Religions > Atheism > Would a believer of karma and reincarnation be classified as an atheist?
| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"V" |
| Date: |
02 Dec 2006 07:09:33 AM |
| Object: |
Would a believer of karma and reincarnation be classified as an atheist? |
Would a believer of karma and reincarnation be classified as an
atheist? God can take many forms and karma and the process of rebirth
might be considered a god of sorts. I would say that such a believer
would not be a total atheist. Such a person could claim to be an
atheist with reference to the traditional concept of God or gods, but
not of a reincarnated soul or entity. What are your thoughts?
V (male)
.
|
|
| User: "GoDrex" |
|
| Title: Re: Would a believer of karma and reincarnation be classified as an atheist? |
02 Dec 2006 09:07:27 AM |
|
|
"V" <vfr44@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1165064973.081108.171490@f1g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Would a believer of karma and reincarnation be classified as an
atheist? God can take many forms and karma and the process of rebirth
might be considered a god of sorts. I would say that such a believer
would not be a total atheist. Such a person could claim to be an
atheist with reference to the traditional concept of God or gods, but
not of a reincarnated soul or entity. What are your thoughts?
V (male)
this isn't a real question is it?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Christopher A.Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: Would a believer of karma and reincarnation be classified as an atheist? |
02 Dec 2006 09:21:02 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 2 Dec 2006 10:07:27 -0500, "GoDrex" <godrex35@hotmail.com>
wrote:
"V" <vfr44@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1165064973.081108.171490@f1g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Would a believer of karma and reincarnation be classified as an
atheist? God can take many forms and karma and the process of rebirth
might be considered a god of sorts. I would say that such a believer
would not be a total atheist. Such a person could claim to be an
atheist with reference to the traditional concept of God or gods, but
not of a reincarnated soul or entity. What are your thoughts?
V (male)
this isn't a real question is it?
It's the kind of question asked by theists who imagine atheists are a
monolithic group, who can't grasp the simple consequences of somebody
not being theist.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "John Baker" |
|
| Title: Re: Would a believer of karma and reincarnation be classified as an atheist? |
02 Dec 2006 01:27:59 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 2 Dec 2006 10:07:27 -0500, "GoDrex" <godrex35@hotmail.com>
wrote:
"V" <vfr44@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1165064973.081108.171490@f1g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Would a believer of karma and reincarnation be classified as an
atheist? God can take many forms and karma and the process of rebirth
might be considered a god of sorts. I would say that such a believer
would not be a total atheist. Such a person could claim to be an
atheist with reference to the traditional concept of God or gods, but
not of a reincarnated soul or entity. What are your thoughts?
V (male)
this isn't a real question is it?
No. This guy's a troll.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: Would a believer of karma and reincarnation be classified as an atheist? |
02 Dec 2006 06:24:42 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 02 Dec 2006 14:27:59 -0500, John Baker <nunya@bizniz.net>
wrote:
- Refer: <etk3n2dphaicm2fkhk1aclsr6bdkok0h00@4ax.com>
On Sat, 2 Dec 2006 10:07:27 -0500, "GoDrex" <godrex35@hotmail.com>
wrote:
"V" <vfr44@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1165064973.081108.171490@f1g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Would a believer of karma and reincarnation be classified as an
atheist? God can take many forms and karma and the process of rebirth
might be considered a god of sorts. I would say that such a believer
would not be a total atheist. Such a person could claim to be an
atheist with reference to the traditional concept of God or gods, but
not of a reincarnated soul or entity. What are your thoughts?
V (male)
this isn't a real question is it?
No. This guy's a troll.
I'm not so sure that he is not a genuine sociopath.
--
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Lars Eighner" |
|
| Title: Re: Would a believer of karma and reincarnation be classified as an atheist? |
04 Dec 2006 12:46:04 AM |
|
|
In our last episode, <1165064973.081108.171490@f1g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
the lovely and talented V broadcast on alt.atheism:
Would a believer of karma and reincarnation be classified as an
atheist?
