Avatar
Please consider registering
guest
sp_LogInOut Log In sp_Registration Register
Register | Lost password?
Advanced Search
Forum Scope


Match



Forum Options



Minimum search word length is 3 characters - maximum search word length is 84 characters
sp_TopicIcon
Tibet under the Dalai Lamas: Tales of Slavery, Torture and Serfdom
January 29, 2009
11:43 pm
Avatar
guest_guest
Guest
Guests
101sp_Permalink sp_Print

He inherited the same fuedal system and was taking part in it until 1959. Thats when China came in and stopped his butt from continuing the fuedal and barbaric rule that had enslaved the serfs of Tibet for centuries. Not that their response was ideal but I would say it was better.

Plus, you didnt tell me what you think of the Golden Urn process.

Did you see how Tez said its not a random process and then I gave him the link to the Golden Urn? Funny.

Whopper. Yea.

January 31, 2009
12:13 am
Avatar
Guest
Guests
102sp_Permalink sp_Print

BevDee.

It seems to me that G_g doesn't understand the meaning of the word 'random'.

Or is there something that I'm missing - do you think?

My post of 29-Jan-09 shows anything but a random process undergone in establishing the identity of the next Dalai Lama. However as the cut and paste posted by G_g shows, if there happens to be more than one equally highly qualified individuals that have been chosen by this very selective process then a draw is held to decide which. See below for a repeat of G_g's cut and paste for your convenience.

However, if there are several possibilities of the reincarnation, in the past regents and eminent officials and monks at the Jokhang in Lhasa, and the Minister to Tibet would decide on the individual by placing the boys names inside an urn and drawing one lot in public if it was too difficult to judge the reincarnation initially.[21]"

Firstly might I point out that the Minister To Tibet is a Chinese official. Even so, this would seem to me to be a very fair and wise way to select one from say three equally highly likely candidates.

Could you explain to me exactly how G_g could possibly see this process as being a random selection from amongst the whole Tibetan child male population? It G_g being obtuse through design or is it his natural disposition? Is it possible that he just doesn't know what the word 'random' means from a statistics perspective?

In addition, can you tell me why G_g shows little interest in the injustices perpetrated on the American Indians in his country of adoption and shows so much bias in direct opposition to the policies and awards of the said government of his adopted country? After all the Dalai Lama was given a prestigious award by his US government. Why is he supporting the Communist Chinese government by promoting Chinese propaganda? Since the Communist Chinese government are not democratic this seems strange to me - almost treasonable? Why isn't G_g highlighting major human rights violations in Pakistan his own home country for example? Doesn't charity begin at home? Now because I question what appears to me to be his ignorance, I guess the hoary old 'argumentum ad hominem' accusations will start flying around again.

January 31, 2009
8:57 am
Avatar
guest_guest
Guest
Guests
103sp_Permalink sp_Print

Do I see anyone here praising Pakistan and saying what a wonderful place it is and how free it is of corruption? __No__. If I did, I'd set the records straight. I'd tell them that the country basically sucks and I'd tell them why and back it up with facts. So yea - dont talk about Pakistan here. You're throwing a red herring here - nice try. On to the topic.

You have 3 men chosen to become the CEO of a huge multinational company. All of them are 'equally qualified'. Do you think drawing a lot is a valid process to determine who should be the CEO? Do you see this silly practice happening anywhere on that level? Why should the Dalai Lama be chosen like that then?

>> then a draw is held to decide which

Drawing lots is a RANDOM process. That was my point. I never said it was a random process for the whole Tibetan population. I said it was a random process, period. Thats all I said.

>> Could you explain to me exactly how G_g could possibly see this process as being a random selection from amongst the whole Tibetan child male population?

DUH - is it even possible to place all the names of the male children in Tibet in a single Urn? Its not. You'd have to write down millions of names. I never said that and you're putting words in my mouth as usual.

