Excellent post, New, and happy to see that you're back. Marek
** --- In [email protected], new.morning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Some thoughts from reading this thread > > > When you smile at someone ... > > From what I observe, actions seem to create an effect. You smile at > someone, they generally smile at you. Go to college, and more types of > jobs are open to you. Save an invest some money, then later there is > something in the bank. Science has mapped out millions of things, > some quite precisely. Do A, B occurs. Some maps are more precise, such > as physics and chemistry. Others are more general, because all the > factors can't be isolated -- like the economy. But still, cause and > effect is pretty clear there too. Raise the price of something and > people tend to buy less of it. > > How far does cause and effect extend? Hard to say -- but it > seems to operate at the small level of quantum mechanics, and at the > large level of cosmology. Given that track record, cause and effect > being every where I look, its not a huge stretch to postulate that > things that happen to me, good and bad, result from past cause. On the > other had, maybe some crazy monkey god on some unknown planet pushed a > button and cause someone to get angry with me. That perhaps is more > comforting when something bad happens -- "poor me, I am a victim of > the irrational monkey god from the galaxy Spartagolopdia" More > plausible to me, is that I did something to provoke the person. > > > Which is more irrational -- accepting or denying cause an effect? > > I find it more odd to dismiss cause and effect, than I do in > accepting it -- at least as a good working hypothesis. In that sense, > to me, the universe "makes sense". To say its "perfect" is to place a > human value judgement or layer of perception over it. To me, while > "perfect" might be a nice poetic way to describe it, more accurate to > me is simply that's the way it is. Its "perfect"in the sense that the > first law of thermodyndamics is "perfect" (nothing is ever lost or > gained. It just keeps getting transformed). But FLOT is not "perfect" > is just IS the way things are. > > > Even if universe is irrational and unfair ... > > And could the working hypothesis be wrong? Of course, But even if I > did not cause something that is now effecting me, I am still not a > victim. i find there is usually a learning opportunity, or the > experience cultures something of value. Irrational experiences, unfair > experiences happen. They become more understandable, rational, if can > see that I caused them. But even if I didn't cause it, I find that > many seemingly "unpleasant" events can be a gift. > > Even if, especially if, its "irrational" and "unfair". If > someone is irrationally inflammatory and mis-perceptive -- at first, > it can be a bit unsettling to be the target of their baseless tirades. > But I often find such to be a gift. Those experiences have cultured, > for me, some things of value. And at times in my life, I have suffered > substantial loss. "Suffered" is a traditional way to describe loss. I > have found that often loss can be liberating. And gain can be an > albatros around one's neck. So to equate, absolutely, suffering with > loss I find can be a large mistake. > > > Should I tell a homeless guy its his fault -- or simply try help him? > > Extrapolating my own personal views of how the universe (possibly) > works, onto the situations of others, I find is not particularly > useful. While a homeless person may, or may not have, caused their > situation, and it may be a horrible situation, or a > character-building, even liberating experience, all of that is > immaterial. It does no good to tell them that, or to justify inaction. > When someone is in need, its an opportunity for us to help, to > empathize, to act compassionately. Someone being homeless is not > "perfect". It is what is. Its false, and irrational to deny it. or > ignore it. Our ability to help is also What Is. If anything is > perfect, it would be our ability to act with compassion to help them. > > > Sometimes we react to our reaction to what someone said, not to what > they actually said. > > To speculate that the vastly observable pattern of cause and effect > may be far reaching, does not "justify the caste system", is not "an > excuse to not help others", is not "some ancient supersticious > belief", does not mean "astrology works", or any number of other odd > conclusions that "do not follow". Yet, such a simple observation about > cause and effect, it appears, can invoke such phantom connections in > our minds, at times. Its interesting to observe each other reacting to > our reactions, and not the singular point made -- in and of itself. >
