I think this is exactly the same as when that loony here in the U.S. blamed Hurricane Katrina on America's "sins".
Somehow, finding superstitious, judgmental idiocy like that across ideologies is comforting, like there is consistency in human stupidity.
Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
Oy.
P.S. I'd elaborate but I'm afraid of saying something else stupid.
Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
quote:I think this is exactly the same as when that loony here in the U.S. blamed Hurricane Katrina on America's "sins".
I disagree. The loonies in the U.S. who say that God caused 9/11 or Katrina or threaten the Dover school district with divine retribution have a large following. Sharon Stone can't even get cast in a movie anymore.
The problem isn't with an isolated nut saying something like this, but (besides people actually looking to these people for guidance) that some have enough power, money, and influence (Robertson, Hagee, Falwell, etc.) and represent/shape the beliefs of a significant chunk of people that politicians pander to them and grant them influence in how this country is run.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
She's a good actress (I just watched The Mighty on Sunday, and she was marvelous). But she's been making idiotic social/political comments for years.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
I'll just quote myself in the 'Indiana Jones 4 draws the ire of Russian Communists...' thread:
quote: It is worthwhile to point out that this is an interesting example of how news travels and is received around the world. Clearly, this was intended for a specific audience in Russia and not for, well, us.
Basically, Sharon Stone suggested at the Cannes that the Sichuan earthquake may be a result of karma, which is obviously not being received so well by some in Hong Kong, let alone China proper since they had their three days of mourning last week for 65,000+ deaths.
The interesting thing is that the news clip is from Hong Kong TV and is mostly in English, but also has short Cantonese and Mandarin bits. However, the majority of the interviewed are Columbian, Japanese, and French reporters at the Cannes speaking English. Globalisation and the media is pretty cool sometimes.
In any case, both pieces are interesting illustrations of the problems of how messages targeted at some domestic groups can be received quite differently somewhere else in the world.
What fascinates me is how, despite all the claims of an "enlightened" age, people still try to make sense of natural disasters.
Earthquakes happen because plates shift. Hurricanes happen because weather is crazy. I think it's hilarious how Stone mentioned karma and the American psycho mentioned God, but both really just referred to a supernatural disastermaker visiting an impersonal and horrific "justice." Thousands of years, and that still doesn't change.
There's something in our brains that doesn't like random disaster.
Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
I think, in these cases, there's also the added element that the people making these statements want bad things to happen to the "immoral" victims of the tragedy. There's a bit of wish fulfillment in there as well.
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
quote:Originally posted by rivka: She's a good actress (I just watched The Mighty on Sunday, and she was marvelous). But she's been making idiotic social/political comments for years.
I don't know. I think Gillian Anderson upstaged her in that movie. She's really not my favourite actress, Sharon Stone.
Besides, that's a stupid comment. No one deserves to be devastated like that...
(well, I don't like the Chinese GOVERNMENT very much, but even they don't deserve that.)
Posted by Achilles (Member # 7741) on :
quote:Originally posted by MrSquicky:
quote:I think this is exactly the same as when that loony here in the U.S. blamed Hurricane Katrina on America's "sins".
I disagree. The loonies in the U.S. who say that God caused 9/11 or Katrina or threaten the Dover school district with divine retribution have a large following. Sharon Stone can't even get cast in a movie anymore.
It doensn't matter how many people are wrong to make a point valid or not. The statements, as were the statements made by those others, were founded in delusion.
Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
Yes, but Sharon Stone is making delusional statement in isolation. No one really cares what she thinks. The various conservative christian leaders who made these statements represent and help shape the opinions of a large group of people and they wield influence in how our country is run.
Thus, these two situations are not exactly the same.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
I'm not interested in that aspect of the conversation.
---
I think there should be a greater uproar about this. I think there should be a conversation about how people look for explanations, despite our growing understanding about how the world works.
Plate tectonics wasn't enough. I'd wager that this actress knows on at least an elementary level why earthquakes happen, and she still felt a need to chalk it up to supernatural justice.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
I don't see what having knowledge of plate tectonics has to do with believing that it was an act of God. Just as understanding (and believing in) evolution isn't incompatable with, and oftentimes doesn't effect in the slightest the belief that God created the earth and all life on it, why would understanding the mechanisms that create earthquakes change someone's opinion about whether it's an act of God?
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
*considers* It is because of my belief in that nature of God that I don't think acts like a bored Calvin on a lazy Sunday afternoon. Comments like that of the actress's and that of the preachers offend me on two levels: 1) that phenomona with scientific explanations are used to preach self-righteously, and 2) the defamation to the character of God that he would toss out justice like that without warning and without explanation.
