b3ta.com qotw
You are not logged in. Login or Signup
Home » Question of the Week » Off Topic » Post 976754 | Search
This is a question Off Topic

Are you a QOTWer? Do you want to start a thread that isn't a direct answer to the current QOTW? Then this place, gentle poster, is your friend.

(, Sun 1 Apr 2001, 1:00)
Pages: Latest, 836, 835, 834, 833, 832, ... 1

« Go Back | See The Full Thread

I'm not sure how karma can be demonstrably bollocks
As you said, the belief (at least where karma in Hinduism is concerned) is that transgressors will 'get theirs' after they've died. For it to be demonstrably bollocks, wouldn't you have to demonstrate that reincarnation (either as another human being or as any other lifeform/object) does not and can not exist?

To make it clear, I'm not arguing if it's bollocks or not, I'm questioning your use of 'demonstrably'.
(, Fri 19 Nov 2010, 10:37, 2 replies, latest was 15 years ago)
How is the tatt?
Healing up good?
(, Fri 19 Nov 2010, 10:40, Reply)
A few thick scabs from where I bled
But it's past the itching stage and into the secondary 'onion skin' stage :)
(, Fri 19 Nov 2010, 10:41, Reply)
Prove to me that reincarnation is also not bollocks.
Give me a single shred of solid evidence that it's not a fatuous stream of camel-dung made up by charlatans for the benefit of imbeciles.

GO ON, DO IT NOW.
(, Fri 19 Nov 2010, 10:47, Reply)
Never said I would or could
Lack of evidence isn't proof of the counterpoint. It's a good indicator that it doesn't happen, but it's not solid proof.
(, Fri 19 Nov 2010, 10:50, Reply)
I know you are right
in that technically absence of proof is not proof of absence but at some point common sense must prevail.

I cannot prove emphatically that tomorrow I am not going to turn into a 15-foot bright blue gibbon....but let's face it, I'm not, am I?
(, Fri 19 Nov 2010, 10:56, Reply)
I agree with you
Hence I'm only questioning the use of 'demonstrably', not the bollocks quotient of karma.
Personally I don't fully put stock in any 'after-life' scenario (heaven, reincarnation, oblivion etc.), but am not intrigued/worried enough to take Pascal's Wager on my deathbed.
(, Fri 19 Nov 2010, 11:01, Reply)
Ironically,
saying that something is "arguably bollocks" won't generate as much debate.

Aren't people odd.
(, Fri 19 Nov 2010, 11:03, Reply)
It won't, no, because it is arguably bollocks.
"The notion that Labs is a handsome young gent is arguably bollocks"
"The notion that Monty is a short, fat, black lesbian hippy is demonstrably bollocks"
(, Fri 19 Nov 2010, 11:12, Reply)
The fact that you have posted this
means that next time I see you I will repeatedly kick you in the (arguable or demonstrable, take your pick...) bollocks.
(, Fri 19 Nov 2010, 11:56, Reply)
With enough MDs you might think that you have.
Alternatively, if this were a Disney film, your daughter would now suggest playing a game which involved you pretending to be a 15ft blue gibbon, and you would be larking about like crazy and then suddenly catch sight of yourself in a mirror and have a "maybe I should try seeing the world differently" moment.

Fortunately this isn't a Disney film.
(, Fri 19 Nov 2010, 11:06, Reply)
Hahahah
this is like a more saccharine and slightly less demented 'Gonz fantasy sequence' post.
(, Fri 19 Nov 2010, 11:10, Reply)
I didn't think that people shitting on each others chests was appropriate in this case.

(, Fri 19 Nov 2010, 11:15, Reply)
Oh, but please try...it would amuse me
Regarding common sense; you're right, absence of proof does not prove its absence, but there comes a point at which the pragmatist in you must recognise that the complete, overwhelming absence of proof is pretty damning and that if you believe in that then you might as well believe in your latent ability to transform into a 15-ft blue gibbon.
(, Fri 19 Nov 2010, 11:11, Reply)
I agree with you completely, but common sense and the utter lack of prood still does not merit 'demonstrably'
I'm a bit busy, otherwise I'd 'shop Monty as a massive blue gibbon ;)
(, Fri 19 Nov 2010, 11:16, Reply)
It doesn't, I agree. Though I think this has become a semantic argument than a philosophical one. 'Demonstrably' was the wrong choice of word, it just sounded better than 'Almost Certainly.'
I do hope you have free time and inclination later on.
(, Fri 19 Nov 2010, 11:17, Reply)
It is more semantic
But in philosophical discussions you have to be very precise with language, just as you do in any kind of debate. It's one way my philosophy degree helps me in my job.
(, Fri 19 Nov 2010, 11:20, Reply)
Well the number of people who claim to be reincarnations...
...of pharaohs, royalty and the famous is rather overwhelming.
And they are all very sane members of society....
(, Fri 19 Nov 2010, 10:51, Reply)
1 in 15 women used to be Cleopatra. FACT.

(, Fri 19 Nov 2010, 10:54, Reply)
You know
in genealogical terms you're probably not far off. It doesn't take very long in going back generations to reach a point where there are more people necessary to provide your genes today than were actually alive at the time.

You're probably partly Cleopatra, as am I.

However, past lives are only believed in by the type of open-mouthed idiots that also believe in the metaphysical healing powers of rocks.
(, Fri 19 Nov 2010, 10:57, Reply)
I can cure society with hasty application of rocks to peoples faces, does that count?

(, Fri 19 Nov 2010, 11:00, Reply)
I have an Aunt who claims to be a reincarnation...
...of one of Cleopatra's hand-maidens.
Oddly enough the following facts are true:
- She is twice divorced and is a total fag-hag.
- She has lots of cats.
- She raised three dysfunctional kids; the oldest ODd in 2002, her daughter is an aging 'exotic dancer' and the most functioning one is a suicidal nut job
- Was an 'expert' in power-crystals, kabbalah and astrology until they went 'out of fashion.
- Is now an 'expert' in gemetria and reiki.
Just like any religious zealout she has a tenuous grasp on reality and has devoted her life to mumbo jumbo and genuinely believes she has been helped by such faddish flights of fancy.
Sad innit?
(, Fri 19 Nov 2010, 11:03, Reply)
Hugely so.

(, Fri 19 Nov 2010, 11:05, Reply)
Rogerthestarfish is your aunt?
Shiiiit.
(, Fri 19 Nov 2010, 11:07, Reply)
Ha! Very good
But otherwise, yes, tragically risible.
(, Fri 19 Nov 2010, 11:08, Reply)

« Go Back | See The Full Thread

Pages: Latest, 836, 835, 834, 833, 832, ... 1