Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
RE: The argument against "evil", theists please come to the defense.
July 19, 2012 at 6:34 pm
(July 19, 2012 at 5:39 pm)Nemo Wrote: Saw a comment on "perfection" and thought i add my two cents.
If you think about it this way. Why would a god just be pure good? In my eyes it creates nothing more then a boring utopia of dull. The very fact that we can choose and create our own path of life is reason enough to not believe in god. I'm sorry but if said god is all powerful and all seeing, why would he allow for evil to happen to his creations? sorry it just doesn't logically add up in my world
Basically, that's what I have been saying. Well spoken.
I won't get an answer out of the deist, and I don't expect there to be an answer from any theist in the near future, so I feel it's safe to assume there ins't one.
Honestly, isn't it logically contradictory to believe in a creator God who is perfectly good, considering the state of things in the world today?
That God can be falsified simply by any single person's ability to think of an alternate world with less needless misfortune and suffering.
I don't have to know everything to understand that a world with perfect living conditions around the globe and a more resilient natural structure would be a better fit for most all beings on the planet.
My conclusion is that there is no reason to believe any of the dogmas of traditional theology and, further, that there is no reason to wish that they were true.
Man, in so far as he is not subject to natural forces, is free to work out his own destiny. The responsibility is his, and so is the opportunity.
-Bertrand Russell
RE: The argument against "evil", theists please come to the defense.
July 19, 2012 at 6:41 pm
I guess a general argument against sufferring can be as follows:
If suffering was for the greater good, we should not want to get rid of suffering.
We should want to get rid of suffering.
Therefore suffering is not for the greater good.
I am waiting for them. One argument I have against diseases is the following:
If diseases are for a greater in good for humanity, we should not want to cure them.
We should want to cure them.
Therefore diseases are not for a greater good for humanity.
To this they will most likely say Original Sin is to blame.
(July 19, 2012 at 6:41 pm)MysticKnight Wrote: I guess a general argument against sufferring can be as follows:
If suffering was for the greater good, we should not want to get rid of suffering.
We should want to get rid of suffering.
Therefore suffering is not for the greater good.
I thought you said before that this is too general and that suffering is subjective?
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it" ~ Aristotle
RE: The argument against "evil", theists please come to the defense.
July 19, 2012 at 9:39 pm (This post was last modified: July 19, 2012 at 9:39 pm by Skepsis.)
(July 19, 2012 at 6:41 pm)MysticKnight Wrote: I guess a general argument against sufferring can be as follows:
If suffering was for the greater good, we should not want to get rid of suffering.
We should want to get rid of suffering.
Therefore suffering is not for the greater good.
I don't understand what you are trying to say here.
Elaborate or rephrase, please. Help me understand.
My conclusion is that there is no reason to believe any of the dogmas of traditional theology and, further, that there is no reason to wish that they were true.
Man, in so far as he is not subject to natural forces, is free to work out his own destiny. The responsibility is his, and so is the opportunity.
-Bertrand Russell
RE: The argument against "evil", theists please come to the defense.
July 19, 2012 at 11:04 pm
What purpose is served to a God who allows suffering for whatever reason? What benefit is there from suffering that an omnipotent God could not have simply willed to form an integral part of human nature. God could give people every benefit imaginable. Life could literally be perfect (perfection, strictly defined, must only be as boring or as exciting as the individual feels is comfortable).
That a God allegedly ultimate and perfect in all ways did not see fit to do this indicates a failure on his part, regardless of how well you could possibly justify it.
RE: The argument against "evil", theists please come to the defense.
July 20, 2012 at 3:31 am (This post was last modified: July 20, 2012 at 3:39 am by Mystic.)
Here is some premises that are possible to be true:
1. All humans will eventually be at peace and without suffering.
2. After gazillions of years of peace and no suffering, even suffering for a thousand years will seem trivial.
3. Opportunity of Higher character building is a worthy goal then of all suffering that is for a trivial period in relationship to endless period.
4. Diseases and mental disorders give opportunity for humanity to strive for cures, and gives higher goals available for humanity. (genetic research, etc)
5. Natural disasters give opportunity for humanity to help one another and also to their best to limit damage of natural disasters.
