From fear of Him does the wind blow; from fear of Him does the sun rise; from fear of Him do Agni and Indra act and death, the fith, doth run (T.U. II.8.1) (Katha II3.3) How does this combine moral and natural claims? Oh my God! You know what, don't bother replying. All those mentions in the scriptures, to practice disciplines, serve the Guru etc. to make oneself fit for the study of Upanishads are bunk. tcpip just needs to swoop in,and randomly quote scipture, and use his imagination to draw conclusion which noone in the Hindu tradition has drawn so far. If only we knew for the past thousands of years that all Dharma is bunk. There is no such thing as Dharma - the Upanishads say there are no moral obligations! I salute your critical analysis, where would we be without you.
Er, no I don't. I only use natural order in the descriptive sense You use natural order in the sense of a present state of things which people should maintain - that is not descriptive but prescriptive.
An action which has followed natural law from beginning to end No, it hasn't. It has required certain choices from free will to be made by humans, which is not dictated by Rta.
You attacked my sincerity I have found you to insincere towards the apparent purpose of having a productive discussion, and more interested in talking about yourself and showing off your familiarity with random terminology. You have ignored my answers and kept asking the same questions, refused to demonstrate how the is-ought fallacy follows from the concept of Rta reverting again and again instead to incorrect usage of the translation "natural order", not acknowledging most places where you were shown to be wrong, and making pompous statements talking mostly about yourself rather than the subject. So I stand by what I said. I started with a much different set of expectations from you, if I could have foreseen your approach I wouldn't have made the first comment. I thought it appropriate to be known that I have been surprised. As for "attack", this is not a forum and only we two are conversing. Still, if you are so sensitive about it, please know that I have found your method of conversing to be baffling and insulting as well.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2011-12-16 05:07 pm (UTC)How does this combine moral and natural claims? Oh my God! You know what, don't bother replying. All those mentions in the scriptures, to practice disciplines, serve the Guru etc. to make oneself fit for the study of Upanishads are bunk. tcpip just needs to swoop in,and randomly quote scipture, and use his imagination to draw conclusion which noone in the Hindu tradition has drawn so far. If only we knew for the past thousands of years that all Dharma is bunk. There is no such thing as Dharma - the Upanishads say there are no moral obligations! I salute your critical analysis, where would we be without you.
Er, no I don't. I only use natural order in the descriptive sense
You use natural order in the sense of a present state of things which people should maintain - that is not descriptive but prescriptive.
An action which has followed natural law from beginning to end
No, it hasn't. It has required certain choices from free will to be made by humans, which is not dictated by Rta.
You attacked my sincerity
I have found you to insincere towards the apparent purpose of having a productive discussion, and more interested in talking about yourself and showing off your familiarity with random terminology. You have ignored my answers and kept asking the same questions, refused to demonstrate how the is-ought fallacy follows from the concept of Rta reverting again and again instead to incorrect usage of the translation "natural order", not acknowledging most places where you were shown to be wrong, and making pompous statements talking mostly about yourself rather than the subject. So I stand by what I said. I started with a much different set of expectations from you, if I could have foreseen your approach I wouldn't have made the first comment. I thought it appropriate to be known that I have been surprised. As for "attack", this is not a forum and only we two are conversing. Still, if you are so sensitive about it, please know that I have found your method of conversing to be baffling and insulting as well.