Putting the names of 2 year old boy's in a Golden Urn and then drawing lots to determine who should become the Dalai Lama - what a joke. Why dont you thank me now for telling you about the Golden Urn? You didnt know that before I told you here. Right? Nah... you wont answer the question because you dont want to admit that you didnt know about the Golden Urn.

January 31, 2009
12:57 pm
Avatar
bevdee
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 259
Member Since:
September 30, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
104sp_Permalink sp_Print

Oh I think you are trying to Golden Shower all over the Dalai Lama.

January 31, 2009
1:14 pm
Avatar
guest_guest
Guest
Guests
105sp_Permalink sp_Print

Yea, I've already dreamed about it.

Got a question for you and Tez:

You have 3 men chosen to become the CEO of a huge multinational company. All of them are 'equally qualified'. Do you think drawing lots is a valid process to determine who should be the CEO?

January 31, 2009
1:17 pm
Avatar
guest_guest
Guest
Guests
106sp_Permalink sp_Print

I love that you are so nasty that you allege I want to Golden shower over the Dalai Lama! Damn. now that is nasty. But nevermind. We have to think about the CEO's and how to choose them.

January 31, 2009
1:28 pm
Avatar
bevdee
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 259
Member Since:
September 30, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
107sp_Permalink sp_Print

So is nasty the personal attacks you are always accusing folks of, or is it a red herring.

Love, Nastoi

January 31, 2009
1:43 pm
Avatar
guest_guest
Guest
Guests
108sp_Permalink sp_Print

You have 3 men chosen to become the CEO of a huge multinational company. All of them are 'equally qualified'. Do you think drawing lots is a valid process to determine who should be the CEO? Yes or no?

January 31, 2009
1:45 pm
Avatar
bevdee
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 259
Member Since:
September 30, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
109sp_Permalink sp_Print

Are those men spiritual leaders?

Is the Dalai Lama a CEO?

January 31, 2009
1:48 pm
Avatar
guest_guest
Guest
Guests
110sp_Permalink sp_Print

Its a simple question. Wow, see? I knew you wouldnt answer it.

Is it ok to elect spiritual leaders based on a random-selection process?

January 31, 2009
1:50 pm
Avatar
bevdee
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 259
Member Since:
September 30, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
111sp_Permalink sp_Print

My questions are simple, too.

January 31, 2009
2:02 pm
Avatar
guest_guest
Guest
Guests
112sp_Permalink sp_Print

Avoiding questions.. nasty, nasty. I love it! There are two problems in the selection process actually:

- They chose 2 year old boys

- They did a random selection process

Do you believe in reincarnation? You do not. Therefore you do not believe that boys were reincarnations of the Dalai Lama. Therefore you know that its silly to choose a 2 year old boy to become the next Dalai Lama. But you're afraid of saying that because you would offend your buddy Tez. You know he believes in reincarnation. I can bet you everything I own that if someone met you on another website before you met Tez or in the absense of Tez, you would gladly agree with all these points and would say them out aloud.

I dont know what it is that causes people to be afraid of saying the truth. Its like if you had a friend who was a cannibal and I asked you if cannibalism was ok, you would keep avoiding the questions in that situation too because your cannibal friend was around. Its amazing how opinions to the simplest questions are hidden so as to not upset a certain relationship.

I can see that but I would never do that. I would say what I think is right or wrong without any fear of upsetting anyone. I'd think if that upsets them, they're not worth my friendship.

January 31, 2009
2:14 pm
Avatar
bevdee
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 259
Member Since:
September 30, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
113sp_Permalink sp_Print

G_,

Your last post is full of assumtions you have made about me. As long as you continue to do this, any attempts at communication between us is pointless.

"Avoiding questions.. nasty, nasty. I love it! " I know you do - you do it constantly.

January 31, 2009
2:29 pm
Avatar
guest_guest
Guest
Guests
114sp_Permalink sp_Print

You had to protest about my "assumptions" knowing that if you did not, you would upset your very sensitive easily irritable friend.

