Karma can be defined as actual cause and effect, and that how we treat others will reflect on we think of ourselves which will ultimately lead to an outcome in our lives. The part I do understand about karma is the cause and effect from which or behaviors manifest our perception of reality, but what I don’t understand is how it is possible for our perception on reality, lets say a destructive one, lead to self destructive outcomes in our lives. Just because we have a destructive perception on life doesn’t mean that our conscience will lead us to destruction. The only way that would be possible is that if there are imposed consequences for our perceptions of reality and their reflective behaviors. Thus a an imposition must have an imposer or god. In a way, karma is similar to the notion that we will be punished or rewarded in heaven our hell after we perish depending on our decisions now hear on earth, but karma instead either gives us little piece of heaven or hell while we are still alive on this planet. Good things happen to bad people, but they also happen to good people. Also, good and bad things happen to both good and bad people. In order to answer such a question another must first be asked: Do you believe in free will? The reason why this question needs to be asked first is because one of the implications discerned from the original question "Do you believe in Karma" is that if you do believe in karma, then how would it be possible to at the same time believe in free will? The answer is that it is not possible if you think logically. The reason is that karma negates free will. So logically, karma can only be understood as the enforcement of the consequences of our actions (actions which reflect our perceptions of reality) which are enforced by an enforcer (god) from outside the realm of our existence. If this is true then this would mean our own actions or causes don't lead to our own effects or consequences, and free will goes right out the door.
Furthermore, cause and effect leaves no room for karma; our actions (causes) are actually effects caused by previous effects, and from which those effects will cause subsequent effects. The only way to alter the pattern of cause and effect would be to alter the conscience of a decision making being which is self aware (humans). What this would imply is that the notion of karma is actually a paradox because the only way to alter or influence a conscience would be to physically alter the brain, and the only ways to achieve this is through drugs which will ultimately changes our thoughts and alters perspective on reality and make us delusional because we can't see reality for what it truly is. But, we can also change our thoughts by making a conscious decision to do so, which would actually be employing freewill. Therefore, karma is actually a delusion created by our own thoughts through our own free will which alters our conscience because we can't see reality for what it actually is; a reality which obeys the laws of physics more specifically cause and effect; karma is actually the effect of its own cause; a paradox. Basically, karma is only true because we decide to make it true, but we can also decide to not believe in it, and in that case it actually doesn't exist because it has no effect on our conscience. Ultimately, to believe in free will is to not believe in karma, and to believe in karma is to not leave any room for our own free will.
Personally, I believe in free will. I think we should take responsibility for our own decisions, and by we I mean as individuals and the whole of mankind. Obviously, we haven't yet because there are those who still believe in something as ridiculous as karma. Karma is nothing more that a selective observation and negation of others which gives the observer a lopsided perspective on reality. Those who believe karma are oblivious to the fact that it's just as likely that good things will happen to good people as bad things will happen to bad people if it is taken from the perspective of the individual in which that something happened to, assuming the individual doesn't use selective observation and takes into account not only just the good things or the bad things that have happened to them, but also all the good or bad decisions they've made in their lives. Odds are they'll find an unbalanced occurrence of the positive and negatives of cause sand effects in they're lives, and realize that karma only exists because they choose to fit karma into a box which they've created themselves in order to validate its existence within their lives. In short, they choose to only recall the bad things they've done when something bad happens to them, and choose to only to recall the good things they've done when something good happens to them. Their conscience will not let them see outside the box in which karma exists in their minds depending on the given circumstance.
Everything which exits in nature besides us is not self aware, we are the only sentient beings. So nature is not aware of the fact that we are self ware. If nature isn’t ware of our awareness then how could it possibly care what decisions we make. The natural occurrence of cause and effect doesn’t take into account that we are aware of its existence because it isn’t even aware that it or anything else in nature actually exists; cause and effect happens regardless of our “feelings” towards it. We interpret the nature of cause and effects through the filtering of our nervous system or our sensory perception which is unique only to us in nature. Nature isn’t good or bad, but simply obeys the laws of physics (cause and effect), and because we are a part of nature we are included in its process of cause and effect. This only holds true of course with the exclusion “divine intervention” from a greater power (god) which could alter the course cause and effect within nature, in other words karma. Also, to prove the validity karma's claim, we would have to take into account for every individual’s ratio of good and bad decisions in their lives to all the good and bad experiences in their lives. They're maybe a possibility that if we take into account every consequence of every decision made by of all mankind from the beginning of our time as self aware conscious beings, that we'd actually be able to prove karma's existence. But, this is only from a holistic perspective of all mankind, and odds are that for the individual life isn't fair; some people deserve what they get and some do not.
Although in my opinion, karma isn't real, it does have one particular (maybe two) benefits, in that it gives those who actually have a conscience something: conditioning. If someone who believes in karma decides at a moment to do something bad, and then later experiences something bad which happens to them, they will be reminded of all the bad things they've done and feel enormous guilt; this prevents future bad decisions because the fear of experiencing enormous guilt again, and that the enforcer of karma (god perhaps) disapproves, which also instills the fear of a greater power who decides the our rewards or punishments. This is also the same for the opposite; those who do good things we'll feel reassured that the greater power which controls karma approves of their decisions, and they will feel safe from bad experiences within the future and be rewarded for good deeds. The problem with this that this doesn't leave any room for goodwill. Shouldn't we have goodwill, rather then doing good out of fear of karma? Shouldn't we let our own consciences' make our decisions rather then letting some arbitrary belief like karma control them? I believe so.
Last edited by rojasje87 on 29 Aug 2010, 4:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
29 Aug 2010, 1:53 pm
