jeeprs wrote:shel wrote:Of course. I will assume that you believe Fromm and D. T. Suzuki converge sensibly without the notion of many lives (and beliefs of similar nature) also, without an explanation as to how they converge. Again Fromm was apparently a scientist and not more concerned with meaning/mysticism/religion in his work, so wherever they converged it would seemingly not have been through mysticism or faith based notions. You probably don't regard "many lives" as a faith based notion and if that's the case I'd be happy to hear you make sense of the idea in a way that converges with Fromm's work.
I don't think of Fromm as a scientist. He never published any scientific papers, although I suppose in his day, psychoanalysis was regarded as, or was trying to be regarded as, a scientific discipline. But as to his background:Wikipedia wrote:Central to Fromm's world view was his interpretation of the Talmud, which he began studying as a young man under Rabbi J. Horowitz and later studied under Rabbi Salman Baruch Rabinkow while working towards his doctorate in sociology at the University of Heidelberg and under Nehemia Nobel and Ludwig Krause while studying in Frankfurt. Fromm's grandfather and two great grandfathers on his father's side were rabbis, and a great uncle on his mother's side was a noted Talmudic scholar. However, Fromm turned away from orthodox Judaism in 1926, towards secular interpretations of scriptural ideals.
The cornerstone of Fromm's humanistic philosophy is his interpretation of the biblical story of Adam and Eve's exile from the Garden of Eden. Drawing on his knowledge of the Talmud, Fromm pointed out that being able to distinguish between good and evil is generally considered to be a virtue, and that biblical scholars generally consider Adam and Eve to have sinned by disobeying God and eating from the Tree of Knowledge. However, departing from traditional religious orthodoxy, Fromm extolled the virtues of humans taking independent action and using reason to establish moral values rather than adhering to authoritarian moral values.
So, very much in the tradition of secular humanism, but based more in hermeneutics - the re-interpretation of traditional texts - than science per se. His whole notion of 'freedom' was founded on a re-interpretation of the meaning of 'the fall' in relation to the human condition.
I'm not sure what it means to deny that someone with a PhD in sociology and trained in psychoanalysis was a scientist. It's like saying that someone with an art degree is not an artist, which could well be the case, at least subjectively speaking. I guess you have some reason to believe that Fromm was a lousy scientist, so there is no point in talking about him any further in that framework.
Fromm extolled the virtues of humans taking independent action and using reason to establish moral values rather than adhering to authoritarian moral values.
Perhaps you could explain how this is convergent with Zen Buddhism or D. T. Suzuki's writings.