Let me ask you a simple question now:

Do you believe in reincarnation?

February 1, 2009
1:25 am
Avatar
Guest
Guests
115sp_Permalink sp_Print

Bevdee.

It seems to me that the question of whether or not you believe in reincarnation is irrelevant to whether the process of selecting the Dalai lama is randomized or not. Why G_g would try to distract you from the point, I do not know. Perhaps he knows that he is beaten? His ego can't stand that.

This sounds like another of G_g's 'bait' and 'switch' conversational terrorist techniques. However he is not half as smart as he thinks he is. Everyone here can see through his little game.

Now back to the topic of the meaning of the word 'random'. G_g needs to read and understand this:

"Randomness is a lack of order, purpose, cause[citation needed], or predictability. A random process is a repeating process whose outcomes follow no describable deterministic pattern, but follow a probability distribution such that the relative probability of the occurrence of each outcome can be approximated or calculated. For instance, the rolling of a six-sided dice in neutral conditions may be said to produce random results in that one cannot compute before a roll what digit will be landed on, but the probability of landing on any of the six rollable digits can be calculated because of the finite cardinality of the set of possible outcomes.

The term is often used in statistics to signify well-defined statistical properties, such as a lack of bias or correlation. Monte Carlo Methods, which rely on random input, are important techniques of computational science.[1] Random selection is an official method to resolve tied elections in some jurisdictions[2], and is even an ancient method of divination, as in tarot, the I Ching, and bibliomancy." - Wikipedia

The Lamas who are meditating in order to make contact with the mind(s) of future potential Dalai Lama(s), are looking, very selectively, by scanning to make telepathic contact with the highest order bodhisattva minds of which in a given Tibetan population there are very few indeed. This is far from a random process and is heavily biased towards contacting only the best of the best Bodhisattva minds.

Should more than one of these rare minds be contacted - any one of which is eminently suitable to fill the position of the Dalai Lama - then there is no other fair way to select from these very few eminent beings than to draw straws as it were. G_g seems to think that any old names go into this urn from a randomly selected list of names for the lottery draw. It shows his complete lack of understanding of the whole process. Such is the way of ignorance.

It is obvious that selecting from a highly biased preselection of a few short listed individuals of equal ranking is a highly selective process and not a random one. Thank goodness that G_g is not a scientist of any kind. Otherwise his experiments using random testing methods would be anything random and his results would be severely biased. Like his posts his findings would lack all credibility. I doubt that he has ever been to uni.

February 1, 2009
1:33 am
Avatar
guest_guest
Guest
Guests
116sp_Permalink sp_Print

Tez

>> G_g seems to think that any old names go into this urn from a randomly selected list of names for the lottery draw. It shows his complete lack of understanding of the whole process. Such is the way of ignorance.

You're still going on and on and putting words into my mouth. I didnt say the above. I've already acknowledged that the boys have gone through some type of selection process and now they're down to 3 or 4 or whatever the number is. After this if its hard to get down to one, they put the names in an urn and draw lots, which is a random process in the end. Get the point?

Why dont you answer the question I asked? You have 3 men chosen to become the CEO of a huge multinational company. All of them are 'equally qualified'. Do you think drawing lots is a valid process to determine who should be the CEO?

Bodisattva and bodyshtva, whaetver that is.

February 1, 2009
1:37 am
Avatar
guest_guest
Guest
Guests
117sp_Permalink sp_Print

Ok Tez, let me spell it out for you, step by step. Tell me which step you dont agree with, alright:

1. Boys go through some sort of selection process.

2. In the end, a few boys remain.

3. If the selection of one boy is hard, then they put they put the boy's names in an Urn.

4. Then they draw lots.

5. Drawing lots is a random process

What step here is hard for you to understand?

