It was far worse. They tried to frame the democratically-elected president for treason and waged a years-long coup based on Clinton campaign conspiracy theories that reached the highest echelons of the intelligence community and the administrative state. The riot on J6 was just their Reichstag moment. — NOS4A2

It’s clear that laws were broken on J6. What laws were broken in this coup you mention?

I don't think that you can only see stoic playacting and rank emotion. I think you're merely trolling, badly.

In the past, you've said contradictory things that indicate dishonesty. There's also the fact you're a diehard Trump supporter. I can't see how anyone who values truth could be such a diehard Trump supporter.

My defense is your apparent untrustworthiness, frankly.

I guess only Americans need to subscribe.

In the link you posted, this is what it says:

Join Fox News for access to this content
Plus get unlimited access to thousands of articles, videos and more with your free account!

Perhaps you forgot that you're a subscriber.

Maybe you're too embarrassed to admit your subscription. You should be.

Then how did you read the article that you linked to?

You have a subscription to Fox News?

Our Western notions about religion are largely tailored after Christianity, so when we look at other religions, we automatically see them through our Christianity-shaped lens. Yet this isn't necessarily how things work in other religions. — baker

Of course if people only know Christianity they’ll naturally view other religions through that lens because that’s the only model they know. I remember being in an introductory meeting at a zen center with a group of newbies years ago. One of the newcomers had a Christian background and asked about the ‘soul’ in Buddhism; asking what they called it or something. He didn’t seem to get it at all when someone tried to explain.

Regarding moral codes specifically, all religions got’m and they all basically work the same way in terms of adherence. Indeed, they generally work the same way in non-religious contexts as well, with those high in the social hierarchy enjoying immunity and those of low status suffering persecution for even minor transgressions.

I’m not a caramel fan myself, but looking up the Chomp I see that Cadbury has a wide variety of treats. The stores only stock a few around here.

Interesting about the Quakers. Until now I only suspected a connection with oatmeal.

Cadbury is an English brand, if I’m not mistaken. If so, I think that makes you some sort of cultural confectionery traitor. A person who’s allegiances are turned on a Dime.

If you say so. I haven’t been able to go back to regular bars since trying these.

The basic question is this: are words more than their symbols? — NOS4A2

Of course. Listen to your inner voice as it now speaks the word “concepts”. Words are merely signs for concepts. Concepts are built on the vast internal model of the world that we constructed throughout our lives.

If you weren't sure that it's a cult this may remove all doubt.

Suit yourself: Trump offers scraps of his indictment outfit for $4,699.53 a pop

It would be an inhuman condition so I don’t think we can say much about it at all.

Can we settle on boring?

It's really no different than the concept of heaven. What would heaven be like? If it's continuous happiness and joy then it is static and dead.

Metaphors can help bridge gaps in understanding, I’m told.

In Theravada and Early Buddhism kamma is intention. Generally, only intentional actions have kammic consequences. This is why two people, externally acting the same way, could face very different kammic consequences if their intentions for doing the actions differ, respectively. — baker

That’s how the law works too. If, for example, you unintentionally kill someone you may be off the hook, depending on the particulars (perhaps including such things as the color of your skin). If you intentionally kill someone you’re going to be in hot water with the law, particularly if you’re poor and can’t afford good legal representation.

The practice of law follows a series of well established steps that take intention into account and is not imponderable.

What you describe looks like Jainism, like I already said. — baker

Yes, I remember you saying that.

Do you remember me asking you: You're claiming that karma & rebirth in Buddhism are not based on cause & effect?

I think this has sometimes more to do with an unwillingness to engage in time-consuming explanations to people who seem hostile rather than anything else. — baker

Sorry I upset you. Maybe try to focus on the “anything else” part and ignore the hostility, if you’re capable. A few deep breaths might help.

And the attitude you've been displaying here certainly doesn't suggest that you're interested in learning about the Buddhist concepts of kamma and rebirth. So why bother? — baker

My mission is not necessarily to learn, though I’m certainly open to the prospect. You responded to statements that I made, not questions.

Why bother? I don’t know.

You should also know that in Buddhism, at least for monks, there are restrictions as to whom they can or should speak about Dhamma and to whom they shouldn't. Lay Buddhist people may also adopt those restrictions. — baker

Not sure why you mention this.