If he did not have a belief in god(s). By the by, most Westeners
think karma is a kind of cosmic bank account which can be summarized
as "what goes around, comes around" or something of the sort: you do
something bad and something bad will happen to you (i.e. the "My Name
is Earl" definition of karma). This is not really very like Eastern
karma, which is more like "Things are according to their nature, and
their nature is according to how/what they are" --- or in other words,
no big cosmic balance sheet.
God can take many forms and karma and the process of rebirth
might be considered a god of sorts.
I believe we have already established that you can define god down to a
level that no reasonable person would not believe. You can define a teacup
as a god of sorts, and then you would find few atheists indeed.
I would say that such a believer would not be a total atheist. Such a
person could claim to be an atheist with reference to the traditional
concept of God or gods, but not of a reincarnated soul or entity. What are
your thoughts?
If my aunt had balls, she'd be my uncle.
--
Lars Eighner <http://larseighner.com/> <http://myspace.com/larseighner>
War hath no fury like a noncombatant.
- Charles Edward Montague
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Douglas Berry" |
|
| Title: Re: Would a believer of karma and reincarnation be classified as an atheist? |
02 Dec 2006 10:26:47 AM |
|
|
On 2 Dec 2006 05:09:33 -0800 "V" <vfr44@aol.com> said the following
in alt.atheism and I was immediately reminded of 1,000 Chinchillas
singing Handel's "Messiah" for some reason...
Would a believer of karma and reincarnation be classified as an
atheist? God can take many forms and karma and the process of rebirth
might be considered a god of sorts. I would say that such a believer
would not be a total atheist. Such a person could claim to be an
atheist with reference to the traditional concept of God or gods, but
not of a reincarnated soul or entity. What are your thoughts?
*sigh* Why is such a simple concept so hard for some people?
Atheism is not beliving in deities or other supernatural entities that
excercise the same role (such as ancestor spirits, etc.) That's it.
If someone belives in reincarnation, but thinks it is a natural
process not involving the intervention of a god, then that person is
an atheist. However, I've never heard of such a theory; every claim
for reincarnation I've encountered involves some power guiding the
soul and assigning a new life.
--
Douglas Berry Do the OBVIOUS thing to send e-mail
Atheist #2147, Atheist Vet #5
Jason Gastrich is praying for me on 8 January 2011
"The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the
source of all true art and all science. He to whom this emotion is a
stranger, who can no longer pause to wonder and stand rapt in awe, is as
good as dead: his eyes are closed." - Albert Einstein
.
|
|
|
| User: "V" |
|
| Title: Re: Would a believer of karma and reincarnation be classified as an atheist? |
02 Dec 2006 10:54:01 AM |
|
|
Douglas Berry Do the OBVIOUS thing to send e-mail
Atheist #2147, Atheist Vet #5
Jason Gastrich is praying for me on 8 January 2011
BTW, what does this mean Douglas?
Atheist #2147, Atheist Vet #5
V
.
|
|
|
| User: "Douglas Berry" |
|
| Title: Re: Would a believer of karma and reincarnation be classified as an atheist? |
02 Dec 2006 05:21:31 PM |
|
|
On 2 Dec 2006 08:54:01 -0800 "V" <vfr44@aol.com> said the following
in alt.atheism and I was immediately reminded of 1,000 Chinchillas
singing Handel's "Messiah" for some reason...
Douglas Berry Do the OBVIOUS thing to send e-mail
Atheist #2147, Atheist Vet #5
Jason Gastrich is praying for me on 8 January 2011
BTW, what does this mean Douglas?
Atheist #2147, Atheist Vet #5
Several years ago, one of the theist trolls declared that he didn't
believe there were more than a dozen or so atheists on the group. So
a list was set up so we could number ourselves. Much later, after an
"atheists in foxholes" debate, a similar list was cvreated for atheist
veterans.