Posted by Tresopax (Member # 1063) on :
quote:What fascinates me is how, despite all the claims of an "enlightened" age, people still try to make sense of natural disasters.
There are scientists that spend their lives trying to make sense of natural disasters - I don't think we should consider them "unenlightened" for doing so. The whole reason we're in an "enlightened" age, insofar as it can be called that, is because mankind has an urge to make sense of nature.
-----
Having said that, I doubt Stone's comment has much to do with making sense of the earthquake. I think it has more to do with a human desire to punish injustice - when we can't punish someone ourselves, we have a tendency to assign the job retroactively to random and totally unrelated disasters in their lives and say "they deserved it."
Of course, the problem with that thinking, and Stone's thinking in this case, is that the people most victimized by this earthquake are not the ones most directly to blame for the Tibet issue. If the universe was really out to punish those responsible for that injustice, it would probably do it to the leaders of China, not to the average folk who have little say in Chinese-Tibetan policy.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
That's a good point. I've only a pop culture acquaintance with karma, but I wonder what crimes she thinks the schoolchildren committed that made them deserve to have a building fall on their heads.
Posted by aspectre (Member # 2222) on :
quote:...and I thought, "Is that karma?"...They're not being very nice to the Dali Lama, who's a good friend of mine...
I very much doubt that the DaliLama looks as favorably upon Stone's comments as China does.
Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
I've got a wikipedia acquaintance with karma, and I think it isn't necessarily anything that they did in this life, if one were to argue it was karma.
Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
quote:I think there should be a conversation about how people look for explanations, despite our growing understanding about how the world works.
I'm not sure what you mean by this. This conversation is going on. It has been for quite some time now. I linked you to a part of it. We have some pretty well-established ideas about what is going on in cases like this?
Do you mean a conversation out in the public square?
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
pooka, I suspect that the actress has about as good an acquaintance with the concept of karma as the average Westerner.
Posted by Achilles (Member # 7741) on :
quote:Originally posted by MrSquicky: Yes, but Sharon Stone is making delusional statement in isolation. No one really cares what she thinks. The various conservative christian leaders who made these statements represent and help shape the opinions of a large group of people and they wield influence in how our country is run.
Thus, these two situations are not exactly the same.
Oh. I agree. That other situation is probably even more dangerous.
I was just saying that comparing one person being wrong to lots of people being wrong is useless. Wrong is wrong, no matter how many people believe it. But lots of wrong people are dangerous. That is your point, I see that now.
Posted by Dan_raven (Member # 3383) on :
Blame is a wonderous dangerous simple thing.
When you lay blame you succeed in doing only one thing, relieving yourself from the responsibility of doing anything about the problem.
So when Sharon Stone says that its China's fault that the earthquake happens, Sharon Stone no longer has to work on the problems caused by the earthquake. Since it was China's Karmic problem, China can solve it.
In deed, if she needs to do anything, its to make sure China behaves better, by loud protests and angry letters to the editor. She isn't being anti-Chinese. She's saving them from the next quake.
When uninformed Ministers condemned Katrina and 911 as due to God's condemnation of Gay Rights Parades that occurred in those cities they no longer had to worry about helping those victimized by the disasters. It was the homosexual communities fault, not theirs.
In deed, if they had to do anything it was to fight harder to stop homosexual activities, hence saving thousands of others from future disasters.
When gas prices exploded this past year Senator Clinton blamed OPEC. She demanded they change, not us.
President Bush blamed environmentalists, demanding they change their stance on protecting the environment, not we change our use and abuse of fossil fuels.
Everyone loves blame. It points fingers away from ourselves, and frees us from having to solve the problem. If its not our fault, we don't have to deal with it.
Blame, its what's for dinner.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
quote:Originally posted by pooka: I've got a wikipedia acquaintance with karma, and I think it isn't necessarily anything that they did in this life, if one were to argue it was karma.
I'm not entirely sure if it would be better or worse, if she was arguing that. In some ways, I think it would actually be fairly disturbing/disgusting if one were to argue that when bad things happen to people, that is actually diagnostic of them having been bad in a previous life. Ick.
In any case, she did mention roughly define karma as "IS THAT KARMA... when you are not nice that bad things happen to you?" (defining bad things as the Tibetan situation) which seems to contradict that particular interpretation.
Posted by DarkKnight (Member # 7536) on :
quote: President Bush blamed environmentalists, demanding they change their stance on protecting the environment, not we change our use and abuse of fossil fuels.
Does this work for environmentalists too? They blame us for climate change.
Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
I think part of the point of karma is to explain why bad things happen to good people.
