Finally got to read some of it, found it on the Computer Science Library at UFRGS. Francisco Varela — a neuroscientist and student of Chögyam Trungpa Rinpoche — makes a relevant critique of dualism in the sciences of mind, utilizing the madhyamika in a western-coherent way.

Basically, the assumption that we have a disembodied mind comes through the habit of distraction or absentmindness. Philosophers actually get used to this being the essential mode of enquiry, when it should be just the opposite. So, the basis for the "meditations" of Descartes — getting an essential body-and-surroundings-free point-of-view — is just what buddhists are trying not to do when meditating (of course the word "meditation" belongs to the western tradition, but this is a semantic problem).

The other common view today is a sort of physicalism, which at first would be the point of "embodying the mind", but that is clearly the other extreme. Either we have a disembodied point-of-view or we have embodied objectivity with mind as an epiphenomenon. Those paths can't provide us a consistent theory of reality.

The middle-way is a body-mind which can be studied through empirical first-person observation. The idea that first-person objectivity is possible is shunned in the west, but basically because of the dualism mistake and of the untrainned mind of philosophers — or better saying, the trainned-in-coherent-distraction mind of philosophers.

This idea, "coherent distraction", seems to me very important. It is the cause of philosophy being engaging and neverending. Philosophers follow large consistent trails of thought — but never complete, by necessity both of keeping philosophy alive and of the very nature of large formal (and by extension wannabe-formal) systems.

Actually, the must futile of all human endeavours can in fact become something relevant. Distraction can be used as a powerfull tool to understand limitation, and if limitation is understood, the unlimited can be inferred.