Psychology & Buddhism.pdf

222 Kathleen H. Dockett and Doris North-Schulte
impermanence of life and the concept of non-self, non-attachment,
eternity of life based on the law of cause and effect over many lifetimes.
Failure to understand these fundamental identities and relationships along
with the resulting delusional attachment to difference is the source of the current
crisis of identity and the ethnic conflict of today, from a Buddhist perspective.
Consequently, Buddhist solutions to the crisis of identity call for embracing
broader concepts of:
self-identity, as one with the universe.
social identity, as mutually interdependent with others.
universal identity, as a global citizen with the wisdom, courage, and
compassion to foster relationships of harmony and peace.
The concept of using broader boundaries of identity is consistent with the
social psychology strategy of altering the social categories we use through the
re-categorization model. Based on social identity theory (Tajfel & Fraser, 1978)
and self-categorization theory (cf., Turner et al., 1987), we understand that social
categorization can cause intergroup discrimination (Tajfel & Fraser, 1978; Tajfel
& Turner, 1979 as cited in Hewstone & Cairns, 2001). Consequently, interventions
have been focused on three strategies for change: (1) eliminating categorization
(de-categorization), (2) altering which categorizations are used (re-categorization),
and (3) crossed categorization (Wilder as cited in Hewstone & Cairns, 2001, p.
331). In the re-categorization approach according to Hewstone and Cairns (2001), by
transforming group member’s perceptions of boundaries from “us” and “them” to
“we,” a “common-in-group identity” may be established that according to Gaertner,
Dovidio, Anastasio, Bachman, and Rust (as cited in Hewstone & Cairns, 2001) can
result in reduced intergroup bias (in-group favoritism). The “common-in-group identity”
model resolves in-group versus out-group conflict by changing group boundaries
and creating a superordinate identity. Re-categorization of self and other into a
common-in-group identity “should reduce bias by increasing the attractiveness of
former out-group members once they are included within a superordinate group
structure” (Hewstone & Cairns, 2001, p. 333).
How one goes about achieving this re-categorization is the focus of this
chapter. We discuss four Mahayana Buddhist principles of integration that provide
an alternative understanding of who we are, and our relationship with ourselves
and other life in the universe (Dockett, 1997, 1999a, 2000; Ikeda, 1993;
Martin, 1995). These are the integrating principles that offer a possible solution
for the prevention of ethnic conflict.
Mahayana Buddhist Principles of Integration
This chapter contends that a strong case can be made for integrating
Buddhist psychology into Western psychological approaches to understanding