminate craving, greed, and suffering by transforming the mind. The fourth truth is the
Eightfold Path, the Buddhist formula of practices for cultivating this transformation, leading to the extinction of both craving and suffering (Rifkin, 101).
Buddhists assert that mindful awareness of existential anxiety produces compassionate empathy for all forms of life. Two other concepts form the bedrock
of Buddhist thinking: impermanence and interdependence. All phenomena are impermanent, because everything is in transition. Interdependence refers to
the fact that everything is a part of everything else. The philosophical roots of the deep ecology movement can be found in the writings of Henry David
Thoreau, Theodore Roszak, Lewis Mumford, Rachel Carson, and others, going back to Baruch Spinoza and the Buddhist philosophers. But it was in 1972
that the Norwegian philosopher Arne Naess coined the term to distinguish it from shallow anthropocentric and technocratic ecology. Since then, Naess
has spelled out a comprehensive platform describing the meaning and scope of deep ecology, as outlined in an eight-point summary: 1. The well-being of
human and nonhuman life on earth have value in themselves. 2. The interdependence, richness, and diversity of life forms contribute to the realization of
these values. 3. Humans have no right to reduce this richness and diversity except to satisfy vital needs. 4. Present human interference with the nonhuman
world is excessive, and the situation is rapidly worsening. 5. The flourishing of human life and cultures is compatible with substantial decrease of the
human population. Moreover, the flourishing of nonhuman life requires such a decrease. 6. Policies must therefore be changed. The changes in policies
will affect basic economic and technological structures. 7. Ideological change is required in order to emphasize quality of life rather than striving for an
ever-higher standard of living. 8. Those who subscribe to the foregoing points have an obligation to help implement these changes (Naess, 68). To imagine
oneself as a separate ego, separate from everything else, locked up in a bag of skin, is a hallucination. Everything is indeed connected with everything else.
Given the profound similarity of Buddhist thought to deep ecology, it is not difficult to realize that the egocentricity of an apparently isolated self needs
to be replaced by ecocentricity. How can we harness this obvious interconnection between Buddhist thought and
deep ecology in order to tackle the urgent problems that continue to threaten the sentient beings on this
planet? As Vaclav Havel, the former president of the Czech Republic, wrote: The only option for us is a change in the
sphere of the spirit, in the sphere of human conscience. Its not enough to invent new machines, new
regulations, and new institutions. We must develop a new understanding of the true purpose of our
existence on earth. Only by making such a fundamental shift will we be able to create new models of
behavior and a new set of values for the planet (Uhl, 307). Like Havel, scores of philosophers, economists, and politicians have
recognized that the advancing human crisis is result of the lack of deep spiritual roots, brought on to a great extent by the divorce of spiritual meaning and
identity from life. But how can we wake up to face this human crisis? Today there is already evidence of an emerging cultural
shift as millions of people and their leaders are stirring, as if from a trance, to deal with these issues . Here are
some possible avenues of approach: * Collective awakening. Spiritual awakening in an individual is sometimes called the opening of the third eye.
When this awareness occurs collectively, it can be called the opening of the fourth eye. Evidence of this collective awakening started in the 1960s and
has matured in subsequent years, dealing head-on with problems as diverse as postmodern anomie, free-market globalization, and global terrorism. *
Building sustainable systems. The great challenge of our time is to build and nurture sustainable communitiessocial, cultural, and physical. This goal is
best attained in four steps: (1) introducing ecoliteracy in order to understand how ecosystems evolve for sustaining the web of life; (2) moving toward
ecodesign by promoting organic farming, energy- and resource-efficient industries, nonmotorized transportation, and low-cost housing, and by reducing
energy consumption; (3) thinking in terms of relationships, contexts, patterns, and processes for ecodesign; (4) striving for resource efficiency, serviceflow economy, and energy conservation in order to reduce ecological degradation (Capra, 230-32). So far the records in these areas of nurturing have been
deplorable. * Transforming the world economy. According to free-market capitalism, all values are monetary values determined by buyers of goods and
services in a competitive market. The prime movers of this system are the transnational corporations (TNCs), whose economic powers frequently surpass
that of many sovereign states. To grow, these TNCs must make enormous profits and consume the worlds raw materials. TNCs and their advocate, the
World Trade Organization (WTO), have been largely able to get what they want because of their influence in manipulating the global market for their own
profit. Poor countries and the poorer sectors of the world are the worst victims of the WTO. Today, one-third of all economic activity worldwide is
generated by only 200 corporations, which are linked to each other by strategic alliances. While the WTO was initially hailed by nations rich and poor as
an organization that would produce huge economic benefits which would trickle down to everybody, it failed to live up to this promise, instead creating
fatal consequences such as the breakdown of democracies, the rapid deterioration of the environment, and increasing poverty and alienation. Consumerism
is now recognized as the most successful religion of all time, winning more converts more quickly than any previous belief or value system in human
history. Philosopher David Loy has pointed out that the strategies of the WTO and the World Bank have been exposed, with the result that there are regular
riots whenever their meetings are held. These two organizations are clearly ill-suited for building a just, sustainable, and compassionate society that can
nurture sufficiency, partnership, and respect for life and its values. Naturally, a new kind of civil society, organized to counterbalance globalization is
gradually emerging, embodied in powerful nongovernmental organizations such as Oxfam and Greenpeace. * Transforming ethics. Activists devoted to
peace and social justice acknowledge that there is a spirit of coerciveness that is present in all cultures, manifesting particularly in violence and crime. This
coerciveness can be counteracted by several strategies. Creative nonviolence in the tradition of Mahatma Gandhi and Buddhist ethics is one welldocumented possibility. Essentially this means that one does not struggle against the opponent but rather against the situation. Political and social
adversaries are seen as potential partners rather than as enemies. Satyagraha, or nonviolent resistance, also pioneered by Gandhi, is one form of such
creative nonviolence. The principle of ahimsa (harmlessness)the refusal to kill any living beingshas also been put to use in stopping armed conflicts.
It is said that when people saw the Buddha soon after his enlightenment, they were so struck by the extraordinary peacefulness of his presence that they
stopped to ask: What are you? Are you a god, a magician, or a wizard? Buddhas reply was stunning. He simply said: I am awake. His answer became
his title, for this is what the word buddha means in Sanskritone who is awakened. While the rest of the world was deep in sleep, dreaming a dream
known as the waking state of life, the Buddha shook off the slumber and woke up (Smith and Novak, 3-4). Although the Buddhas wake-up
call was issued a very long time ago and has since been repeated time and time again by almost every
known spiritual system, it is unfortunate that a mistaken metaphysics has led us to an alienation between
us and the earth and between us and other sentient beings. It is essential that we reestablish and restore an
awareness of this interdependence. Naturally, such a transformation requires profound reeducation at every
stage of our lives. Private foundations, nongovernmental organizations, businesses, academic institutions, and
religious organizations have an equal stake in setting priorities in this endeavor . In this context the advice of the Dalai
Lama is particularly poignant: The Earth, our Mother, is telling us to behave. . . . If we develop good and considerate qualities within our own minds, our
activities will naturally cease to threaten the continued survival of life on Earth. By protecting the natural environment and working to forever halt the
degradation of our planet, we will also show respect for Earths human descendantsour future generationsas well as for the natural right to life of all
of Earths living things. If we care for nature, it can be rich, bountiful, and inexhaustibly sustainable. It is important that we forgive the destruction of the
past and recognize that it was produced by ignorance. At the same time, we should reexamine, from an ethical perspective, what kind of world we have
inherited, what we are responsible for, and what we will pass on to coming generations (Hunt-Badiner, v).
Our educational model is a pre-requisite for breaking down dominant

