Kurzban sees less value in the concept of a self than do most Buddhists.
Given that he brings it up in order to criticize it, and feels that the concept is misleading enough to spend significant time dissecting, it feels like he actually has exactly the same notion of its value (and largely the same goal for discussing it) as most Buddhists do. Both think the folk notion of the self is incoherent and does a lot of harm, and want to show that to people.
Along the way, Kurzban makes fun of the literature on self-esteem, and of models that say self-control is a function of resources.
Worth noting that as I recall, Kurzban called the resource models of self-esteem as being nonsense somewhat before they started getting empirically disproven.
I made the comparison in part to point out the similarities, and I guess I should have been clearer about that.
My understanding of Buddhism is fairly shallow. I think I checked this Wikipedia page, which says there’s some disagreement. But now that I reread it, it does suggest that many Buddhists agree with Kurzban.
Given that he brings it up in order to criticize it, and feels that the concept is misleading enough to spend significant time dissecting, it feels like he actually has exactly the same notion of its value (and largely the same goal for discussing it) as most Buddhists do. Both think the folk notion of the self is incoherent and does a lot of harm, and want to show that to people.
Worth noting that as I recall, Kurzban called the resource models of self-esteem as being nonsense somewhat before they started getting empirically disproven.
I made the comparison in part to point out the similarities, and I guess I should have been clearer about that.
My understanding of Buddhism is fairly shallow. I think I checked this Wikipedia page, which says there’s some disagreement. But now that I reread it, it does suggest that many Buddhists agree with Kurzban.
Yes, it was published in 2010.