Good points, well stated, Judy. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" > <curtisdeltablues@> wrote: > > > > Judy: "You're assuming, though, that the human idea of > > justice conforms to the universe's idea of justice. > > That may not be the case. Karma may work differently, > > for instance, for creatures that have free will > > versus for those that don't." > > > > Me: Right, I am assuming that any standard of morality needs to > > connect with my sense of what is moral for it to have any meaning > > for me. A moral position that allows for willfully imposing > > suffering is too far from my own standards to be useful to me. > > It goes back to Hume's paradox. God can't be moral, omnipotent > > and omniscient at once with the reality of suffering in the world. > > Karma, if it exists, is entirely impersonal. It > isn't a matter of God sitting up on high and blasting > someone with suffering because He doesn't like the > way they've behaved. Also, Hume's paradox doesn't > take reincarnation into account. The belief in karma > doesn't work very well without reincarnation. > > > I think you are proposing a variation in which our sense of > > morality is dismissed as limited, but that redefinition takes > > away what I value in the concept of morality. > > I wasn't *dismissing* it, for heaven's sake, > in any practical sense of how one should behave > in the world. Our personal idea of morality > is all we've got. Belief in karma does *not* > mean discarding that idea. > > I'm just saying you can't look at the apparent > cruelty of nature in regard to wild animals and > decide that must mean there's no such thing as > karma. > > We don't dismiss the suffering of animals any > more than we do the suffering of humans, and we > try to remedy it to the extent that we can. > That's all part and parcel of the karmic equation. > > As I said, there are no *practical* implications > for behavior of a belief in karma. The only > difference it makes is that, *if* the notion of a > random universe is disturbing, believing instead > that there is some overreaching order, even if > you can't discern how it works in any particular > case, can keep you from falling into despair. > > If you're not bothered by the randomness idea, > but you *are* disturbed by the notion of an impartial, > impersonal cosmic justice, then stick with > randomness. Pick the belief that enables you to > be most effective in your life. But preferably > give each belief a fair shot--try to understand > what it involves and implies. > > I could reject the randomness idea, for instance, > on the grounds that it justifies behaving any old > way you want, without any sense of morality. That > would not be giving the idea a fair shot. > > > I think that karmic theory was created at a time when Mosaic style > > justice was in vogue on earth. Our standards and values have > > evolved since then. For example if a child is behaving cruelly, > > I am pretty sure being cruel to him or putting him in painful > > situations is not going to open his heart in compassion to others. > > Maybe not in this lifetime. But behaving cruelly to a > child because the child is behaving cruelly to others > isn't at all something a belief in karma would lead > you to do anyway. *You* don't get to determine what > the child requires to "teach him a lesson." > > We have evolved > > different techniques since the old style "beat his ass" > > retribution style teaching. > > A belief in karma does *not* involve such a teaching. > > > But karmic theory seems stuck in the dark ages of our > > past when we thought of things in those simplistic terms. > > With all due respect, I think it's your idea of > what belief in karma involves that's simplistic. > > > If someone > > is cruel, give him a life as a leper, that will > > straighten him out! > > Not up to us to determine why someone has been given > a life as a leper. We just do whatever we can to > mitigate his suffering. >
To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