economic paradigms
De Silva, 98 (Padmasiri de Silva, Research Fellow in the Philosophy Department at Monash
University, Environmental Philosophy and Ethics in Buddhism, pg 182)//DH
Education and culture are the two main pathways for effective environmental discourse. But till we
dismantle the economic and political discourse that pervades the wrong type of social paradigm that
humans have embraced, we may not get to the roots of the malady of environmentalism. But even if the
correct diagnosis of the malady is made, to dismantle the pervading political and economic discourse,
people have to be moved to do so. It is time for philosophers to revise their classification of
epistemological resources, from which new perspectives for environmental education may emerge. Buddhist
pedagogy, reaching back 25 centuries, provides insights into how this project may be developed.
Education on Buddhist Economics is uniquely key to our understanding

of economics
Dharmkosajarn 11 (Dr. Phra Dharmakosajarn, Venerable Professor at
Mahachulalongkornrajvidyalya
University, Chairman at ICDV & IABU, Rector at MCU,
Buddhist Virtues in Socio-Economic Development, p.111, May 2011, BG)
Knowledge is power, miraculously, knowledge leads to wisdom - education is important for understanding
or comprehending the management of economic transactions. Towards this aim noted Thai Dr. Prawasi Wasi
state : What is wrong with our education system [based on separate disciplines, memorizations, examinations?]
Why are we having a harder time when we have arguably better and more expansive educational systems?
Humanity seems to have crisis when they cannot combine different disciplines toward complicated
realities. We have too many problems in our complicated societies. Its difficult to begin in a single theme, yet
people are afraid to step outside of the current paradigm or create new possibilities .
Ontology First
Our ontological orientation towards the world must be evaluated
before substantive claims
Jackson 10 - Associate Professor of International Relations in the School of International
Service at the American University in Washington

(Patrick, The Conduct of Inquiry in International Relations: Philosophy of Science and its
Implications for the Study of World Politics, p. 41-2)//BB
Ontological commitments, whether philosophical or scientific, logically precede substantive claims,
and serve as the often-unacknowledged basis on which empirical claims are founded . In this sense, ontological
commitments are foundational not in the sense that they provide unshakable grounds that universally guarantee the validity of
the claims that are founded on them, but foundational in
the sense that they provide the conditions of
intelligibility for those claims. In that way, ontological commitments are world-disclosing, since they make a particular kind of tangible
world available to a researcher (Habermas 1990, 321). A claim such as democratic states do not go to war with one
another implicitly makes a number of ontological presuppositions. The claim makes scientific-ontological presuppositions
that a states democracy-ness is a conceptually separable attribute of that state and most likely also presupposes that a states standing as a democracy is
something that is visible to external scholarly observers and specifiable in an abstract fashion.1 The claim also makes philosophical-ontological
presuppositions, although these are somewhat further removed from the individual claim and pertain more to the overall intellectual context within which
the claim make sense; hence one needs to know something about the broader body of scholarly literature within which a claim has standing in order to
explicate the philosophical-ontological commitments that it tacitly presumes. The academic study of the democratic peace has been almost completely
dominated by a neopositivist methodology. Neopositivism, although neutral with respect to the truth-value of specific empirical propositions, sets
the contours of the research design within which claims about the democratic peaceand, quite frankly,
claims about many of the other empirical phenomena regularly studied within academic IRare
evaluated. Before scholars can engage in debates about whether democratic peace is best measured and assessed as a dyadic of as a
monadic phenomenon (for example, Rousseau et al. 1996), it is first necessary for those scholars to agree on some basic
methodological principles, such as the notion that a causal connection shows itself in systematic cross-case correlations between
specific factors (in this case, variable attributes such as being a democracy and going to war with another democracy), and the notion that
knowledge is constructed through the successive proposing and testing of hypothetical guesses about the
character of the world. The fact that these assumptions are so widely shared, both within the democratic peace research community and within
the field of IR more generally, does not make them any less philosophicalor any less philosophically contentious. Hypothesis testing and
covariation-causality are more or less direct consequences of the pair of philosophical-ontological
commitments on which neopositivism stands: mind-world dualism and phenomenalism. Mindworld dualism enables hypothesis testing, inasmuch as testing a hypothetical guess to see whether it
corresponds to the world makes little sense in the absence of a mind-independent world against which to
test the hypothesis. Phenomenalism enables covariation-causality, since the limitation of knowledge to those aspects of the world that can be
empirically grasped and directly experienced implies that the only confidence that observers can have about a causal relationshipwhich must be inferred
rather than abduced or counterfactually ideal-typifiedmust be founded on its systematicity.3 In the absence of these
philosophical-ontological commitments , testing hypotheses in order to arrive at reliable