If you find that the Buddhists you're talking to don't seem all that open or willing to discuss things with you, then consider the possibility that you have ticked one or more boxes on that list of restriction criteria. (In my opinion, you have.) You can hardly blame people for setting boundaries on whom they spend their time on. — baker

Are you suggesting that some Buddhists may be able to answer ‘imponderable’ questions about karma and rebirth but don’t because they’re stingy with their time? I don’t think so. I think they can’t answer because they don’t know. Just like no one can answer questions about God.

If they seem evasive to you, bear in mind that from their perspective, you're evasive too. — baker

That covers them and me to some degree, not that it is in any way relevant to our chat. I would ask why you’re evasive, if I cared.

Unanswerable question #2:
What is it that travels from one body to the next body in Buddhist rebirth? They say it’s a soul in Hinduism.

Recall that when violent protesters attacked the whitehouse in 2020, removing barriers and violently harming officers and secret service with bricks and urine, defacing monuments, toppling statues, and the like, the press and politicians sang a different tune. Should the protesters have been shot in the face with pepper balls and concussion grenades thrown at their feet? — NOS4A2

The reports show that pepper spray, tear gas, and concussion grenades were used to disperse a crowd of hundreds. By contrast, it’s estimated that ten thousand were at the insurrection, two thousand of which made it into the capital building.

So far, you haven't asked any such question that I can't answer. — baker

Of course, you actually answered the question. Your answer is nonsensical though, regardless of any relation to karma and rebirth. You wrote:

What is said to be imponderable is knowing in advance what consequence some particular action you did now will have in the future, given that you will also do a lot of other things and their effects will mitigate each other. But right now, we don't know what other things you'll also do, hence the imponderability.

As far as I'm aware, it's impossible to know something in advance of knowing something. That's nonsensical and has nothing to do with my question.

My question basically has to do with narrative. Buddhists claim that karma & rebirth act according to cause & effect despite being unable to provide a narrative that shows this structure in their narratives. Going back to my example, if I were to create a narrative where someone spontaneously turned into a dirty cockroach for no apparent reason I would be failing to provide a narrative that shows cause & effect relationships. When asked about it I could, like the Buddhists do, say that the spontaneous transformation is inexplicable, or rather, imponderable, and that you'll just have to have faith in my narrative that the structure of cause & effect is there.

Ah.

It is admirable that Floyd turned his life around with the help of the church. After being found libel for fraud and rape, and facing scores of felony charges, there’s no sign that Trump’s going to turn his life around. Despite all that there’s also no sign that NOS, who’s been diligently defending Trump in this thread for years, thinks that he’s a scumbag. No Trump supporter would say that Trump’s a scumbag. If fact, many claim that he was chosen by God.

So when a person like NOS calls someone a scumbag it is meaningless.

Who received a bronze statue for BLM rioting? Oh, you mean the slavers statue that was pulled down. Were you a fan or something? Why do care so much about that?

Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. :worry:

I think this only shows that the protesters were too stupid to run away from pepper spray and rubber bullets. Do they also piss into the wind?

Given that in life you also do a lot of other things, their effects mitigate eachother. If you once stole a loaf of bread, but you later regret it, work hard, earn money, and with it buy a hundred loaves of bread and give them to charity, then having stolen that one loaf once can be mitigated and then some. — baker

This is irrelevant to the question.

What is said to be imponderable is knowing in advance what consequence some particular action you did now will have in the future, given that you will also do a lot of other things and their effects will mitigate each other. But right now, we don't know what other things you'll also do, hence the imponderability. — baker

You're basically saying that it's impossible for me to make predictions. Okey dokey! :snicker:

What you describe above is more like the Jain doctrine, a type of karmic fatalism. Hindu or Buddhist doctrines of karma are different.
...
Instead of freestyling your ideas about karma and rebirth... — baker

You're claiming that karma & rebirth in Buddhism are not based on cause & effect?

Scientific textbooks and terms are not authorities.
— praxis

No, people just treat them as such. — baker

Some textbooks may be authoritative in the sense that they're considered accurate or true. A textbook is not an authority in the sense that it doesn't have the power or right to give orders, make decisions, and enforce obedience.

Faith in authority is essential in religion.
— praxis

Gosh darn, why do scientists stick to the definitions of scientific terms as found in scientific textbooks? — baker

Scientific textbooks and terms are not authorities.