--
Douglas Berry Do the OBVIOUS thing to send e-mail
Atheist #2147, Atheist Vet #5
Jason Gastrich is praying for me on 8 January 2011
"The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the
source of all true art and all science. He to whom this emotion is a
stranger, who can no longer pause to wonder and stand rapt in awe, is as
good as dead: his eyes are closed." - Albert Einstein
.
|
|
|
| User: "V" |
|
| Title: Re: Would a believer of karma and reincarnation be classified as an atheist? |
02 Dec 2006 07:01:57 PM |
|
|
Douglas Berry wrote:
On 2 Dec 2006 08:54:01 -0800 "V" <vfr44@aol.com> said the following
in alt.atheism and I was immediately reminded of 1,000 Chinchillas
singing Handel's "Messiah" for some reason...
Douglas Berry Do the OBVIOUS thing to send e-mail
Atheist #2147, Atheist Vet #5
Jason Gastrich is praying for me on 8 January 2011
BTW, what does this mean Douglas?
Atheist #2147, Atheist Vet #5
Several years ago, one of the theist trolls declared that he didn't
believe there were more than a dozen or so atheists on the group. So
a list was set up so we could number ourselves. Much later, after an
"atheists in foxholes" debate, a similar list was cvreated for atheist
veterans.
--
Douglas Berry Do the OBVIOUS thing to send e-mail
Atheist #2147, Atheist Vet #5
Jason Gastrich is praying for me on 8 January 2011
"The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the
source of all true art and all science. He to whom this emotion is a
stranger, who can no longer pause to wonder and stand rapt in awe, is as
good as dead: his eyes are closed." - Albert Einstein
Thanks for the info,
V
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "V" |
|
| Title: Re: Would a believer of karma and reincarnation be classified as an atheist? |
02 Dec 2006 10:52:31 AM |
|
|
Douglas Berry wrote:
On 2 Dec 2006 05:09:33 -0800 "V" <vfr44@aol.com> said the following
in alt.atheism and I was immediately reminded of 1,000 Chinchillas
singing Handel's "Messiah" for some reason...
Would a believer of karma and reincarnation be classified as an
atheist? God can take many forms and karma and the process of rebirth
might be considered a god of sorts. I would say that such a believer
would not be a total atheist. Such a person could claim to be an
atheist with reference to the traditional concept of God or gods, but
not of a reincarnated soul or entity. What are your thoughts?
*sigh* Why is such a simple concept so hard for some people?
Atheism is not beliving in deities or other supernatural entities that
excercise the same role (such as ancestor spirits, etc.) That's it.
If someone belives in reincarnation, but thinks it is a natural
process not involving the intervention of a god, then that person is
an atheist. However, I've never heard of such a theory; every claim
for reincarnation I've encountered involves some power guiding the
soul and assigning a new life.
--
Douglas Berry Do the OBVIOUS thing to send e-mail
Atheist #2147, Atheist Vet #5
Jason Gastrich is praying for me on 8 January 2011
"The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the
source of all true art and all science. He to whom this emotion is a
stranger, who can no longer pause to wonder and stand rapt in awe, is as
good as dead: his eyes are closed." - Albert Einstein
Thanks for the input Douglas. I wondered if atheism disavowed the
belief in 'all that was unproven', more so than just the unproven
entity aka God / gods. It seems to all revolve around the 'theist
entity' powering things more so than the natural powered act of
reincarnation if I understand you.
V
.
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: Would a believer of karma and reincarnation be classified as an atheist? |
02 Dec 2006 04:19:23 PM |
|
|
On 2 Dec 2006 08:52:31 -0800, "V" <vfr44@aol.com> wrote:
I wondered if atheism disavowed the
belief in 'all that was unproven', more so than just the unproven
entity aka God / gods.
Atheism is lack of theism - "it" doesn't avow or disavow anything.
It seems to all revolve around the 'theist
entity' powering things more so than the natural powered act of
reincarnation if I understand you.