statements about robust correlations would make little sense , and if we were interested in knowing
about how democracy was connected to questions of war and peace, we would have to engage in some
other kinds of knowledge-production procedures.
Complexity
The affirmative approach is based in linear problem solution mentality,
but in reality society is non-linear and their intervention produces
unpredictable outcomes, the alternative reflection and re-evaluation
needs to come before action such that we can channel energy more
effectively. Their framing and paradigm makes resolution impossible
Implications for development interventions if society is seen as a dynamic. non-linear system, where change emerges from
local-level interactions and planned interventions produce unpredictable outcomes, what does this mean
for development and other attempts to direct social change? It does not mean that we are forced resign
ourselves to drifting along through history and accepting the undesirable circumstances that emerge
through the results of our actions like massive inequity species loss hunger pollution, and war. It means that we
need to re-evaluate how we think about change in a changing world. According to one of the researchers
investigating complex adaptive systems: Its like a kaleidoscope: the world is a matter of patterns that change, that partly repeat, but never quite repeat,
that are always new and different. We are a part of this thing that is never changing and always changing . If you think that youre a
steamboat and can go up the river, youre kidding yourself. Actually, youre just the captain of a paper
boat drifting down the river. If you try to resist you are not going to get anywhere. On the other hand. if you
quietly observe the flow, realizing that youre part of it, realizing that the now is ever-changing and
leading to new complexities, then every so often you can stick an oar onto the river and punt yourself from one eddy to another.. .it means that
you try to see reality for what it is, and realize that the game you are in keeps changing, so Its up to you to figure out
the current rules of the game as its being played...YOU observe. And where you can make an effective move you make a move. A complexity
paradigm is call for a more strategic approach to directed social change a process of constantly observing
and analyzing the system identifying strategic spaces for action and channeling our energy and resources
more effectively. According Harsha Navatne the Chajiiai of Sewalailka Fotlndarjor to follow a linear pre-determined plan can
restrict our act effectively. Development is a balancing act, an art, and the exact path cant be predicted .
Once, to explain this point, he took out a blank sheet of paper and made a hark at the top this is where we want to go, but we are here, he said pointing, of
the page. He then drew lines across page. We cannot go directly. There are many obstacles in the way. There are many constraints and the and the situation
is constantly changing. If we try to go in a straight line according to our ideology and theories we will get
stuck . He drew a winding line from the bottom of the page to the top that bypassed all the obstacles. You have to find a creative
way to reach your goal you have to keep your eves focused on where you are trying to go. but you have to
understand that to reach that place you may have to try many different paths. You have to be flexible and
creative. Pre-determined project plans confine genuine participation and limit the ability of the
participants to adapt local conditions, learn from experience and adjust to changing circumstances .
Epistemology
The 1acs data is shaped by the SELF this taints objectivity and
ensures error
Macy 79 (Joanna Rogers Macy scholar of Buddhism, general systems theory, and deep
ecology, Dependent Co-arising: The Distinctiveness of Buddhist Ethics, The Journal of

Religious Ethics , Vol. 7, No. 1 (Spring, 1979), pp. 38-52, Wiley, JSTOR)
Basic to the ethic is the radical view of the self, which the teachings present. It is an interdependent, self-organizing
process shaped by the flow of experience and the choices that condition this flow. Possessed of no "I" apart from what it feels, sees, thinks, does, the
self does not have experience, it is its experience. Hence in the Buddhist ethic the error of egoicity. The problem with
"mine-ness" (mamatta) is not just the greed it engenders, but the fundamental error it expresses and
reinforces - that of considering the self as an independent, autonomous entity. This process view of self underlies other distinctive
features of Buddhist ethics: namely, the moral character of knowing, the identity-producing character
of action (karma), the valorization of body and nature, and the interdependence of self and society. Let us
view these briefly in turn. 4. The moral character of knowing. Because he posited no autonomous self, the Buddha's teachings about the
relation of knower to known, of perceiver to perceived, were radically different from other views set forth in his
time. In the Upanisads perception appears, in the last analysis, as the action of the atman, the immutable, eternal essence within. It is he who sees
through our eyes, hears through our ears. In Samkhya philosophy perception is the reflection of phenomena upon the purusa, pure consciousness,
passive, unalloyed and unalterable. Both atman and purua represent the silent witness, the imperturbable rider of the chariot, the unconditioned
knower, unaffected and undefiled by what he perceives. In paticca samuppada, however, perception is no passive registering of stimuli. It is a two-way
street, a mutual process involving the convergence of sensory signal with attention and sense organ, and the mental constructs imposed by the perceiver.
This is made explicit both in the nidana series, where phassa, contact, is set apart from sense organs and objects (saVayatana), so to dramatize the
relational, convergent nature of the perception event, and in the Majjhima Nikaya where perception is presented as generative of consciousness itself
(M 1.257-260; M III. 242). Since, as these passages stress, thought co-arises with perception, a priori reasoning is suspect. Indeed, the proliferation of
concepts (papanca-sanfiasankha), as we interpret experience, shapes in turn the world we see (M 1. 1 1 1). Hence perception is a highly interpretive
process and thinking itself a contributing factor in the arising of phenomena. We create our worlds, but do not do so unilaterally,
for consciousness is colored by that on which it feeds. The Nikayas deny neitherthe "thereness" of the sense object nor the
protective tendencies of the mind. The mutuality is real - the world is neither independent of the viewer nor the viewer independent of his perceptions.
The ethical implications of this interdependence are several. Iconoclasm is built in, for all theories and
speculation are seen as contingent. Perception, data-gathering and interpretation are not value-free, but
freighted with emotional predispositions and cognitive preconceptions. Expressive of this recognition are both the
tolerance characteristic of the Buddhist ethical stance, and the barely disguised contempt the Buddha showed for rigid dogmatic assertions (A 11.24).
Hence, paticca samuppada extends the domain of morality beyond action to interpretation, beyond deeds to ideology. Our theorizing is
neither "objective" nor value-free, but relative constructs which bear our moral responsibility.
Death Trick
Death leads to reincarnation best scientific evidence proves
Secrest No Date - award-winning American biographer, primarily of American artists and art
collectors
(Meryl, Scientific Proof of Reincarnation Dr. Ian Stevenson's Life Work, http://reluctantmessenger.com/reincarnation-proof.htm)
Probably the best known, if not most respected, collection of scientific data that appears to provide scientific proof that
reincarnation is real, is the life's work of Dr. Ian Stevenson. Instead of relying on hypnosis to verify that an individual has had a previous life, he
instead chose to collect thousands of cases of children who spontaneously (without hypnosis) remember a past life. Dr. Ian Stevenson uses this approach
because spontaneous past life memories in a child can be investigated using strict scientific protocols. Hypnosis, while useful in researching into past lives,
is less reliable from a purely scientific perspective. In order to collect his data, Dr. Stevenson methodically documents the child's
statements of a previous life. Then he identifies the deceased person the child remembers being, and verifies
the facts of the deceased person's life that match the child's memory. He even matches birthmarks and
birth defects to wounds and scars on the deceased, verified by medical records. His strict methods
systematically rule out all possible "normal" explanations for the childs memories. Dr.
Stevenson has devoted the last forty years to the scientific documentation of past life memories of children from all over the world. He has over
3000 cases in his files. Many people, including skeptics and scholars, agree that these cases offer the best evidence yet for
reincarnation. Dr. Stevenson's credentials are impeccable . He is a medical doctor and had many
scholarly papers to his credit before he began paranormal research. He is the former head of the Department of Psychiatry
at the University of Virginia, and now is Director of the Division of Personality Studies at the University
of Virginia.
ONLY the alternative leads to Nirvana