February 1, 2009
1:45 am
Avatar
guest_guest
Guest
Guests
118sp_Permalink sp_Print

Typo:

3. If the selection of one boy is hard, then they put the boy's names in an Urn.

I'm not going to get any responses from you. You'll say now that its useless to debate with me because I dont get it and blah blah... typical avoidance.

I have more than one graduate degree, alright, and I did advanced maths and statistics. We did atleast one course on statistics and probability. Maybe for you, the only time you studied maths was counting pennies on the sidewalk while asking for change, so yea - dont tell me I didnt go to Univ. Moving on:

Any time lots are drawn, randomness is introduced into the process. The few boys that remain in the end are chosen randomly based on whose names is picked out of the urn. What else is that other than a random process? Remember my example of the 3 'qualified' CEOS? Right.

I guess you're stil shocked and secretly disappointed or embarrassed to have learnt from me about this Golden Urn thing.

February 1, 2009
2:05 am
Avatar
guest_guest
Guest
Guests
119sp_Permalink sp_Print

Tibet under the Dalai Lamas: Tales of Slavery, Torture and Serfdom

In 1959, Anna Louise Strong visited an exhibition of torture equipment that had been used by the Tibetan overlords. There were handcuffs of all sizes, including small ones for children, and instruments for cutting off noses and ears, gouging out eyes, breaking off hands, and hamstringing legs. There were hot brands, whips, and special implements for disemboweling. The exhibition presented photographs and testimonies of victims who had been blinded or crippled or suffered amputations for thievery. There was the shepherd whose master owed him a reimbursement in yuan and wheat but refused to pay. So he took one of the master's cows; for this he had his hands severed. Another herdsman, who opposed having his wife taken from him by his lord, had his hands broken off. There were pictures of Communist activists with noses and upper lips cut off, and a woman who was raped and then had her nose sliced away. (Friendly Feudalism: The Tibet Myth , by Michael Parenti)

February 1, 2009
2:06 am
Avatar
Guest
Guests
120sp_Permalink sp_Print

guest_guest
1-Feb-09

"What step here is hard for you to understand?"

What is hard for me to understand is why you left out all the steps prior to your step one. But then again, I think I know why you are so deliberately 'blindsighted'. It doesn't suit your futile and flawed argument.

February 1, 2009
2:14 am
Avatar
guest_guest
Guest
Guests
121sp_Permalink sp_Print

Nah, you're only making it LOOK like I left out something. Thats the only thing you have in your hands now, is to make a false allegation on me.

I left out all the steps? I included all those steps in step 1. The boys go through a selection process. What did I leave out that is not included in step 1?

Are steps 3, 4 and 5 not part of the process? What about these steps? Do you agree with them?

February 1, 2009
8:47 am
Avatar
guest_guest
Guest
Guests
122sp_Permalink sp_Print

Tez
Ok, bear with me once again. You wrote:

The Lamas who are meditating in order to make contact with the mind(s) of future potential Dalai Lama(s), are looking, very selectively , by scanning to make telepathic contact with the highest order bodhisattva minds of which in a given Tibetan population there are very few indeed. This is far from a random process and is heavily biased towards contacting only the best of the best Bodhisattva minds.

Should more than one of these rare minds be contacted - any one of which is eminently suitable to fill the position of the Dalai Lama - then there is no other fair way to select from these very few eminent beings than to draw straws as it were. G_g seems to think that any old names go into this urn from a randomly selected list of names for the lottery draw. It shows his complete lack of understanding of the whole process. Such is the way of ignorance.

It is obvious that selecting from a highly biased preselection of a few short listed individuals of equal ranking is a highly selective process and not a random one. Thank goodness that G_g is not a scientist of any kind. Otherwise his experiments using random testing methods would be anything random and his results would be severely biased. Like his posts his findings would lack all credibility. I doubt that he has ever been to uni.

