I think this is fairly revisionist. This narrative undersells the influence that Buddhist thought had on enlightenment philosophers[0].<p>IANAHistorian, and am likely well out of my depth here, but I&#x27;d venture a guess that the influence worked in both directions, due to overlap in philosophical positions. For example, from the Dalai Lama:<p><i>Both Buddhism and science prefer to account for the evolution and emergence of the cosmos and life in terms of the complex interrelations of the natural laws of cause and effect. From the methodological perspective, both traditions emphasize the role of empiricism. For example, in the Buddhist investigative tradition, between the three recognized sources of knowledge - experience, reason and testimony - it is the evidence of the experience that takes precedence, with reason coming second and testimony last.</i>[1]<p>[0]<a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.theatlantic.com&#x2F;magazine&#x2F;archive&#x2F;2015&#x2F;10&#x2F;how-david-hume-helped-me-solve-my-midlife-crisis&#x2F;403195&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.theatlantic.com&#x2F;magazine&#x2F;archive&#x2F;2015&#x2F;10&#x2F;how-davi...</a>
[1]<a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.dalailama.com&#x2F;messages&#x2F;buddhism&#x2F;science-at-the-crossroads" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.dalailama.com&#x2F;messages&#x2F;buddhism&#x2F;science-at-the-cr...</a>