(August 2007), pp. 145-153, http://www.jstor.org/stable/41472078)
Thomas Schelling rightly characterises modern Western economics as an "ego- nomical framework". Modern Western economics is
centred on self-interest, understood as satisfaction of the wishes of one's body-mind ego. Buddhism
challenges this view because it has a different conception of the self, which is anatta, the "no-self' (Elster
1985). Anatta specifies the absence of a supposedly permanent and unchanging self in any one of the psychophysical constituents of empirical
existence. What is normally thought of as the "self' is an agglomeration of constantly changing physical and mental constituents, which give rise to
unhappiness if clung to as though this temporary assemblage represented permanence. The anatta doctrine attempts to encourage
Buddhist practitioners to detach themselves from the misplaced clinging to what is mistakenly
regarded as self, and from such detachment (aided by moral living and meditation) the way to Nirvana can be
successfully traversed. Modern neuroscience supports the Buddhist view of the self. What neuroscientists have
discovered can be called the selfless (or virtual) self, "a coherent global pattern, which seems to be centrally located, but
is nowhere to be found, and yet is essential as a level of interaction for the behavio r". The non-localisable, nonsubstantial self acts as if it were present, like a virtual interface (Varela 1999: 53, 61).
AT: Non-Falsifiability
Thats a link the idea of falsifiability presumes mind-world dualism
Service at the American University
So perhaps the most significant implication of the disappearance of an explicit consideration of philosophical ontology within IR debates, and the
consequent rush to elaborate scientific ontologies and to design research techniques and approaches, is that mindworld dualism goes
largely unnoticed and largely uncriticized. This would not present any particular problems or challenges, except for the fact that
mindworld dualism is far from uncontroversial in philosophical circles, where it has been contested under a banner that should be
very familiar to contemporary IR scholars: social construction. This is more than a mere coincidence of labels, as IR constructivists have been
leveling challenges at mindworld dualism for at least two decades (Onuf 1989; Kratochwil 1989), but have often
been charged by critics with failing to elucidate empirically testable propositions about world politics. In
other words, constructivists are charged with failing to subject their scientific ontologies of rules and norms
and transactional social practices to the kinds of evaluation procedures that are only meaningful
within a philosophical ontology of mindworld dualism procedures involving efforts to
compare expected outcomes with observed outcomes, and so to test (for example) the relative causal weight of
social identities versus structurally induced preferences (Fischer 1992; Schweller and Wohlforth 2000). We persistently
fail to notice the logical absurdity of the situationobviously it makes no sense to evaluate a claim
opposing mindworld dualism by presuming mindworld dualismin part because we do not think
enough in IR about philosophical ontology and its implications for research practice.7
Falsifiability is illogical even the most scientific statements can be

confirmed against contrary evidence
Service at the American University
The Popperian criterion of falsifiability enjoys a great deal of support , especially among practicing scientists
charges that some claim or piece of research is unfalsifiable are often used in a transparently
disciplining manner, to exclude that claim or piece of research from serious consideration (Taylor 1996, 3031).
The idea that claims must be testable through the collection of empirical evidence has, to some extent, become commonsensical in many discussions of
science, taken for granted to the point that an explicit defense of the idea is not considered to be necessary. For example, in debates about evolution and
creation science, one regularly sees each side accusing the other of holding onto their core assumption in defiance of the available evidence, and thus
not adhering to the principle of falsifiability (Beil 2008); but nowhere in those debates will one find a defense of falsifiability as a criterion demarcating
science from non-science. Instead, debate using the Popperian criterion revolves around the two behavioral implications
of the falsifiability principle: researchers should be actively trying to falsify their conjectural claims, and
only tentatively and provisionally accepting claims that survive a more or less rigorous series of tests;
and researchers should abandon claims that have been falsified, because knowledge only expands if
discredited propositions are discarded. Hence the focus of evaluation shifts from claims themselves (as long as they are falsifiable) to
the behavior of the communities of researchers working with them, and science ceases to be a purely logical endeavorit is, rather, a practical one.
One problem with falsifiability, however, is that it does not appear to work very well even when applied to
established sciences such as physics. That was the chief empirical argument of Thomas Kuhn, who spent a lot of time observing the
actual history and practice of science when writing his classic book The Structure of Scientific Revolutions(Kuhn 1970b). He discovered that
practicing physicists do not, in fact, spend a lot of time attempting to falsify foundational claims about
the world. In fact, they seem to take a lot of claims for granted in the conduct of their everyday research
work, and when confronted with results that would appear to call into question those foundational
claims, they were more likely to creatively reinterpret the results (for instance, by postulating an exogenous intervening
factor) than
simply to abandon their claims. Kuhn argued that acceptance of these foundational claims was, in
fact, the precondition of scientific work: When engaged with a normal research problem, the
scientist must premise current theory as the rules of his game. His object is to solve a puzzle, preferably one at which others
have failed, and current theory is required to define that puzzle and to guarantee that, given sufficient brilliance, it can be solved. (Kuhn 1970a, 45)
Normal science, as Kuhn defined it, was characterized by puzzle-solving, not by ongoing efforts to falsify any
and all conjectures and claims. Actual scientists did not , in practice, adhere to the behavioral
implications of falsifiability ; hence there was either something wrong with the principle of
falsifiability, or with the practice of science itself. Kuhn preferred the former; Popper, in a rather striking contrast to his own
principle of falsifiability, stuck to his claim in defiance of the empirical evidence about scientific practice, claiming that Kuhns normal scientist has
been badly taught and is a victim of indoctrination rather than possessing a properly critical intellect (Popper 1970, 53). In a way, the disagreement
between Kuhn and Popper about what constitutes science illustrates another difficulty involved in attempting to implement the principle of falsifiability
in the first place. Take a (Popperian) statement such as science is characterized by the making of bold conjectures and the attempt to falsify them, and
confront it with evidence that practicing scientists do not, in fact, behave in this way; what is the result? Perhaps the statement is rejected because of the
discrepant evidence, but perhaps the statements author questions the accuracy of the potentially falsifying empirical claim, or the definitions involved in
the collection of that data, or the meaning of the phrase science is, or any one of dozens of other things that might be done to call into question the
precise relationship between the statement and the evidence. The point is that falsifying a statement is a very complex
endeavor, and some philosophers (notably Quine) have argued that one can in principle always preserve a theoretical
statement by adjusting various background assumptions: the meanings of key terms, the scope of the
claim, or the theory built into the way that the empirical data was collected and organized in the first
place (Chernoff 2005, 183184). All of these considerations mean that it is almost impossible to determine when
and whether a claim has been falsified, making falsifiability a deeply problematic way to demarcate
science from non-science (Hay 2002, 8384).
AT: Religious Wars