But as far as wikipedia goes:
quote:Religion In the early 1990s, Stone became a member of the Church of Scientology. Stone remained with the religion until recently when she converted to Buddhism, after fellow actor Richard Gere introduced her to the Dalai Lama.[22] She is an ordained minister with the Universal Life Church.[23]
Posted by Teshi (Member # 5024) on :
This strikes me as a rather unintelligent person making a rather unintelligent comment. The Chinese people are right to be derisive. Even if karma did exist, the 65 thousand people, including children, killed are not to blame for any action undertaken by the state. To describe 65 thousand people you don't know as 'not nice' is ludicrous.
quote:Does this work for environmentalists too? They blame us for climate change.
If the Chinese had arguably somehow directly scientifically caused the earthquake, this comment would be applicable. As it stands, it is irrelevant.
Posted by Blayne Bradley (Member # 8565) on :
I just have to wonder now how many people think the US government now possesses an earthquake machine, I recall an argument once where people insisted on it.
Posted by Achilles (Member # 7741) on :
Sharon Stone's, and much of Western Civ's understanding of Karma is inherently flawed.
In it's correct usage, karma determines your dharma. That is, your karma only comes into effect upon death, to determine what your next life will be.
Read The Tibetan Book of the Dead for a more complete description.
Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
I don't know that karma as I've studied it "determines" your dharma. I thought dharma was the actions of those who have escaped samsara (or worldly existence) and are in a state of moksha, or liberation.
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
quote:Originally posted by Synesthesia:
quote:Originally posted by rivka: She's a good actress (I just watched The Mighty on Sunday, and she was marvelous). But she's been making idiotic social/political comments for years.
I don't know. I think Gillian Anderson upstaged her in that movie. She's really not my favourite actress, Sharon Stone.
Besides, that's a stupid comment. No one deserves to be devastated like that...
(well, I don't like the Chinese GOVERNMENT very much, but even they don't deserve that.)
I didn't remember either of them in that movie. I love that movie, but totally forget who's in it, other than Kieran Culkin.
Obviously I need to watch it again.
And yes, Sharon Stone is an idiot; people do not cause earthquakes.
Posted by Achilles (Member # 7741) on :
quote:Originally posted by pooka: I don't know that karma as I've studied it "determines" your dharma. I thought dharma was the actions of those who have escaped samsara (or worldly existence) and are in a state of moksha, or liberation.
Yes. You have a more complete understanding of the term than most, however. Dharma is very akin to the idea of destiny in Western thought. A little easier to digest for most.
You got all that from Wiki? Wow. And here I poured over the Book of the Dead for nuthin!
Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
I got it from several wiki articles, including one on the Mandelbrot set. I find this bit fascinating:
quote:"Moksha can be attained only by doing, not by a process of effort". All actions performed by one in the state of Moksha are called Dharma.[citation needed]
"That's so deep, it goes right up to the point of being... confusing." -- Invisible Boy
I only got interested in Buddhism last week, and I've been incredibly excited by what I've found.
Posted by Achilles (Member # 7741) on :
It's very interesting, to be sure. Check out the Tibetan guide to passing through the Bardo. I find it both interesting and metaphorical. It has some great perspective on human psychology, I think.
(Though I don't believe in souls or reincarnation.)
Posted by Achilles (Member # 7741) on :
It's very interesting, to be sure. Check out the Tibetan guide to passing through the Bardo. I find it both interesting and metaphorical. It has some great perspective on human psychology, I think.
(Though I don't believe in souls or reincarnation.)
Posted by JonHecht (Member # 9712) on :
Why do people care what actors say? Simply because they are good at one thing does not mean that they know what the hell they are talking about.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
Is that a question asking for more information about the people in China, the Western world, or purely rhetorical? Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
quote:Sentient beings who have not practiced during their lived experience and/or who do not recognize the clear light (Tibetan: od gsal) at the moment of death are usually deluded throughout the fifth bardo of luminosity.
That is really interesting. This has a lot to do with my whole concept of heaven and hell. Hell is simply a state of disorientation of being separated from your brain if you have not developed your spiritual communication with the divine in this life. It would be like being a newborn baby, where sensory bombardment alternates with long periods of sleep. It also could be similar to the emotional state of waking from a dream (though in our bodies we are generally able to shake such disorientation easily.)
So when you say you don't believe in souls, what do you see in this?
Posted by Achilles (Member # 7741) on :
I see an interesting perspective of human psychology. Delusion is not nessisarily relegated to the bardo. I read the Book of the Dead as literature. It is an interesting view of Buddhist ideas, and gave me a lot of insight into that particular venue of Eastern culture. It's been a while, but I believe that this would be the point where the Devas would force you to flee into a new womb.
Let me locate some links on my thoughts about TBotD and KSR's The Years of Rice and Salt.
Posted by Achilles (Member # 7741) on :
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)