6. 4 & 5 are justified with perspective 1, 2, & 3.
7. Only designer has right to inflict pain for greater goal just as only designer has right to set up death.
8. Just as we can't murder each other, because designed system kills a person, same then with not wanting to alleviate suffering, because system is designed to afflict suffering.
9. All suffering caused by free-will is part of character choosing and gives opportunity for heroic struggle against evil.
10. Free-will was worthy goal given perspective 1, 2, and 3.
11. Any higher character building at any given time by any person is worth any suffering given perspective 1, 2, and 3.
12. Patience in face of tragedy and suffering is worthy virtue, given perspective 1, 2, and 3.
RE: The argument against "evil", theists please come to the defense.
July 20, 2012 at 8:11 am
I am thankful for my free-will as i enjoy picking my own path in life. Eradicating suffering and evil (depending on whos point of view) would be completely and utterly counter-productive. Let's face it, due to vast military projects and wars we now are able to surf the web, text message each other and what not (i know these are utterly pointless examples but you guys should get the gist of my point).
The biggest problem is that there is little to know acceptance of individualism in most parts of this earth. If i were to say i am Atheist or muslim for example i would be judged and visa versa. Where did that come from?
RE: The argument against "evil", theists please come to the defense.
July 20, 2012 at 10:03 am
I responded point by point, so it was pretty long. I decided to hide it.
I honestly want to hear a Christian weigh in on this.
(July 20, 2012 at 3:31 am)MysticKnight Wrote: 1. All humans will eventually be at peace and without suffering.
Perhaps, but that has yet to be proven.
(July 20, 2012 at 3:31 am)MysticKnight Wrote: 2. After gazillions of years of peace and no suffering, even suffering for a thousand years will seem trivial.
A gazillion years? Wouldn't living for a gazillion million years be suffering in itself?
(July 20, 2012 at 3:31 am)MysticKnight Wrote: 3. Opportunity of Higher character building is a worthy goal then of all suffering that is for a trivial period in relationship to endless period.
Not for an omnibenevolent God who could have made humanity any way he wanted.
(July 20, 2012 at 3:31 am)MysticKnight Wrote: 4. Diseases and mental disorders give opportunity for humanity to strive for cures, and gives higher goals available for humanity. (genetic research, etc)
While the issue is anthropocentric, you can't blanket humanity. There shouldn't be evil in a single crevise in the universe.
Basically, what good came to the mental guy? He can never improve. This is injustice, an evil inflicted directly by God.
(July 20, 2012 at 3:31 am)MysticKnight Wrote: 5. Natural disasters give opportunity for humanity to help one another and also to their best to limit damage of natural disasters.
Why didn't God make a world where there didn't exist natural disasters? He had the power to create a timeline where no natural disasters occured.
(July 20, 2012 at 3:31 am)MysticKnight Wrote: 6. 4 & 5 are justified with perspective 1, 2, & 3.
1 is unjustified, and 2 and 3 are based from one. I also explained why I felt 2 to be suffering in itself.
(July 20, 2012 at 3:31 am)MysticKnight Wrote: 7. Only designer has right to inflict pain for greater goal just as only designer has right to set up death.
Isn't this a form of special pleading? Why does only God have this right?
(July 20, 2012 at 3:31 am)MysticKnight Wrote: 8. Just as we can't murder each other, because designed system kills a person, same then with not wanting to alleviate suffering, because system is designed to afflict suffering.
I don't understand this one, but it seems that God could alter the system at his will to avoid suffering.
(July 20, 2012 at 3:31 am)MysticKnight Wrote: 9. All suffering caused by free-will is part of character choosing and gives opportunity for heroic struggle against evil.
Sounds like Romanticism to me. God places evils in the world that otherwise didn't need to exist, then justifies this by saying "Oh, well at least now you can fight evil heroicly".
(July 20, 2012 at 3:31 am)MysticKnight Wrote: 10. Free-will was worthy goal given perspective 1, 2, and 3.
#6?
