Re: Belief in Reincarnation is a Product of Evolution

On Jun 9, 8:18 pm, "jerry" <jroli...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"DharmaTroll" <dharmatr...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:509e0ee3->
I'm not the believer here, and bernie or jesus or whoever can't debate
his way out of a paper bag -- I only fear that intelligent posters
like Tang might win the debate. But when I'm bored I play whack-a-
mole with the rodents who claim to be mystical oracles.

And yes, when I see people babble about "facts" only to reduce
dissonance, such as needing to feel that there is a kind of
conservation of justice law, I see fear and clinging -- so when I see
a poster say such silly things, I make the inference. I'm giving the
benefit of the doubt -- it could be stupidity, not fear, as some folks
simply follow whatever the closest and most charismatic authority
happens to be.

In terms of physical energy expended perhaps, but relating this to
human values is absurd -- that's my point.

> --DharmaTroll

There is no way to post on the ng's without a self arising, unless it is
with a selfless intent. You have found the way to peace and contentment and
you wish that all could share in this. Then your posts would be free of
elitism, playing games for self amusement, name calling and judgments.

Oh, you know where you can shove your way to peace and contentment.

Were I enlightened and perfectly serene, I wouldn't waste my time with
the rogues and hucksters in usenet hell.

I'm just making the point that neither I nor you nor any bozo posting
here has any clue whether or not there exists some mystical cosmic
justice conservation principle or mechanism. So when someone babbles
that some mystical mumbo-jumbo that makes them feel secure is a
'fact', I simply point out how really loony and absurd such a claim
is. It doesn't take an awakened, serene, enlightened superhero to see
that -- any reasonably intelligent and educated schmuck can figure it
out.

You neglected to answer my question as to the point of
reference of your judgements.

I don't need credentials to make sense -- my arguments stand on their
own merits, you see. Think I'm wrong, then attack my arguments.
Pointing out that I'm not awakened will only get me to agree with you
about that, but it won't weaken my arguments one bit.

The self does not like to be revealed, since this is the first
step in its demise.

More Hindoodoo. There is no 'self' that can have a 'demise'. I think
that talk is a crock. It reminds me of a lot of Freudian
psychoanalysis, which is quite interesting and wonderfully
metaphorical but often just doesn't refer to anything and ends up
useless. Same with Hinduist stuff about some sneaky evil self that is
out for self-preservation. There ain't no such critter. It's just
more made-up fluff, more conceptual baggage.

And using the silly Hinduist "destroy the self" talk as a character
attack on me is beyond silly. It's like sicking the ghosts and
gandhabbas and devas on me. Get back to the issue, which is that none
of us has a clue whether or not some cosmic justice conservation
principle exists, and that there is no evidence for such, but we hold
onto the idea without good reason because it comforts us.

--DharmaTroll
.