Bibliographic record
Abstract
Buddhism as a spiritual discipline is concerned with freedom from suffering, conceptualizing suffering as originating in false views about the nature of self and reality. Buddhist psychology conceptualizes emotions and mental habits as being wholesome or unwholesome based on the tendency of these habits to promote or hinder the quest for enlightenment, and contains a rich diversity of methods to transform unwholesome emotional tendencies. Many of these emotions, such as anger, fear, and despair, are commonly dealt with in clinical or therapy settings. Buddhist ideas about the genesis and cessation of suffering can be used as an overarching model to organize a diversity of therapeutic techniques, bridge different therapy models, and select particular techniques at particular times in the treatment of emotional disorders. Learning objectives: after this session, participants will be able to use the Buddhist Yogacara model of mind and karma as a model of how negative emotions are transformed. After this session, participants will be able to describe indirect methods (evoking wholesome feelings) in order to transform negative emotional tendencies and how this overlaps with current therapy models such as supportive and compassion-focused therapy. After the session, participants will be able to conceptualize how Buddhist “direct methods” of mindful awareness and contemplating right view overlaps with methods used in cognitive behavioural therapy, marital therapy, or acceptance and commitment therapy. Self-assessment questions: according to Buddhist psychology, what is the primary cause of negative emotions? Broadly speaking, what are 3 types of techniques for transforming emotional habits? Disclosure of interest The author has not supplied his/her declaration of competing interest.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".