The dialogue is based on two individuals with two different sets of beliefs. One individual is an atheist believes that in order for one to be a moral, ethical person, one must not be a religious person. Mark is more in tuned with his beliefs on buddhism, and reaching a state of enlightenment of perfect knowledge combined with infinite compassion. Both parties are having strong beliefs, and throughout the dialogue they take in insight on both sides.
Buddhism is pretty fascinating I decided on this topic based on the fact that it troubles me the most. Buddhism seemed like a detachment from life in the disconnection from suffering it provides in my opinion. In that case I choose this issue because I wanted to highlight spirituality, and the difference in everyone’s path in life. The different aspects of life individuals have in terms of for example identifying as atheist or buddhist. It is important to respect everyone’s beliefs, and it is highly important to broaden your horizons on insights of others beliefs. The dialogue should impact individuals who are set stubbornly to their own beliefs. Individuals who question their own spirituality, buddhists, and atheists.
In the beginning of the dialogue Mark touches on the principle of questioning which is very prominent in buddhism. The whole point Mark is trying to appeal Buddhism to Sarah stating that it can appeal to the modern, western idea of questioning social aspects. The concept of “kalpa” which is the universe cycle and its suppose to look like oscillations of the universe, and the Buddhist principle of constantly questioning belief. It’s the idea of questioning, and really just being open minded to different aspects of formation, destruction and existence of life. Sarah then mentions her Ideas on moral conduct, and restrictions that are present in buddhism despite these principles Mark states. In every religion there appears to be moral restriction, and she makes that clear. Her stance is really that she values her freedom, and believes her moral restrictions should not be a moral obligation to a certain philosophy or religion. Marks major theme is morality in terms to his response, and the major themes that go hand in hand which include enlightenment for buddhists. Sarah in contrasts brings out other themes in contrast to the idea of not having spiritual quest of for example to reach enlightenment. She touches on mental issues, and drugs how these variables can highly impact an individual’s path. She talks more in terms of what we cannot control when we deal with inevitable problems and pain. Mark touches on Buddhism fulfilling our life in way where our ego would not anymore. She touches on how she agrees that many aspects of the detachment would be beneficial those that are egocentric. Sarah states in a respectful manner her views, and then continues to thank Mark for the provided insight on his view of Buddhism.
I wanted to bold the names of the the speakers to make it very apparent and clear. I decided to just provide a snippet of the conversation where their main points are given on the topic. I wanted to make the dialogue as clear and specific as possible, and that was the best stylistic choice that gave that impression. The dialogue covers an important theme in philosophy over expanding knowledge, and questioning what is known to us. Sarah seems to question everything Mark provides her in insight of Buddhism. In general to raise questions about our reality and what other variables can also play a role. It is important, and a reminder of the remaining question that are what further provides more insight and knowledge.
