Mindfulness and Ethics

  There is some debate in Buddhist psychology circles whether or not 'mindfulness' as it is described in Buddhism has been co-opted to serve technical rationalism. I read an article by Steven Stanley (2013) which suggests that even the original context of mindfulness in Buddhism has been stripped of its ethical connotations. How has this been done? Stanley argues in several ways. For one, the modern concept of mindfulness tends to stress a context-free emphasis on the eternal "now" at the expense of that which is remembered and learned from the past (p.154). Second, it appears that there is no longer any sense of how mindfulness might involve conceptual-based insights into how things interconnect and harmonize. Instead, modern ideas of mindfulness might stress a kind of 'concept-free' bare attention, without fully appreciating the need for concepts to evaluate or discern the right and wrongs of situations (p.156). Finally, mindfulness has been said to be co-opted into a 'computer' metaphor now popular in cognitive science, which tends to reduce the mind to a flow-chart that can be mapped and programmed. In this latter instance, the seeming 'neutrality' of the computer model trumps any efforts at ethical communication or interaction. Perhaps the reason for this that the more we see ourselves as 'mechanisms' that are somehow determined by different factors, the less likely we might treat each other humanely.
   My own take on this issue is rather complex. While I agree that some kinds of mindfulness might de-emphasize the ethical aspects of relating to the world, I tend to feel that mindfulness practices can also naturally soften the mind and lead to a greater possibility of smooth communications between different peoples and stakeholders. I agree with a certain aspect of Stanley's argument, namely that this kind of attention requires conceptual scaffolding, and there needs to be specific areas where mindfulness is more stressed. But I am hesitant to say that there are absolutes when it comes to making ethical decisions from a Buddhist perspective. While Buddhism has precepts for ethical behavior, these precepts are not intended to be hard concepts that are used to determine a final result or action. To the contrary, precepts make situations more ethically complex, because they are not easy to apply. When we look at the precept of non-killing, for instance, we can reflect on how far or to what extent we should avoid harming others, even those who live in distant countries that have no seeming relation to ourselves. But there is no rule here which explains how to avoid harming beings. That is up to the person, and it would seem that properly observing this precept requires an open and inquiring state of mind. Could it be that what's missing in the discourses of mindfulness is the notion of ethical 'inquiry' rather than obeying ethical 'rules'?

Stanley, Steven (2013). ‘Things said or done long ago are recalled and remembered’: The ethics of mindfulness in early Buddhism, psychotherapy and clinical psychology European Journal of Psychotherapy and Counselling 15(2). 161-162