Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that The doctrine of non-self is incompatible with the Buddhist doctrines of karma and rebirth

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.The body ceases to exist at death
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Mental states all originate in dependence on sense-object contact events, so no psychological constituent can transmigrate
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If no constituent moves from one life to the next, the being in the next life cannot be the same person as the being in this life
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Karma requires a morally continuous agent who accumulates and 'owns' the consequences of intentional actions across time.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Anattā denies any persistent self or soul that could constitute such a morally continuous agent.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Without a persistent agent to bear moral responsibility, karmic inheritance across lives collapses into mere causal sequence with no normative force.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Parfit's reductionism in 'Reasons and Persons' demonstrates that psychological continuity without a persisting self cannot ground desert-based moral accountability.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Buddhist rebirth requires that the being born bears the specific karmic debt of the specific being who died, not merely resembles them causally.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A causal stream of momentary mental events, as in Vasubandhu's Abhidharma analysis, generates qualitative continuity but cannot ground the numerical identity that karmic justice presupposes.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.