Yes, I know the above (bold) and I agree with it and I have said that many times but you probably did not read or understand my posts. I know the few boys that are selected in the beginning are chosen selectively with many criteria. That is not a random process. I'm talking about the situation when more than one boy has passed all those criteria and the authorities dont know who is the correct Dalai Lama. Thats the situation I'm talking about. Here, I'll quote Wikipedia now, which sats the same thing I'm saying::

Golden Urn

In Tibet , on several occasions, children believed to be the reincarnations of the Dalai Lama or the Panchen Lama have been identified by a lottery method, in which names of competing candidates are written on folded slips of paper placed in a golden urn.

This method originated in a decree issued by the Chinese emperor Qianlong in 1792, and was used in the selection of the 10th , 11th , and 12th Dalai Lamas.

Dalai Lama

However, if there are several possibilities of the reincarnation, in the past regents and eminent officials and monks at the Jokhang in Lhasa , and the Minister to Tibet would decide on the individual by placing the boys names inside an urn and drawing one lot in public if it was too difficult to judge the reincarnation initially.

See that? Names of competing candidates are placed in a Golden Urns. I agree those competing candidates have passed a certain set of tough criteria but now we have reached the situation where more than one boy has passed the criteria. Now they'll put their names into this Golden Urn and draw out a name. That is a random process.

------------

Do you think people are dumb so they dont know whats going on? The fact is that you know this is true but this is embarrassing you so much that you simply cannot openly agree with me on this. So you're resorting to what Muslims do: accuse me of taking things out of context or something like that. I've debated with so many muslims and not one of them changed their mind. People will do anything to keep their beliefs. The problem is that you've already disagreed that its a random process and now your ego cannot afford to backtrack on that and admit to me the obvious embarrassing fact.

I dont think I can expect you to have a proper debate on this. Your next post as usual is going to avoid the real quotes in this post of mine and repeat your "he doesnt know anything and I have proved him to be ignorant amd he lacks credibility". Thats exactly what you'll say, without explaing why I'm wrong. Thats what you did with Michael Parenti too. You might be knowledgable in relationship stuff but here you're not. You need to read the text above the dotted line carefully and tell me what you disagree on.

February 1, 2009
8:48 am
Avatar
guest_guest
Guest
Guests
123sp_Permalink sp_Print

Ah inspite of double checking everything, I still got a typo:

- which *says* the same thing I'm saying

February 1, 2009
9:17 am
Avatar
bevdee
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 259
Member Since:
September 30, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
124sp_Permalink sp_Print

Hey Tez,

"Why G_g would try to distract you from the point, I do not know. Perhaps he knows that he is beaten? His ego can't stand that.

This sounds like another of G_g's 'bait' and 'switch' conversational terrorist techniques. However he is not half as smart as he thinks he is. Everyone here can see through his little game."

I sure don't know the answers, but I'm starting to suspect it's all a game to him. Negative attention is better than none at all. Time will tell, I guess.

February 1, 2009
9:39 am
Avatar
guest_guest
Guest
Guests
125sp_Permalink sp_Print

We're discussing if drawing lots in the Golden Urn is a random process or not.

Forum Timezone: UTC -8
Most Users Ever Online: 349
Currently Online:
29
Guest(s)
Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)
Top Posters:
onedaythiswillpass: 1134
zarathustra: 562
StronginHim77: 453
free: 433
2013ways: 431
curious64: 408
Member Stats:
Guest Posters: 49
Members: 111020
Moderators: 5
Admins: 3
Forum Stats:
Groups: 8
Forums: 74
Topics: 38570
Posts: 714311
Newest Members:
cosmo789, bravelassie, Chloe12, future life, austinjacob, Hadity1
Moderators: arochaIB: 1, devadmin: 9, Tincho: 0, Donn Gruta: 0, Germain Palacios: 0
Administrators: admin: 21, ShiningLight: 572, emily430: 29

Copyright © 2020 MH Sub I, LLC. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Policy | Health Disclaimer | Do Not Sell My Personal Information