Not Buddhism
of Budapest
While Western economics emphasizes self-interest and material development, Buddhist economics
stresses interconnectedness and inner development. It would also place an emphasis on culturally
appropriate economic approaches. A Buddhist approach involves an emphasis on sustainable development, where both human beings and
living creatures can realize their potential, and where inner development and economic development are compatible, all in the context of a just society and
a healthy ecosystem. Buddhist economics sees little problem with activities that are beneficial to oneself, to ones
business and to ones country, but only in circumstances of non- harmfulness to others. Establishing
mutually beneficial transactions rather than exploitative ones is important . One distinguishing feature of Buddhism
is that its adherents have never engaged in a religious war. Its emphasis on peace and non- harm needs
to be translated into modern economics. Non-harm means respecting all human beings and all other creatures and developing a sense of
respect for all life.
AT: Cede the Political

Mindful reflection LEADS TO societal re-ordering
JSTOR)
Within traditional Theravada Buddhism, the first part of training the mind is to achieve samatha, tranquillity, in
order to plant the seeds of peace. The second part, vipassana, insight training, is a technique for understanding the true nature of both
one's own and the world's psychophysical constitution. This can be developed into analytic thinking through an under-
standing of causal relations and of problem solving. With the detachment of the ego it becomes a factor in
the development of wisdom or right understanding. Yonisomansasikara, or critical self-awareness, leads to self-
lessness, reducing selfish desires and generating energetic efforts. Calm and the development of yonisomanasikara in turn
lead to the development of panna, genuine understanding. Panna, which comes from both the head and the heart, is very different from purely
intellectual knowledge. It helps one to become aware, humble, and to know one's limits, even as it promotes
metta and compassion in sharing the sufferings of others and attempting to eliminate the causes of
suffering. In addition, when one tackles the causes of suffering, especially within an oppressive social system, and encounters resistance and
retaliation from those who wish to maintain the status quo, bhavana helps one both to understand the danger and to forgive one's enemies. Bhavana
is a powerful tool against all forms of suffering both within oneself and within the environment. As Thich
Nhat Hanh has repeatedly pointed out, mindful breathing is a tool that can be used to surround feelings of hatred, greed, and delusion that arise within
oneself, shining metta onto these feelings until they crack and it is possible to look into them and see their roots. At this point the mind is unable to
resist flowering, just as a flower is unable to resist blossoming when the sun shines into its heart. At the social level, bhavana can also
be used to work against capitalism, consumerism, sexism, militarism, and the many other 'isms' that
undermine the wholesomeness of life. It is a tool for criticizing positively and creatively our own society,
nation state, culture, and even our own Buddhist tradition. With this attitude, we do not fall into the traps of hating our
and others' oppressors but are able to use understanding to destroy the oppressive systems and violent
structures instead.
AT: Empirics
We are empirically verifiable
Puntasen 7 (Apichai Puntasen is Dean and professor of Faculty of Management Science at
Ubon Rajathanee University , Society and Economy , Vol. 29, No. 2, SUSTAINABILITY AND
SUFFICIENCY: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN A BUDDHIST PERSPECTIVE (August 2007), pp. 181200, http://www.jstor.org/stable/41472080)
This is a challenging concept. The Buddha told them how to deal with confus- ing information through personal investigation as well as through evidence
ac- ceptable to the majority of people with the average level of sanity. So, it is not enough just to be told by believers but it must be a belief in
something that has been proven to be correct from personal experiences. Because of this elaborate method of proof, Buddha-Dhamma is neither
a religion, nor a philosophy. Its actual status is a
tested theory or a theory that has already been proven through
empirical evidence . The epistemology of Buddha-Dhamma contains three parts. First of all is
Pariyatti, which is the theoretical concept. Second is Pattipatti, which is how to apply the theory. The last one is
Pattivedha, proven results through evaluation that confirms the theory (Phra Brahmagunaphorn 2005: 105). The
knowledge that can be trusted is the one originated from a theory or a conceptual framework . After then, such
concept must be put into actual practice. Finally, the result of the practice must be evaluated and shown that it confirms or at least it is consistent with
the said theory. Buddha-Dhamma is different from a mechanistic science, which studies matter and energy. Buddha-Dhamma is a mind-
based science that goes beyond these. Mechanistic science deals with typical behaviour while Buddha-Dhamma deals with atypical
behaviour. In this mind-based science, the "truth" can vary according to different levels of mind development. This concept can never be understood by
physics because it is based on a different plane of reality, and physics does not recognise the existence of the "mind"; they only understand matter and
energy. Although mind is also a form of energy, it can be developed to reach different levels of understanding. This is why the "truth" can vary based
on different levels of mind development. The scientific part of this mind-based science is that persons with the same level of mental development will
perceive the same "truth". There- fore it is not merely an individual perception. Also there are many known and proven methods of
mind development and sikkhttaya is the method suggested by the Buddha himself. It has been proven to work for everyone, so far (Puntasen -
Prayukvong 2007). This "truth" could be "absolute truth" if the mind has been developed to the highest level.
But at different levels, the truth can vary from one person to another. The development of the mind requires the condition of a cleanness or a purity of
the mind generated by sila, a calm mind generated by samdhi and a clear mind generated by paa. Most of the time human minds are
controlled by different degrees of defilements caused by anger, greed and delusion. At the highest level
of development of the mind, paa, a person will understand clearly that peace and tranquility or
sukha is the opposite of pain or dukkha.
AT: Suffering Bad

