chownah wrote: ↑
Sat Oct 06, 2018 3:14 pm
I think you are changing the subject being discussed from the content of what I have said to the way in which I present it. Whether I provide causes for my opions I think is of no importance.....I could just be mistaken.....
I think its importance is related to clear communication. Suppose i claim that the sky is green (which is different than how the majority of human perceive it). In order to be taken seriously and to be considered conveying something meaningful and useful, i need to explain why i believe the sky is green.
I don't see that I have "provided causes" for my opinions....perhaps you could explain what you mean by this.....what I am trying to say is that I don't claim to know how the world works; perhaps there is some active principle of "cause and effect" or perhaps "cause and effect" might be a delusional construct like the buddhist concept of a delusional self....I don't claim to know which of these is the way the world works or if perhaps it might work another way entirely .....that the world appears to operate through cause and effect is a commonly held belief but does not mean that it must be that way....it might be completely wrong.
We are discussing two theories/laws explaining the world, aint we? Hence the need for definitions arose. We are not discussing our personal opinions about the world, but analyzing the world through the two laws in hand, and by doing so, trying to understand the similarities and the differences between the two.
Even if cause and effect as a commonly held belief does not make them necessarily right, but that does not make them wrong. In fact, the topic of this discussion is not discussing whether cause and effect are real or not, but comparing/contrasting determinism and DO in which causes and effects seem integral to both. Instead of focusing on the main issue, you focused on something completely different which is the validity of cause and effect, not by providing evidence, but by mere speculation. Notions such as "cause and effect might be a delusion" do not add anything useful, do not lead to clarity, but to confusion in my opinion.
If I provide causes for my opinions (which I am doubting but willing to be shown) then this might just show that I am under the spell of a delusional sense of "cause and effect". Think about gamblers.....some of them think that crossing their fingers (or other things) brings them luck until they loose their money.....we are all easily deluded (think identity view here).
I have already shown you when i quoted you.
Also in my mind, when you say that this might just show that you are under the spell of delusional sense of cause and effect, you did the following:
1- provided a speculative/imaginary/uninformative view
2- Presented it as if it was the truth
And the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus, saying: "Behold now, bhikkhus, I exhort you: All compounded things are subject to vanish. Strive with earnestness!"
This was the last word of the Tathagata.