Philosophical Speculations

You could make a case for the advantage or necessity of archetypical beings in an explanation of karma, technically it's not my duty to argue in opposition since it's your claim.

Re the above 'nonsense phrases' - my experience is that your (and Ashwin) explanations require even more nonsense

I have no qualms regarding karma as a force, sufficiently confusing and complex enough without adding archetypal beings as managers. MAL has nothing to do with karma or morality -karma and morality lie within the field of action. Yes, Lorenzo, your position is quite established and you have affirme...

I can't respond to the story because I can't respond to Steiner's particular explanation as a 'truth'. Re your questions I don't see any issues with 'non-local' and etc. in an infinite field of consciousness. However, I fail to see how the addition of archetypical beings answers your questions - ev...

I can't respond to the story because I can't respond to Steiner's particular explanation as a 'truth'. Re your questions I don't see any issues with 'non-local' and etc. in an infinite field of consciousness. However, I fail to see how the addition of archetypical beings answers your questions - eve...

Karma as a mindless mechanical force is simpler, more rational and intuitive. For example, if I throw a ball against a wall, or break balls in billiards, I don't see any advantage in believing the resulting motions involve the insight of an archetypical being. An argument could be made that karma h...

Hi all, I was mazed by how much AI has advanced. https://g.co/bard/share/88585e153f5e Please look at how Bard explains the way the formation of the non corporeal life atom/ soul is going to be ontologically explained . If anyone is keen to get to know the existential reality and get to the point of...

Correct, there are many explanations where our thoughts come from other than archetypal beings, for example: karma; stresses in the body; field of pure awareness; and if the mind is elastic and porous, shared ideas\thoughts amongst families\societies\cultures. As I understand 'archetypal beings', a...

The suggestion that our thoughts\thinking is influenced or perhaps sourced from archetypal beings doesn't seem reasonable or intuitive. In fact, if I 'thought' this was the case, I'd revolt and strive for freedom from these tricksters. Why even bother with the having of human beings anyways if it's...

So if there are no beings structuring your thinking, yet your thought-life is not entirely yours as a private possession, then what is it? There are explanations for thunder (for example) that don't include a god of thunder. The notion that the world is filled with 'trickster gods' has been debunked.

The suggestion that our thoughts\thinking is influenced or perhaps sourced from archetypal beings doesn't seem reasonable or intuitive. In fact, if I 'thought' this was the case, I'd revolt and strive for freedom from these tricksters . Why even bother with the having of human beings anyways if it'...