Science, Nietzsche and the blind men of Savatthi

The Tittha Sutta (PTS, Udana 66) provides a fine example of what Nietzsche meant when he said it is possible to conceive of a reality that can be resolved into a plurality of fictions relative to multiple standpoints. This is from a section of the Sutta. The translation is done by Thanissaro Bhikkhu (it is on the Internet).

"Once, in this same Savatthi, there was a certain king who said to a certain man, 'Gather together all the people in Savatthi who have been blind from birth.'"

"'As you say, your majesty,' the man replied and, rounding up all the people in Savatthi who had been blind from birth, he went to the king and on arrival said, 'Your majesty, the people in Savatthi who have been blind from birth have been gathered together.'

"'Very well then, show the blind people an elephant.'

"'As you say, your majesty,' the man replied and he showed the blind people an elephant. To some of the blind people he showed the head of the elephant, saying, 'This, blind people, is what an elephant is like.' To some of them he showed an ear of the elephant, saying, 'This, blind people, is what an elephant is like.' To some of them he showed a tusk... the trunk... the body... a foot... the hindquarters... the tail... the tuft at the end of the tail, saying, 'This, blind people, is what an elephant is like.'

"Then, having shown the blind people the elephant, the man went to the king and on arrival said, 'Your majesty, the blind people have seen the elephant. May your majesty do what you think it is now time to do.'

"Then the king went to the blind people and on arrival asked them, 'Blind people, have you seen the elephant?'

"'Yes, your majesty. We have seen the elephant.'

"'Now tell me, blind people, what the elephant is like.'

"The blind people who had been shown the head of! the ele phant replied, 'The elephant, your majesty, is just like a water jar.'

"Those who had been shown the ear of the elephant replied, 'The elephant, your majesty, is just like a winnowing basket.'

"Those who had been shown the tusk of the elephant replied, 'The elephant, your majesty, is just like an iron rod.'

"Those who had been shown the trunk of the elephant replied, 'The elephant, your majesty, is just like the pole of a plow.'

"Those who had been shown the body of the elephant replied, 'The elephant, your majesty, is just like a granary.'

"Those who had been shown the foot of the elephant replied, 'The elephant, your majesty, is just like a post.'

"Those who had been shown the hindquarters of the elephant replied, 'The elephant, your majesty, is just like a mortar.'

"Those who had been shown the tail of the elephant replied, 'The elephant, your majesty, is just like a pestle.'

"Those who had been shown the tuft at the end of the tail of the elephant replied, 'The elephant, your majesty, is just like a broom.'

"Saying, 'The elephant is like this, it's not like that. The elephant's not like that, it's like this,' they struck one another with their fists. That gratified the king.

"In the same way, monks, the wanderers of other sects are blind and eyeless. They don't know what is beneficial and what is harmful. They don't know what is the Dhamma and what is non-Dhamma. Not knowing what is beneficial and what is harmful, not knowing what is Dhamma and what is non-Dhamma, they live arguing, quarreling, and disputing, wounding one another with weapons of the mouth, saying, 'The Dhamma is like this, it's not like that. The Dhamma's not like that, it's like this.'"

This story is not so amusing when we see it illustrating the problem with Western science as it lo! oks towa rds the really, real, or ultimate reality (paramarthasatya). It is as blind as the blind men in the Sutta, although some of the more doctrinaire friars of science might disagree. More fundamental to the problem is that science cannot discern where illusion ends and true reality begins (or maybe I should say, where the scaffolding ends and true reality begins).

Yes scienceI admithas provided us with many useful fictions, but we must keep in mind that it is not in possession of the really, real. In the dim, lamp light of science, our human world remains nothing more than a fictional construct which in the end signifies nothing if we have not, in this lifetime, passed beyond all fictions.

Not caring to pass beyond all fictions somewhat describes the ethos of the modern world where science proudly stands as the new Holy See. Strangely, this ethos is not unlike Nietzsches view of life when he says,

My philosophy is inverted Platonism: the further a thing is from true being, the purer, the lovelier, the better it is. Living in illusion as the goal (from an early sketch for The Birth of Tragedy).

Whether or not we care to admit it, without Buddhism/Platonism, we have doomed ourselves to madness. While the blind men in the Sutta suffer from an affliction they had no power over, we willingly suffer from an affliction we find too much pleasure in, creating supreme illusions.