lorenzop wrote: ↑Mon Feb 05, 2024 3:28 am
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 affirmed it many times, but we continue to lead these dialogs in the hope that you may notice how it is nothing else than blurred-out materialism.
What you have written above can be paraphrased like: "The brain is complex enough even without adding some spooky 'consciousness' as a thing-in-itself. The physical world has nothing to do with ideas, morals, and so on - they lie completely within the purely mechanistic quantum fields of the brain."
Why so many thinkers today still hold on to physicalism? Because the whole topic is like a cloud of confusion for which they say "These things are so confusing and complex that it is too early to dismiss a purely mechanistic explanation of the inner experience. From what we see so far, every inner phenomenon corresponds to some completely mechanistic pattern of neural firing, hormonal waves, and so on. We have no reason to assume that consciousness is anything different than exactly these purely physical activities."
What you say is of the same character, only on the next level. Why should we overcomplicate things by assuming some Cosmic meaningful intents? Things are so hazy that it's too soon to dismiss a completely mechanistic explanation.
Already several times I've tried to lead the conversation into more
concrete examples of karma, which you skillfully avoid. For example, how could immoral life lead to a certain physical ailment in another, without any direct genetic link between the two? And we know how you would respond if you were really pressed into the corner about these things (since you have already responded in such ways previously). You simply say: "Well, in fact, I don't know (or care) whether there's such thing as karma, destiny, soul, reincarnation, etc. What I care about is that I've found this meditative trick through which I feel like stepping out of the movie and temporarily feeling above it. All else is a quest for the golden calf." That's why it's preferable to keep these questions behind the door of confusion, lock it, and place a sign "Whoever goes beyond that door has contracted the gold fever."
I'm not writing any of this with negative feelings. I'm just trying to place things on a clear foundation and explain why you can't see any value of the [unimpressive] things that are discussed here:
1. You see ideas and meaningful intents (in the sense of intrinsic Cosmic phenomena, not simply epiphenomena in human heads) as unnecessary over-complication.
2. You assume that mechanistic laws are quite capable of explaining any
apparent spiritual order.
3. You prefer to keep the things that need explanation in a cloud of confusion. This is necessary because if you try to enter into the details of this cloud it will become more and more apparent that mechanistic explanations are completely ad-hoc. It becomes paradoxical: mechanistic laws should govern moral happenings that do not even exist from the fundamental perspective.
4. If somehow you are forced into the details, you would rather recoil into a physicalistic/panpsychic perspective, eliminating concepts like karma, reincarnation, morality, good, evil, etc., one by one, until you remain with the crude mechanistic universe which somehow can be conscious of itself within disconnected bubbles.