Philosophy Now Forum

If, then, the material world has a beginning, then you are right: the rest becomes absurd, an implausible "just-so" kind of story. The whole system hangs on the supposition of the co-eternality of spiritual and material. The world, for you, and within the system that you function in, has ...

I say that your brand of theism, and the specificity of false notions about Jesus Christ as the sole gateway (to whatever you describe as of ultimate value) is erroneously grounded. Yes, I know you do say that. But WHY? Why is it that you think the Vedic one is superior? You still haven't said: and...

But that's not what Hinduism says. In Hinduism, rather, "punishment" or better, "samsara," "suffering," is perpetual, and in fact, eternal. It's karmic, and a cycle, and goes around and around forever, unless one escapes the great Wheel by achieving enlightenment and r...

It’s time for both of you guys (you and IC) to emerge from the fog of the opposing mythologies that you both cling to, and realize that the truth of reality is far more, again, wonderful, and logical, and purposeful than what our ancient ancestors were able to discern. You hear that Immanuel? Words...

Yes, the karmic view implies you inherit your own sins. But it also requires both the soul and the material universe to be omni-existent entities. And science reveals quite definitively that material reality is not eternal. So it presents a very serious problem for Eastern mysticisms. I note that y...

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Mon Feb 16, 2026 8:08 pm Well, karma isn't a "philosophy," but a supposition. But let that be.

Karma is part of a metaphysical conception expressed, often, philosophically.

But the belief in a past-eternal universe is different; science definitively debunks it. You continually rephrase what I say into statements I did not make. I did not make any statement about a 'past-eternal universe', I repeated what is expressed in much Vedic scripture: that the soul is part-and-...

As far as I know there is no science based way to know and to have solid, absolute answers to many of these questions. Well, I think that if you did know more about these things, you'd be less certain of that. No sir, I have examined numerous of the sources you have recommended over the years and n...

...thoughtful men, within our intellectual traditions, have read the Gita and come to very very different conclusions about it than you did... And thoughtful men within our intellectual tradition have read the Gita and criticized its irrationality and amorality, as I have. So that looks like a wash...

If you have something from the Gita that should make us believe it's superior, please feel free to point it out. But I started with the statement that your version of 'the soul' is inadequate, that is one, and the Bhadgavad Gita presents the notion that our soul is a minor element of the same stuff...

Will you continue post after post, asking one question after another? When will you yourself respond?

I'm not speaking with Aldous Huxley, am I? I'm speaking with you. And it wasn't Huxley's claim, but yours. Hold on, let me check. You are right! (I had a moment of doubt but I resolved it. Whew!) The point however you missed. It is that thoughtful men, within our intellectual traditions, have read ...

I'm responding to your claim of worldview superiority, by asking the reasonable question: how do you establish your perspective as superior. But to answer that question we would have to acknowledge that all people, and any person, and certainly you in your case, will 'establish their perspectives',...

Will you continue post after post, asking one question after another? When will you yourself respond ? Here BTW is Aldous Huxley's introduction to one version of the Bhagavad Gita. It is worthy of consideration and is, at least, interesting and relevant to our topic. So I might say that a man, a rat...

Yes, I know you do say that. But WHY? Why is it that you think the Vedic one is superior? You still haven't said: and in fact, this message is just another attempt to reverse that burden-of-proof, rather than forming an answer. I don't think you have an answer. I think that if you did, you'd have p...