It revolves around being a theist - atheists aren't. There are
atheists who believe that anything not yet disproved may be possible,
there are atheists who follow the scientific method and there are
atheists who are way off the beaten track. The ONLY thing that's
"atheist" about all of them is that none of them are theists. That's
where the definition starts, and that's where it ends.
--
rukbat at optonline dot net
"I see only with deep regret that God punishes so many of His children for their
numerous stupidities, for which only He Himself can be held responsible; in my opinion,
only His nonexistence could excuse Him."
-A. Einstein (Letter to Edgar Meyer, Jan. 2, 1915)
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: Would a believer of karma and reincarnation be classified as anatheist? |
04 Dec 2006 07:55:09 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 02 Dec 2006 08:52:31 -0800, V wrote:
Thanks for the input Douglas. I wondered if atheism disavowed the
Atheism is *solely the lack of belief in deities.
Stop trying to make this complicated, it's not.
--
Mark K. Bilbo
------------------------------------------------------------
"Christians, it is needless to say, utterly detest each other.
They slander each other constantly with the vilest forms of
abuse and cannot come to any sort of agreement in their
teachings. Each sect brands its own, fills the head of its
own with deceitful nonsense, and makes perfect little pigs
of those it wins over to its side." -Celsus (2nd century C.E.)
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: Would a believer of karma and reincarnation be classified as an atheist? |
02 Dec 2006 06:23:27 PM |
|
|
On 2 Dec 2006 05:09:33 -0800, "V" <vfr44@aol.com> wrote:
- Refer: <1165064973.081108.171490@f1g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
Would a believer of karma and reincarnation be classified as an
atheist?
Insufficient data.
God can take many forms and karma and the process of rebirth
might be considered a god of sorts.
Question begging idiocy.
I would say that such a believer
would not be a total atheist.
Unwarranted relation between two separte concepts.
Such a person could claim to be an
atheist with reference to the traditional concept of God or gods, but
not of a reincarnated soul or entity. What are your thoughts?
I wish to know how often you have to bang your head against a brick
wall to maintain your level of cognitive dissonance?
--
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jos Flachs" |
|
| Title: Re: Would a believer of karma and reincarnation be classified as an atheist? |
02 Dec 2006 09:12:34 PM |
|
|
On 2 Dec 2006 05:09:33 -0800, "V" <vfr44@aol.com> wrote:
Would a believer of karma and reincarnation be classified as an
atheist?
No. In that case this 'atheist' believes in something that cannot be
proven, being karma.
God can take many forms and karma and the process of rebirth
might be considered a god of sorts.
Sigh. Any proof of karma?
I would say that such a believer would not be a total atheist.
I would say such a BELIEVER would totally not be an atheist.
Such a person could claim to be an
atheist with reference to the traditional concept of God or gods, but
not of a reincarnated soul or entity. What are your thoughts?
Nonsense.
.
|
|
|
| User: "bowman" |
|
| Title: Re: Would a believer of karma and reincarnation be classified as an atheist? |
03 Dec 2006 10:50:42 AM |
|
|
Jos Flachs wrote:
Sigh. Any proof of karma?
Any proof of unconditioned phenomena? Did your current physical and mental
state arise randomly?
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: Would a believer of karma and reincarnation be classified as an atheist? |
03 Dec 2006 07:43:51 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 03 Dec 2006 09:50:42 -0700, bowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
- Refer: <1165164565_2403@corp.com>
Jos Flachs wrote:
Sigh. Any proof of karma?
Any proof of unconditioned phenomena? Did your current physical and mental
state arise randomly?
Any coherent defintion of "unconditioned phenomena"?
--
.
|
|
|
| User: "bowman" |
|
| Title: Re: Would a believer of karma and reincarnation be classified as an atheist? |
03 Dec 2006 11:43:31 PM |
|
|
Michael Gray wrote:
Any coherent defintion of "unconditioned phenomena"?
Dose anything ever happen without a cause or without dependence on something
prior?
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: Would a believer of karma and reincarnation be classified as an atheist? |
04 Dec 2006 12:27:01 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 03 Dec 2006 22:43:31 -0700, bowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
- Refer: <1165210932_7459@corp.com>
Michael Gray wrote:
Any coherent defintion of "unconditioned phenomena"?
