Re: karma question (zero Who)

["Schrade, Scott" <sschrade@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> <sigh>
> Here's Schrade the realist to debunk the notion. 

Yeah, Heaven forbid we try to drag our minds out of the Dark Ages.

> In realist terms, metaphysics is, as you say, only another description 
> of events, but it's not baseless and the events are not necessarily 
> random. 

Can you provide me with any citations from legitimate, respected scientific
or psychological journals where any type of metaphysical phenomenon was
found to occur via experimentation?  Or does the scientific community like
to keep those results under wraps, like the government refuses to tell us
about UFOs?   

> Events have a cause,

Some do.  Some don't.

> and metaphysics's a reasonable system which only represents a somewhat 
> different perception and a different interpretation.

It's a faith-based "system" with no hard evidence or proof to back it up.
Santa Claus presents a "different perception" & a "different interpreta-
tion" for children about events relating to Christmas.  Does that somehow
make Santa Claus real or legit?        

> For example, if someone says they are haunted by a ghost, then they are 
> haunted, whether or not I can see the ghost.

No one's denying that people's mental faculties can become impaired or 
that superstition isn't rampant in our society.  But that doesn't make any 
of that nonsense *real.*  Just because you believe in karma doesn't mean
it's legit.  Karma & ghosts may be a part of *your* mind but they don't
exist in *my* world & there's no evidence for either of them.  So, what am
I supposed to believe?  That karma & ghosts *do* exist, or that many people
are superstitious & believe in things that aren't real.  I've been on the
planet for a while; I know how fucked up people are.  That's an easy one.


> Likely it's in their own mind, and there is some reason that it's there. 

Again, this is a psychological matter.  It has nothing to do with the
physic-
al sciences.  You're making a mistake by trying to link the two.

> A psychologist might exorcise it, but then a priest might do a better job.
> It all depends on the nature of the ghost.

Oh my God.  What year is this?  1640?  Have I traveled back in time?  The
human race is doomed. 

> Karma has to do with accumulated probabilities.

Here in 2003 we call that statistical mathematics.  And karma isn't needed 
to explain any of it. 

> If you live your life well, then you accumulate probabilities that you 
> will have less heart disease, less cancer and fewer auto accidents.

Oh my Lord.  Those are health decisions!  Smoking, drinking, driving reck-
lessly.  What's that have to do with karma?  Karma states that if I do
something bad or immoral, like smacking my wife around, I'll pay for those
actions later on down the line, perhaps in a way that has no connection 
with my original offense.  

*That's* what I'm arguing against!  Not that smoking or drinking isn't bad
for people!  Let's not dilute or sidetrack the discussion, OK?  
 
> However, if you sin, you've got bad actuarial probabilities and you may 
> end up reincarnated as a roach.

Why would that be bad?  From what I understand roaches are pretty resilient.
Unless you mean roach as in the remnant of a marijuana joint.  But again....
;-) 

> Um. Maybe I shouldn't go into the reincarnation thing.

Please.  I've had all I can take.  ;-)


- SCHRADE in Akron