Loading...
Please wait

Overview: In this episode, Vince Horn and Daniel Thorson explore the evolving landscape of Western Buddhism, unpacking the tensions between Consensus Buddhism and Pragmatic Dharma, while reflecting on ethics, teacherly authority, and the possibilities for a more integrated future.Vince Horn: I'm here with Daniel Thorson, hanging out in your office-slash-bedroom. You've been in the Asheville area for what—a year now?
Daniel Thorson: Almost two years, actually.
Vince: Whoa, really? That’s wild! And this is our first time recording together since you moved here. Doing it in person feels weird—so hyper-intimate.
Daniel: Yeah. It’s a whole 3D—or maybe even 4D—experience.
Vince: More D than that if you include yourself.Daniel: Totally.Vince: So, I suggested we record because, well, we were going to hang out anyway, and you’ve been writing a really interesting series on your Substack, The Intimate Mirror.
Daniel: Yeah, that’s the one. Initially, I was exploring AI as a kind of mirror—how to use and work with it. But I’ve taken a side journey into critiquing Western Buddhism. I’m planning to do some reconstructive work too, eventually.
Vince: Especially the American convert Buddhist scenes we’ve been part of, right? Like, the Buddhist Geeks orbit, Insight Meditation world, maybe even broader—Consensus Buddhism, as David Chapman calls it.
Daniel: Exactly. My focus is mostly on modern Western Buddhist culture. That includes Insight Meditation, but also Westernized Zen, and even American Vajrayana. It's like a meta-sangha of Buddhist Modernism.
Vince: Right. Like the teachers who went to hang out with the Dalai Lama in the 90s and asked, "How can we make Buddhism more friendly to the West?" And now there’s this whole ecosystem.
Daniel: Definitely. And I want to be clear: I'm not critiquing individual teachers. It's more about the communities and cultures that have grown around them—looking at their gifts and their shadows.
Vince: So you’ve got Consensus Buddhism on one hand and Pragmatic Dharma—what you call the Tech Bro Buddhist scene—on the other. I loved your piece on the "Upper Middle Path and the Tech Bros." You brought in critiques I’ve seen mostly in academic circles—people like David McMahan and Ann Gleig—but you made it much more accessible and relevant.
Daniel: Thanks. That was the goal: take these ideas out of esoteric academic circles and bring them into contemporary discourse. Especially around communities like ours that are immersed in Buddhist Geeks-type spaces.
Vince: It felt like a kind of moral responsibility to name the limitations and mistakes we've seen—or made—over the years. Like, I see a lot of younger folks in the liminal web, teapot Twitter, etc., getting into Buddhist modernism the way we were 15 years ago.
Daniel: Exactly. And I think it's important we help them avoid some of the pitfalls. Not because we’re better or more advanced, but just because we've had more time to metabolize these dynamics.
Vince: Right. I mean, early Buddhist Geeks was full-on modernist—tech, enlightenment, Daniel Ingram’s stage models. But it evolved. Ann Gleig even said she saw postmodern elements starting to emerge in that community. I think she was right.
Daniel: Totally. And part of my own evolution, especially through training at the Monastic Academy, has been this inquiry into ethics—specifically, how ethical responsiveness is missing in a lot of Buddhist spaces. That’s especially problematic in a time of planetary crisis.
Vince: It’s not just about meditating in caves or on retreat anymore. There's a demand for something deeper and more responsive. A lot of Buddhism as it’s been practiced here feels