See the definition of authority

For instance, I could ask a dozen questions about rebirth that no one could answer.
— praxis
I double dare you. — baker

1. Karma and rebirth are supposedly based on cause & effect. If true, there's a mountain of causes that, at death, would logically result in rebirth that is practically indistinguishable from the previous life. Yet the story goes that if you do a lot of dirty deeds in your life you will be reborn as a dirty cockroach or something. That doesn't make sense if karma and rebirth are based on cause & effect. It would be like I'm a human being one instant and the next instant I spontaneously turn into a dirty cockroach, just because I stole a loaf of bread or whatever. I should be reborn the same human bread stealing dirty deed doer that I was the instant before death, if karma and rebirth are based on cause & effect.

If you ask a "book reader" about this they will say that such things are imponderable, or to put it another way, the book they read from is fiction.

NOSism - fat-shaming someone by noting their similarities to Churchill.

It is an open book to those who are able to read. — Wayfarer

That doesn’t appear to be true though. For instance, I could ask a dozen questions about rebirth that no one could answer. It would be the same for questions about God. All anyone could say is that the subject is imponderable or beyond human comprehension. Yet rebirth and God are held to be truths, and it is necessary to not oppose these truths in order to be considered part of the faith. Scientific theories, medical practices, and piano concertos don’t need to be taken on faith in order to belong to those communities. Binding groups in a shared narrative, values, norms, etc is not the point in those disciplines. That is entirely the point in religion.

It's not that they 'ignore' that teaching, although they might. It's also because the main point of the Buddhist teachings is not simply an open book to anyone who happens upon it; or rather, that insofar as it is an open book, one has to learn to read it. The Buddha declares elsewhere that 'the dhamma that I teach is subtle, deep, profound, only perceivable by the wise' (my italics). Unlike empirical science, the kind of insight into emotional reactivity and attachment that the Buddha teaches is a first-person discipline. But, and especially in the early Buddhist texts, it is also stressed that this insight can be obtained by others, as that is the aim of the entire teaching. However not everyone will have that insight to begin with, so to that extent the possibility must be taken on trust. And that does amount to faith, although I understand the connotations of the term provoke strong reactions. — Wayfarer

It is necessary the same with all religions. If religion was an “open book” as you say, and accessible to anyone, there would be no need for religious authorities and nothing *special* or sacred with which to bind a community. Faith in authority is essential in religion.

Well, I don’t seem to be convincing you that the Big Lie is actually a lie so I gotta work on my Hitler thinking.

Correct. :up:

I guess your mind-numbing conclusion is that I’m a nazi.

Big Lie, capital letters, exactly as written by political operatives. Everything is decided for you. Your only duty (and ability) is to repeat it. You cannot do otherwise. But your sorcery theory of words suggests you’d blame them and not yourself for being their parrot. — NOS4A2

A big lie about a big lie written by political operatives? :chin: :snicker:

A big lie is a gross distortion or misrepresentation of the truth primarily used as a political propaganda technique. The German expression was first used by Adolf Hitler in his book Mein Kampf (1925) to describe how people could be induced to believe so colossal a lie because they would not believe that someone "could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously". Goebbels said that if you tell "a lie big enough" and regularly repeat it [by someone viewed as an authority], "people will eventually come to believe it."



Anyway, if you’re saying that the Big Lie is a big lie then that seems to mean that you believe the Big Lie and that Trump’s propaganda has succeeded in shaping your beliefs.

Why would anyone attend a political rally? It's so weird. — Michael

I guess it’s a cult thing.

I was just thinking how meaningless a life must be to flock around a creep like Trump as though he were the second coming of Christ. And indeed many of them claim he was chosen by God, whatever that means.

No. They saw a virtual candidate in Joe Biden, someone who didn’t leave his bunker and had abysmal attendance at his rallies, but got the most votes of any president ever. That’s the problem: you pretend Trump convinced everyone, but really they’re just watching your malfeasance. — NOS4A2

Remarkably, you’re using some of the Big Lie words verbatim, that Joe never left his bunker, had poor attendance at his rallies, and yet got the most votes in history. This strongly indicates that you believe these words have influential power. And you’re right, they’ve proven to be effective.

I personally didn’t attend any of Biden’s rallies. Does that somehow disqualify my vote for him? I simply chose what I thought was the much lesser of two evils.

Au contraire, with mere words Trump managed to convince millions that the election was stolen, despite all evidence, or rather lack of evidence, to the contrary. In fact, some of them believed it so fervently they stormed the nations capitol and intentionally disrupted congress.

As of September, around 380 people have been imprisoned because of January 6th. Imprisonment caused by mere words from your God-King.