Dose anything ever happen without a cause or without dependence on something
prior?
Yes.
Now what about a defintion?
--
.
|
|
|
| User: "bowman" |
|
| Title: Re: Would a believer of karma and reincarnation be classified as an atheist? |
04 Dec 2006 08:56:57 AM |
|
|
Michael Gray wrote:
Now what about a defintion?
unconditioned: not subject to conditions or restrictions; unconditional.
phenomenon: An occurrence, circumstance, or fact that is perceptible by the
senses.
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: Would a believer of karma and reincarnation be classified as an atheist? |
04 Dec 2006 04:10:45 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 04 Dec 2006 07:56:57 -0700, bowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
- Refer: <1165244136_7479@corp.com>
Michael Gray wrote:
Now what about a defintion?
unconditioned: not subject to conditions or restrictions; unconditional.
phenomenon: An occurrence, circumstance, or fact that is perceptible by the
senses.
Then just one example from many of your "unconditioned phenomena"
would be say: the Casimir effect.
Next please?
--
.
|
|
|
| User: "bowman" |
|
| Title: Re: Would a believer of karma and reincarnation be classified as an atheist? |
04 Dec 2006 10:16:23 PM |
|
|
Michael Gray wrote:
Then just one example from many of your "unconditioned phenomena"
would be say: the Casimir effect.
Show me a Casimir cavity without matter, and we'll talk. In the classical
experiment, the effect is observed between two parallel plates and is
dependent upon them. Practically speaking, the experiment is dependent on
one hell of a lot of laboratory apparatus, technicians, and a few centuries
of scientific investigation.
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: Would a believer of karma and reincarnation be classified as an atheist? |
05 Dec 2006 12:44:26 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 04 Dec 2006 21:16:23 -0700, bowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
- Refer: <1165292101_7612@corp.com>
Michael Gray wrote:
Then just one example from many of your "unconditioned phenomena"
would be say: the Casimir effect.
Show me a Casimir cavity without matter, and we'll talk. In the classical
experiment, the effect is observed between two parallel plates and is
dependent upon them. Practically speaking, the experiment is dependent on
one hell of a lot of laboratory apparatus, technicians, and a few centuries
of scientific investigation.
If you keep snipping the context of my replies, then I shall have to
assume that you not interested in a real dialogue.
You asked me a question.
I asked you to define the meaning of the question.
You did.
I gave a fully compliant answer.
You are now radically and arbitrarily changing the definition and
suggesting that somehow I am therefore wrong.
That makes me annoyed, as it seems to be a deliberate technique to
shift the goalposts to suit your ego.
Where did you learn logic?
--
.
|
|
|
| User: "bowman" |
|
| Title: Re: Would a believer of karma and reincarnation be classified as an atheist? |
05 Dec 2006 09:06:41 AM |
|
|
Michael Gray wrote:
On Mon, 04 Dec 2006 21:16:23 -0700, bowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
- Refer: <1165292101_7612@corp.com>
Michael Gray wrote:
Then just one example from many of your "unconditioned phenomena"
would be say: the Casimir effect.
Show me a Casimir cavity without matter, and we'll talk. In the classical
experiment, the effect is observed between two parallel plates and is
dependent upon them. Practically speaking, the experiment is dependent on
one hell of a lot of laboratory apparatus, technicians, and a few
centuries of scientific investigation.
If you keep snipping the context of my replies, then I shall have to
assume that you not interested in a real dialogue.
Okay, I'll quote the whole post, which I find annoying when others do it.
You asked me a question.
I asked you to define the meaning of the question.
You did.
I gave a fully compliant answer.
You are now radically and arbitrarily changing the definition and
suggesting that somehow I am therefore wrong.
That makes me annoyed, as it seems to be a deliberate technique to
shift the goalposts to suit your ego.
