I wasn't sure it was a good answer. It doesn't answer jo's specific questions, e.g. "why care about kamma?" It tries to answer a more general question, e.g. "what's wrong with a materialist/annihilationist view?" and e.g. "why care to practice Buddhism?" And it's IMO quite a theoretical answer. And I'm not sure that I answer any follow-on questions jo might ask me. But, ok, I undeleted it so feel free to criticize this answer now.

@Chris. I agree with you that your answers do not always address the specific question of Milinda. But I also agree with Andrei: This should not be a reason to delete your answers :-) In my opinion "materialism" is a fighting word from 19. century. Also hedonism and ascetisms are labels rather to end a discussion than to exchange arguments. Of course I agree that your list comprises desirable properties of a human person. My own stance concerning your alternatives to cope with suffering: A selection from alternatives 2-4, depending on the circumstances and the kind of suffering.

@Chris. I assume that you too use the word and the concept of "I"; see the beginning of your reply to Andrei :-) My understanding of anatta: 'anatta' meaning self-is-not-an-essence-or-entity is misunderstood as self-does-not-exists-at-all. (See "Galin, David: The concept of 'self' and 'person' in Buddhims and Western psychology (2001)". You can google the author) That's what Buddha wanted to emphasize. Of course the "I" of a person changes during life. But there is an enduring identity, my personal memory. It is the memory which explains both change and identity.

:-) Hedonism and asceticism are words which the Buddha used to introduce the Middle Way (between extremes), immediately/even before he began to first explain the Four Noble Truths. If your question were only "Why worry about the past and future?" that would remind me of this story about the Sermon on the Mount. But a converse, a thing to worry about, a reply to an over-optimistic "There's nothing, never anything, to worry about", might be this story.

The "desirable properties of a human person" might not follow from a view that "nothing matters because we're all going to die" (extinctionism), nor that "nothing matters because we're never going going to die" (eternalism). The desirable properties aren't incompatible with your "why worry?" view but also not necessarily implied by that view. Like a doctor must deal with gross injury (a gaping wound) before going on to promote further health, perhaps the Buddha needed to start with some basics like, "Look, guys, there's 'cause and effect' exists in the world" and "What you do matters" etc.

@jowehler Ah, the view that "the enduring identity is my personal memory". I remember someone who had several tragic, traumatic experiences when she was young. Those experiences affected her memories (e.g. PTSD flashback), and her "view" (of other people, of her relationship with the world). I wanted to say to her, "those tragic events are finished, past" ... grieve, but 20 or 30 years afterwards your memories shouldn't be continuing to make you suffer like that, shouldn't consume you: live in the present, see the new reality...

... I wanted to say, "you are not your memories" in the same way you might say to someone, "you are not your bank account." The view that "identity is memory" might see "I" as past, passive, imperfect narrative ('my story'), more than as a present agent ('my view/intention/effort' etc.) with a finished past.

@Chris: I agree that Buddha emphasized the rule of cause and effect which I consider one of our most important heuristics. But in my opinion Buddha spoiled a lot of this insight when he mixed it with the conception of karma and rebirth. The latter are Brahmin and Jain conceptions of Buddhas time and society which he overtook without questioning. For a historical evaluation, please see "Gombrich, Richard: What the Buddha thought. Chap. 3 and 4".

@Chris: I hold the view that our memory determines our present state of mind to a high degree. Does not your example support this view? It is hard work to release a client from her traumatic experience. In general, you need the help of an expert in psychotherapy. Today's question in the context of neuroscience and philosophy of mind is the relation free will - determinism. A possible solution is complicated by the fact that the origin of our decisions are unconscious. Only the final conscious part of the decision is sensed as my free decision: I sense myself as the agent of my decision.

Is it surprising if Buddhism is mixed with Vedic or Jain notions? They say it's mixed with Chinese notions, later; and Japanese; etc. IMO, Christianity is mixed with Abrahamic notions like "God" for example. Back to Buddhism, if 'There are 80,000 doors to the dharma' maybe "kamma and rebirth" is just one of those 'doors', e.g. for Brahmins or Jains of the day.

To say "he spoiled the insight" could be rejecting a gift because of disliking its gift-wrapping. Also FYI people find other descriptions of rebirth: for example there's this answer which might (I don't know) be supported by the Abhidhamma ...

and then there's a Madhyamaka which I don't know at all but which (according to Wikipedia) is a reaction against the just-mentioned Abhidhamma and which has yet another description of the Middle Way. This answer quoting the Abhidhamma implies that the Abhidhamma's author needed to describe the extent (if any) to which 'rebirth' is true.

Given the context of the time (i.e. their audience), you may agree they needed to do so. But "Why worry?" maybe you don't feel a need to have a description using those terms. Perhaps most important part of the message isn't kamma or rebirth but, rather, annata.

> I hold the view that our memory determines our present state of mind to a high degree. Does not your example support this view?

Yes it does. My view though is that the sense of self created by memory can apparently have (in my opinion) pathological consequences. That a solution to the problem of the suffering you experience (in this life) might be to change your sense of who you are, that attachments to specific memories can cause problems. Questions like "do I exist?", "do I not exist?", etc., are called unwise reflections.

> A possible solution is complicated by the fact that the origin of our decisions are unconscious.

Maybe the state of our unconscious depends on merit we accumulate (or lose) little by little: see Dhammapada.