We agree mediation prevents suffering
Ash 11 Lecturer in Economics @ U of Reading
(Colin, Ethical Principles and Economic Transformation A Buddhist Approach, p. 123)//BB
The purpose of the Buddhist agenda can be summed up in two words: stop suffering . To the extent that
suffering, in the sense of unsatisfactory conscious experience, is internal and conditioned, meditation is central to Buddhist
practice: the aim is to train the mind so that ultimately the process of dependent origination ceases . Mindfulness
meditation is a noticing practice, being the knowing rather than automatically identifying with moods, feelings, etc. Simple techniques are
used to calm the mind and sharpen the awareness or attention. The various components of dependent
origination can then be observed more objectively, in detail, and with increasing refinement . Just
observing sensory contact, feelings, desire and aversion, attachment and framing, and obsessions as they
arise and pass away reduces their continuity and connectedness. Gradually mindfulness practitioners are
able to come off autopilot , letting go, for example, of ingrained comparisons between perceptions
of their present situation with memories of the past and expectations and goals for the future.
Mindfulness enables the exercise of the neuroscientists free wont . By becoming aware of a
formerly subconscious mental trigger, it is possible to forgo what otherwise would have been the
automatic, conscious response. A more even balance can then be sustained between the far-sighted Plannerand the myopic Doer; between,
to repeat the words of Thaler and Sunstein (2009, 45), long-term welfare . . . and the temptations that come with arousal.
AT: Growth Good

Growth doesnt solve the rich poor gap
The economic Objective of Sarvodaya, if it can be said so, is a No-Poverty Society. Sarvodaya rejects the
goal of Affluence for All for very practical reasons. Affluence cannot be achieved by all. It cannot be
reached easily without using wrong means. A country or the world simply does not have resources to
provide affluence for all. Social, environmental, moral, and cultural costs of trying to build an affluent
society are very heavy. It generally increases the already existing gap between the poor and the rich. An
affluent person or society is not necessarily happier than a non-poor person or society. The best way to
measure the progress of a community is to find out at what level the poorest people live. If they can be in a state of
no-poverty that can be our starting point for so-called development.
Western economic growth is driven by non-Buddhist means


In Buddhist texts and related literature numerous instances can be found pertaining to making wealth in the right way. Then, what are the wrong
ways of earning money? They are by taking away life, by thieving, by deception, by producing and selling
intoxicating substances and drugs, poisons and weapons that destroy human and animal life and property
and trading in slaves. In Buddhist economics this kind of economic activity is totally unacceptable.
Imagine what will happen to our national and world economic statistics that measure standards of living
of people by growth rates, per capita incomes, and GDPs etc. if only our governments follow Buddhist
Economic Principles!
Globalization doesnt solve

Buddhist Economics, Schumacher Lectures on Buddhist Economics, pg. 16-17)//DH
The latest slogan some use nowadays is globalization promising it as the panacea for all of the worlds ills .
It is true that the horizons of the world are contracting physically as a result of advancement of transport of and communication systems and expansion of
free movement of goods and services in a worldwide market. However this same development will widen the material gap
between the poor and the powerless and the rich and the powerful unless the spiritual emptiness that
generally exists in the latter is filled with beneficence, love and selflessness. Bringing home this truth is next
to impossible with the rich and powerful with a movement like Sarvodaya however much we try. Yet the
poor and the powerless are numerically more and are within the reach of Sarvodaya. So our endeavors
must necessarily and primarily be with the poor and the powerless people to gather the needed
momentum for a global application, which includes all. Our task is the more difficult because unlike the
free-market economy or political alignments like the European Community, ASEAN or SAARC, our mandate is not from
human-made political and economic arrangements, but is derived from our innermost spiritual aspirations and moral values
and a vision we share to bring happiness about for all transcending caste, class, color, creed, race,
religious, political, national and other barriers. One may call this very idealistic and that is right, though
partly, yet we are also very practical as one can see from the track record of what we have achieved. Long
before the present form of globalization, with its promises of material prosperity and its sustainability, was given expression to and was accepted by the
elite, and projected to the poor as the newest and surest way to solve their problems, the common people of the villages in our country for over two
millennia had accepted the thought of vision of eradicating the physical and mental suffering and fear from all sentient beings. They were promoters of a
global consciousness of oneness of mankind. The exact words of two Pali stanzas they recite in their daily religious observances to this day are as follows:
1. May there be seasonal rains (Devo vassuta kalena) May there be agricultural prosperity (Sassa sampathi hotuca) May the entire living world be happy
(Pito bhavatu lokoca) May the rulers be righteous (Raja bhavatu dhammika) 2. May those who suffer physically overcome their suffering. May those who
are in fear overcome their fear May those who suffer mentally overcome their pain May all Living things be well and happy. Dukkhappattaca niddhukka;
Bhayappattaca nibbaya; Sokappattaca nissoka;Honthu sabbepi panino. (Pali)
***This evidence edited for gendered language
AT: Greed/Growth Inevitable Genetics

New neuro and behavioral science disproves
Tideman 11 - founder and managing partner of Global Leaders Academy in the Netherlands
and a Senior Fellow of the Garrison Institute in New York
(Sander, Joel, Ethical Principles and Economic Transformation A Buddhist Approach, p.
144)//BB
The new neuro and behavioral science is revelatory because it provides empirical evidence
derived from a biological basis for the notion that human nature is not driven by greed and egoism alone;
at least equally important are principles of fairness, cooperation and altruism. Since neoclassical
economics consider itself to be a science concerned with hard data, the fact that there is hard biological
basis for these principles helps to uproot the long held yet untested assumptions of classical
economics on selfishness and rationality (Beinhocker 2006; Gowdy 2008). The wiring of the human brain
indicates that motives of fairness and degrees of altruism are more natural to the human mind than
selfishness and individuality. Most significantly, neuro- and behavioral economics have established that the so
called rational self-regarding actor model needs to be replaced by a framework that accounts for our
irrational, emotional and pro-social behaviors (Gintis 2000; Beinhocker 2006; Gowdy 2008).
19th century disproves