It is an attempt to define the goalposts, not shift them. Where have I
suggested you are wrong? Are you suggesting the Casimir effect is some sort
of miracle that occurs outside of the conditions of the world? That is
depends on no prior state, it just sort of happens? I don't think you are
proposing some sort of magical thinking, and neither am I.
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: Would a believer of karma and reincarnation be classified as an atheist? |
05 Dec 2006 08:06:10 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 05 Dec 2006 08:06:41 -0700, bowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
- Refer: <1165331116_8187@corp.com>
Michael Gray wrote:
On Mon, 04 Dec 2006 21:16:23 -0700, bowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
- Refer: <1165292101_7612@corp.com>
Michael Gray wrote:
Then just one example from many of your "unconditioned phenomena"
would be say: the Casimir effect.
Show me a Casimir cavity without matter, and we'll talk. In the classical
experiment, the effect is observed between two parallel plates and is
dependent upon them. Practically speaking, the experiment is dependent on
one hell of a lot of laboratory apparatus, technicians, and a few
centuries of scientific investigation.
If you keep snipping the context of my replies, then I shall have to
assume that you not interested in a real dialogue.
Okay, I'll quote the whole post, which I find annoying when others do it.
That you find commonly accepted courteous practise "annoying", is
noted.
You asked me a question.
I asked you to define the meaning of the question.
You did.
I gave a fully compliant answer.
You are now radically and arbitrarily changing the definition and
suggesting that somehow I am therefore wrong.
That makes me annoyed, as it seems to be a deliberate technique to
shift the goalposts to suit your ego.
It is an attempt to define the goalposts, not shift them. Where have I
suggested you are wrong?
"Show me a Casimir cavity without matter, and we'll talk."
I made no such suggestion, express or implied, and it is a
non-sequitur, as we were talking about a specific definition of yours
which did not contain that proviso, and which you also rudely snipped.
I am not about to waste my time to retrieve your words, and repost
them to you, as if your memory is that bad, then the interaction ends
right at this reply.
Are you suggesting the Casimir effect is some sort
of miracle that occurs outside of the conditions of the world?
What a bizarre non-sequitur!
That is
depends on no prior state, it just sort of happens? I don't think you are
proposing some sort of magical thinking, and neither am I.
How do you manage to get so far off the subject at hand?
You gave a definition.
I gave an example that fitted that definition precisely.
You start ranting almost incoherently and put words into my mouth.
Until you are able to get a grip and clarify your basic thought
processes, I do not think it wise to continue down the slope of
decreasing coherency that you appear to be sliding down.
I was going to suggest that you take a basic quantum mechanics course,
but I now think that is quite premature.
I suggest a basic course in logic first.
--
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Christopher A.Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: Would a believer of karma and reincarnation be classified as an atheist? |
05 Dec 2006 04:29:47 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 04 Dec 2006 21:16:23 -0700, bowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
Michael Gray wrote:
Then just one example from many of your "unconditioned phenomena"
would be say: the Casimir effect.
Show me a Casimir cavity without matter, and we'll talk. In the classical
experiment, the effect is observed between two parallel plates and is
dependent upon them. Practically speaking, the experiment is dependent on
one hell of a lot of laboratory apparatus, technicians, and a few centuries
of scientific investigation.
So what? It happens, and is an example of what religious extremists
pretend can't happen.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: Would a believer of karma and reincarnation be classified as an atheist? |
04 Dec 2006 05:14:10 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 04 Dec 2006 07:56:57 -0700, bowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
Michael Gray wrote:
Now what about a defintion?
unconditioned: not subject to conditions or restrictions; unconditional.
phenomenon: An occurrence, circumstance, or fact that is perceptible by the
senses.
the universe fits that, as far as we know.
--
rukbat at optonline dot net
"To assert that the earth revolves around the sun is as erroneous as to claim that Jesus
was not born of a virgin."
