Here's an interesting article about how someone did not find solace in Buddhism. Feel free to express your opinion in a reply. slate.com/culture/2003/02/why-…
I personally think that there are some common misconceptions that might have influenced the author's views, e.g. the way he understands the definition of attachment, enlightenment, views on reality, but it's always so interesting to see differing opinions.
Why I ditched Buddhism.
For a 2,500-year-old religion, Buddhism seems remarkably compatible with our scientifically oriented culture, which may explain its surging popularity...John Horgan (Slate)
Winter blue tardis reshared this.

@
Winter blue tardis
in reply to Erion • • •Winter blue tardis
in reply to Winter blue tardis • • •Erion
in reply to Winter blue tardis • • •Winter blue tardis
in reply to Erion • • •Day Garwood
in reply to Erion • • •Erion
in reply to Day Garwood • • •I just had the same thought, didn't want to influence anyone's reading though.
I think he is looking for something that science can prove to be right, the same way it proved that humans technically have two brains which the Chinese knew for thousands of years through martial arts, the Tao, etc. Also categorising Buddhism as a religion while it's really not.