If consumerism did in fact stem from a natural instinct of the human species, it was not evident among most
Americans in the 19th century. One of the problems facing capitalism throughout the 19th century was
chronic overproduction . Businesses were producing goods for the market, but people tended to be
frugal, self-sufficient, and were reluctant to spend their earnings on more and more consumer goods.
More often than not, people tended to follow the ethic expressed in Christian Proverbs : He that tilleth his land
shall have plenty of bread: but he that followeth after vain persons shall have poverty enough . . . Remove far from me van- ity and lies: give me neither
poverty nor riches; feed me with food convenient for me (Holy Bible, Proverbs 28:19, 30:8). For many Americans at that time, conspicuous
consumption consuming and buying for social status was unseemly. By the turn of the 20th century, businesses began searching for new
ways to get people to spend more of their earnings on consumer goods. In order to sell goods in volume, businesses began deploying
revolutionary methods designed to entice people into consumer indulgences that were previously
considered frivolous or unnecessary. According to cultural historian and author, William Leach, the early 20th century was what he
described as The Dawn of a Commercial Empire (Leach 1993, 15) Leach writes: After 1880, American commercial capitalism, in the interest of
marketing goods and making money, started down the road of creating . . . a set of symbols, signs and enticements . . . From the 1880s onward, a
commercial aesthetic of desire and longing took shape to meet the needs of business. And since that need was constantly growing and seeking expression
in wider and wider markets, the aesthetic of longing and desire was everywhere and took many forms . . . this aesthetic appeared in shop windows,
electrical signs, fashion shows, advertisements, and billboards (ibid., 9).
Consumption is not inevitable

Jackson 5 Professor of Environmental Strategy @ Surrey
(Tom, Live Better by Consuming Less?, Journal of Industrial Ecology, Volume 9, Number 12,
Scholar)//BB
On the other hand, it seems to me that the symbolic interactionist approach does offer some particularly promising insights for sustainable consumption. At
the very least, the social anthropology and philosophy of consumer behavior does not preclude the possibility of
negotiating or renegotiating
the conditions and the means under which marking services, for example, are
exchanged. Moreover, the insight that a certain amount of consumer behavior is dedicated to an (ultimately
awed) pursuit of meaning opens up the tantalizing possibility of devising some other, more successful
and less ecological damaging strategy for pursing personal and cultural meaning . This is not, in any sense, a simple
task, nor one that can easily be pursued by any given individual or set of individuals. On the contrary, it is a fundamentally social and
cultural project, which will require sophisticated policy interventions at many different levels (Jackson and Michaelis 2003; Jackson 2005).
Nonetheless, it remains a very real possibility that we could collectively devise a society in which it is
possible to live better (or at least as well as we have done) by consuming less, and become more human in the process.
AT: Separation of Church and State

The alternative is more usefully thought of as an ethical philosophy,
not theistic dogmatism
(Peter, Ethical Principles and Economic Transformation A Buddhist Approach, p. 37)//BB
The analysis is not presented as dogmatic or inflexible discourse but, in line with the open and tolerant nature of Buddhist thought is simply intended to
contribute to the much-needed innovation and efforts for creating new more adaptive socio-cultural visions for the future. Here, the contribution is based
on the fusion of Eastern and Western knowledge and wisdom. Buddhism is often considered more a psychology or philosophy an
ethical system circumscribing a view and way of life rather
than a religion in the conventional sense (Banjaree 1978; Nelson

proposition is typically based on Buddhisms appeal to reasoning and a logical, if somewhat
metaphysical, explanation of the nature of reality. These explanations form the foundation for universal
principles that provide quite comprehensive guide- lines for everyday behavior and can be
empirically tested by the adherent. Hence, Buddhism facilitates thought and learning rather than
2004). This
the unquestioning acceptance of dogmatic rules from a supreme theistic authority .
AT: Meditation Bad

Western psychoanalysts concede that meditation is liberating even
though it doesnt wholly shatter the ego, it helps humans to break free
from selfishness and the ontological self
Dialogue between Western psychoanalysts and Buddhists is now shedding light on
how the insight meditation can be liberating, rather than destabilizing and
pathological (Bobrow, 2003; Brazier, 1995; Claxton, 1986; Rubin, 1998; Safran, 2003; Suler,
1993; Unno, 2006). Until recently, Western psychotherapy and psychoanalysis,
particularly Kohuts (1971) school of Self Psychology and its offshoots, did not question
the ontological status of the self. Buddhism is often misinterpreted as being nihilistic,
equating its project to the loss of personhood or the denigration of psychological functions
(Aaronson, 2004; Bobrow, 2009). Unfortunately, many New Age spiritual movements,
influenced by Eastern traditions, often resort to such exhortations that a person has to get rid
of, or lose, their ego. Mental functions, discernment, healthy ego functioning are
preserved, or even enhanced as a result of Buddhist practice. What is lost is the
erroneous conception of an inherently existing ontological self. Indeed, Buddhist
practice does not resort to repression, denial or fantasy. In other words, the object of negation
in Buddhist meditation is not the psychological self, but the illusory nature, and seemingly real
sense of a metaphysical-ontological self (Finn, 1992). The psychological self does not
disappear with a realization of selflessness; a person still uses the word I, still
has a name and a unique historical identitybut the person is no longer fixed or
overinvested in self-images, habitual reactions, or a sense of metaphysical
substantiality (Aaronson, 2004). As Fenner (2009:63) points out, there is nothing
problematic in having a unique identity, so long we realize that there is no one whos having
an identity.
Neuroscience proves that meditation directly correlates with more

extraordinary moments of insight or enlightened awareness
Seeing the emptiness of self-nature, or shunyata, is the fruition of the Buddhist
path. Often referred to as the unborn, uncreated, or unconditioned, this act of
seeing is embodied in lived experience and wholeheartedly expressed in daily
affairs. When expressed as lived experience, it could be characterized as acting
unselfconsciously, or being unmanaged, in the sense that thinking, feeling, perceiving and
acting can all happen without an agent or self that needs to defend and maintain its position
as the doer (Finngarette, 1958). This amounts to a radical dissolution of an internal manager
or controller in terms of how the mind operates. Engler (2003:64) points out that such a
mode of being is actually conducive to everything happening much more
efficiently and without anxiety and conflict, freed of the burden of selfcenteredness and egocentricity. Buddhist awakening is a direct seeing into the
emptiness of self-nature and the ultimate futility of the identity-building enterprise.