Cardinal Bellarmine,[1615, during the trial of Galileo]
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
.
|
|
|
| User: "bowman" |
|
| Title: Re: Would a believer of karma and reincarnation be classified as an atheist? |
04 Dec 2006 10:53:40 PM |
|
|
Al Klein wrote:
the universe fits that, as far as we know.
Hardly. Examine the keyboard in front of you. Doesn't it have conditions for
its existence? Could it be boundless? Eternal? Immaterial? Wasn't the
material compounded in a petrochemical plant? Didn't the raw material come
from an oil well? Wasn't there a dinosaur in there someplace? Isn't there a
whole chain of conditions?
We're probably talking at cross purposes. Usually when you go looking for
something that is not dependent on prior states, and has an essence that
does not depend on anything else for its definition, you are looking at
some sort of deity.
In Buddhist terminology, 'conditioned phenomena' is anything that is
non-permanent, that arises, and passes away. That seems to fit the universe
pretty well.
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
.
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: Would a believer of karma and reincarnation be classified as an atheist? |
05 Dec 2006 07:28:21 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 04 Dec 2006 21:53:40 -0700, bowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
Al Klein wrote:
the universe fits that, as far as we know.
Hardly. Examine the keyboard in front of you. Doesn't it have conditions for
its existence? Could it be boundless? Eternal? Immaterial? Wasn't the
material compounded in a petrochemical plant? Didn't the raw material come
from an oil well? Wasn't there a dinosaur in there someplace? Isn't there a
whole chain of conditions?
You're assuming that the universe formed in conditions similar to the
conditions in the universe. Since the universe didn't form inside
itself (if it did, indeed, "form"), that's an unwarranted assumption.
We're probably talking at cross purposes. Usually when you go looking for
something that is not dependent on prior states, and has an essence that
does not depend on anything else for its definition, you are looking at
some sort of deity.
Usually (so usually as to be always) there's not the slightest shred
of objective evidence of the objective existence of any deity, and
never has been.
In Buddhist terminology, 'conditioned phenomena' is anything that is
non-permanent, that arises, and passes away. That seems to fit the universe
pretty well.
The universe probably won't end, it'll either collapse or entropy will
stop, but the universe will still be here.
--
rukbat at optonline dot net
"They laughed at Newton, they laughed at Einstein, but they also laughed at
Bozo the Clown."
- Carl Sagan
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
.
|
|
|
| User: "bowman" |
|
| Title: Re: Would a believer of karma and reincarnation be classified as an atheist? |
05 Dec 2006 08:58:14 AM |
|
|
Al Klein wrote:
You're assuming that the universe formed in conditions similar to the
conditions in the universe. Since the universe didn't form inside
itself (if it did, indeed, "form"), that's an unwarranted assumption.
I am not making an assumption about the formation of the universe. I would
hazard a guess it did not form. Especially, I have no reason to believe it
was created ex nihilo by some sort of deity.
We're probably talking at cross purposes. Usually when you go looking for
something that is not dependent on prior states, and has an essence that
does not depend on anything else for its definition, you are looking at
some sort of deity.
Usually (so usually as to be always) there's not the slightest shred
of objective evidence of the objective existence of any deity, and
never has been.
Which is what I have been saying.
In Buddhist terminology, 'conditioned phenomena' is anything that is
non-permanent, that arises, and passes away. That seems to fit the
universe pretty well.
The universe probably won't end, it'll either collapse or entropy will
stop, but the universe will still be here.
Again, agreed. I am not exactly sure where this conversation went off the
rails.
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: Would a believer of karma and reincarnation be classified as an atheist? |
03 Dec 2006 10:41:17 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 03 Dec 2006 09:50:42 -0700, bowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
Jos Flachs wrote:
Sigh. Any proof of karma?
Any proof of unconditioned phenomena? Did your current physical and mental
state arise randomly?
Any evidence that it didn't?
--
rukbat at optonline dot net
"Damn. Looks like all of usenet agrees that you don't have the logical
faculties to prove the statement 'dogshit is not peanut butter' if we
gave you a jar of each and a box of crackers" - John Hattan to Tichy
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
