dimreepr

Indeed, using a poker analogy, he's short stacked and he's made a substantial raise pre-flop with a pair of 9's; it doesn't matter what the flop is, he's always going to commit everything; because he has nothing to lose, and if we win the hand he's always got his gun.

LOL +1

The point Confucius is trying to make is, if we just hate instead of trying to understand; then we all lose...

Indeed, But we've also seen his determination to win, something, at any cost... The needs of the many, is always a fine balance; the needs of the one is no corollary.

I wonder what happens, when Putin starts to lose because of western supply of arm's; it's a fine balance of allowing Putin to win enough to avoid him going to war with NATO.

That seems fair, I've made a proper fool of myself... But to never forgive our human foibles is kinda the point, it's not rational to dismiss an honest question or belief, even if you don't like it...

PTSD suggests, if I do harm to other's I do harm to me; I choose to feed the happy wolf. But I don't have the value of two sheep...

For every, negative, action there is a positive action; in life two negatives doesn't produce a positive; for instance, if I don't have two sheep and I take away two sheep, how do I suddenly have four sheep?

My apologies @Genady I was a bit drunk yesterday. Because he's the one making the claim, faith doesn't require proof; the religious who claim science is wrong, then they need to provide evidence that he's wrong. I don't care what you believe, if it makes you happy; the scientific method is to provide a bias free way to investigate ourselves and our world, not a means to destroy subjective contentment in other's. What makes you doubt that karma is practically Newtonian? PTSD is well established and causes pain and suffering to those who have encountered a traumatic event; a normal person that kills someone, will sufer as a result. There's nothing supernatural about it.

What makes you think, zero has a value?

Then you ignore the question of life and it's value...

Why?

It's my topic...

We all have something we don't want to admit, but I forgive myself; seems more rational to me, than blaming someone else...

That depends on what you've done wrong...

Depends on your level of understanding, IOW, how is karma wrong?

Indeed, but that doesn't make the old man wrong...

Welcome to our world of grey; in order to teach a child, we need to paint a monochromatic picture first, and then smudge the colours.

We have to learn somewhere/sometime... Can you explain why the old man is wrong?

And that's the point of my Berty quote, thanks... It is if it's science that claims it... But like I've said, in this thread, it's NOT about a god...

Which is more rational to believe without evidence: Something that makes you happy or something that makes you laugh? Dawkins can't prove that God doesn't exist, yet he's happy to point the finger and claim, they're delusional. Not every religion claims the supernatural, karma for instance is practically Newtonian. How does that quote contradict mine? How is this thread an attack on science?

but it is a belief...

Which is truer?