Through dedicated meditative practice, what emerges is a nondual awareness that draws
upon allocentric attentive processing (rather than egocentric) which is at home in
groundlessness (Austin, 2011). Drawing from the emerging field of contemplative
neuroscience, Austin (2011:19) has shown how more receptive forms of meditation--such
as Zen--activate underused neural pathways in the brain which he characterizes as
bottom-up or allocentric attentive processing. Allocentric is derived from the Greek
allo, meaning other (Austin, 2011:25). Allocentric pathways of attention bypass our
typical self-referential, autobiographical, egocentric self which are associated with
the more extraordinary moments of insight or enlightened awareness. This form of
other-referential vision presents a more objective version of reality, which cancels our usual
sense of self, thereby reducing maladaptive egocentricities (Austin, 2011:37).
Only the alternative allows us to embrace the lack, or no-self, which

solves for ontological security
Drawing upon the work of Jacques Lacan (1977a; 1977b; 1988a; 1988b), a French
psychoanalyst, Driver (2009a:59) has theorized organizational identity is constructed
from an imaginary order. In this section, I will build upon much of Drivers Lacanian
(2005; 2009a; 2009b) theorizing which argues that organizational identity discourse is a
conscious attempt to compensate for an unconscious lack. According to Driver
(2009a:57), in the end, there is only lack and the ever-present nothingness of work,
organization, and self. The function of imaginary constructions of organizational identity is to
assuage a collective sense of ontological insecurity (Driver, 2009a:64). Drivers conclusion is
based on the premise that Lacanian analysis offers no cure or salvation from the quagmire of
lack. Like Lacanian psychoanalysis (Homer, 2004), the Buddhist perspective also illuminates
how the self struggles with a sense of lack (Lacans jouissance and Buddhisms samsara often
translated as the wheel of suffering or a wheel off kilter). However, for Buddhism, the
struggle with lack is rooted in a fundamental ontological insecurity: the compulsive
and unconscious desire to be real. Because all organizational identity discourse is
in essence a collective desire to become real, it also constitutes an ongoing
egocentricity, amounting to a quest for symbolic immortality through a continuous
pressure for expansion and growth, an obsession with the future, and maintenance
of institutionalized defense mechanisms (Carr and Lapp, 2006; Low 2008; Sievers, 1994).
Buddhism departs from Drivers Lacanian interpretation of lack as being a futile and endless
struggle (as well as a stopping point for inquiry). To understand this in more depth, I turn to
the major theoretical works of Buddhist scholar and Zen teacher, David Loy (Loy 1998, 2000,
2002, 2003, 2008). Loy postulates that lack is symptomatic of a primary repression: a
fear of no-self. This is an existential human fear-- that deep down our self -- the
core of who we are is not real, but groundless (Loy, 2000). However, our usual sense of
self is just the oppositewe attempt to live and function as if the self were real. The
perception of a self as being independently real and permanent can only occur if it is based on
separation. The usual sense of self is egocentric: I am me, and I exist here separate from
you over there.

Buddhism K 1 Michigan7 2013

Cargado por

Información del documento

Título original

Derechos de autor

Formatos disponibles

Compartir este documento

Compartir o incrustar documentos

Opciones para compartir

¿Le pareció útil este documento?

¿Este contenido es inapropiado?

Copyright:

Formatos disponibles

Buddhism K 1 Michigan7 2013

Cargado por

Copyright:

Formatos disponibles

Buddhism K BFJR 7wk

The alternative is to reject the 1acs call to act in favor of mindful

the sense of self is a mental construct, it is by definition ungrounded and

Link Modern Economics

economic system is radically impersonal and non-relational . It is claimed that

Wanting less is a necessary corrective to western economics

The affirmatives faith in market economics is inherently marginalizing

SUSTAINABILITY AND SUFFICIENCY: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN A BUDDHIST PERSPECTIVE

Economics drives environmental destruction and social injustice

Modern economics ignores ethical and social externalities for

The AFF makes assumptions based on economic theories which are

economic worldview? Deterministic

this new reality

logic is no longer sufficient. New ways of measuring are required to embrace

place to begin. I think, Is to reflect personally

The affirmative is problem-solution oriented this means they will never

cause. ,omtrng differences within shared find deepening To Ignore

our differences now is to fail resolving current

is a strong tendency for people to attempt to assuage this insecurity by accumulating

need to develop the capacity to

sway of the technological-economic-scientific order may be nuclear technocrats who, in

Link More Goods / Growth

Link Human Rights

'facts' are theory-laden, and un- critically assuming

2NC link ext and alt solves

Indeed, as mentioned in the introduction, while

Link Economic Rationality

Link Non-renewable Resources

Buddhists there is an essential

Demand and supply economics of fossil fuels are a system of

Transition to green energy creates just as much destruction.

University of Nottingham, UK, December 22, 2010, The ConsumerismDevelopmentSecurity

Buddhist economics can correct the externalities of modern economics

These trends are promising.

In particular (and in accordance with neoclassical economics),

Anxiety and fear preclude inner peace

say you want peace and

you do act, act with wisdom and without selfishness, hatred or

Realizing nonduality will prevent extinction.

Only by confronting our self away from outside solutions can we

In other words, part of the

Impact Nuclear War

Impact Value to Life

Our economic market cultivates more desire for materialistic values

Buddhist economics create a shift away from traditional economic

Impact Root Cause

Mindfulness overcomes all suffering

Solves the root cause of war

Mahachulalongkornrajvidyalya University, Chairman at ICDV & IABU, Rector at MCU, Buddhist

Impact Resource Wars

scarcity , environmental pressure and cultural conflict .

Impact Structural Violence

free ourselves from the systemic , structural

violence that mainstream economics is bringing about.

Impact Social Justice

(Juliana, Ethical Principles and Economic Transformation A Buddhist Approach, p. 61)//BB

Impact Environmental Sustainability

world is facing unprecedented environmental instability from the scale of human

Buddhist economics solves the internal link to environmental

Ecological overshoot leads to extinction

most foundational environmentalist of the 20th century

demand is overshooting supply . Meanwhile,

of its natural supports. Nor will ours.