(July 20, 2012 at 3:31 am)MysticKnight Wrote: 11. Any higher character building at any given time by any person is worth any suffering given perspective 1, 2, and 3.
Worth it, worthy goal,justified? #6, #11 and #12 are basically identical.
(July 20, 2012 at 3:31 am)MysticKnight Wrote: 12. Patience in face of tragedy and suffering is worthy virtue, given perspective 1, 2, and 3.
Completely unnecessary if a God had the power to create a world without any evil. Why is it a virtue to combat evil if there isn't any and never will be?
(July 20, 2012 at 3:31 am)MysticKnight Wrote: Problem of Suffering and Evil seems solved.
Really?
My conclusion is that there is no reason to believe any of the dogmas of traditional theology and, further, that there is no reason to wish that they were true.
Man, in so far as he is not subject to natural forces, is free to work out his own destiny. The responsibility is his, and so is the opportunity.
-Bertrand Russell
RE: The argument against "evil", theists please come to the defense.
July 20, 2012 at 10:46 am (This post was last modified: July 20, 2012 at 11:10 am by Mystic.)
(July 20, 2012 at 10:03 am)Skepsis Wrote: Not for an omnibenevolent God who could have made humanity any way he wanted.
But can he bestow the virtues without us going through the struggle?
Can he gives us the value of struggle and patience in adversity, without having gone through it?
Perhaps it is impossible, just like making square triangles is impossible.
Quote:While the issue is anthropocentric, you can't blanket humanity. There shouldn't be evil in a single crevise in the universe.
But this argument is meant to show this is not true, and not only that, since all suffering bring about some character building in any human...then it's worth it, since suffering is trivial given a gazillion years of peace.
Quote:Basically, what good came to the mental guy? He can never improve. This is injustice, an evil inflicted directly by God.
It's possible his suffering for a short period relative to the infinite period of peace, and is worth the character building of those trying to find cures and help him, because in the long run, as well, given I don't suscribe to a religion, it can be that he will be sane in another world to come with memory of whom he was, and that world has conflict and evil, and allows character building as well but the final destination, is peace without suffering..
Quote:Why didn't God make a world where there didn't exist natural disasters? He had the power to create a timeline where no natural disasters occured.
From the perspective, of the hard things people face, and we face as humanity together, they give opportunity for character building, which according to premise 3, is a worthy goal.
Quote:1 is unjustified, and 2 and 3 are based from one. I also explained why I felt 2 to be suffering in itself.
lol so if God creates a world with perfect peace and no death, you say it's sufferring too, you might as well not want of God to created anything?
Quote:Isn't this a form of special pleading? Why does only God have this right?
Well it's similar to how only the Designer sets up a system where we die, but no one has the right to kill an innocent person, just because God has the right to.
(July 20, 2012 at 3:31 am)MysticKnight Wrote: 8. Just as we can't murder each other, because designed system kills a person, same then with not wanting to alleviate suffering, because system is designed to afflict suffering.
I don't understand this one, but it seems that God could alter the system at his will to avoid suffering.
Quote:Sounds like Romanticism to me. God places evils in the world that otherwise didn't need to exist, then justifies this by saying "Oh, well at least now you can fight evil heroicly".
But how we react to it makes us whom we are. Without evil and good in combat, there is less potential of higher character building....
Quote:Worth it, worthy goal,justified? #6, #11 and #12 are basically identical.
True wrote this at around 3:00 am.
Quote:Why is it a virtue to combat evil if there isn't any and never will be?
Exactly a world without evil, would lack those virtues. And we wouldn't be able to choose our character and build our character out of free-will, as much as we are able to do so now.
Quote:Really?
Seems so, might not be so.
I wanted to play Devil's Advocate a little longer , but the theists weren't responding.
RE: The argument against "evil", theists please come to the defense.
July 20, 2012 at 11:12 am (This post was last modified: July 20, 2012 at 11:13 am by Skepsis.)
(July 20, 2012 at 10:46 am)MysticKnight Wrote: But can he bestow the virtues without us going through the struggle?
Can he gives us the value of struggle and patience in adversity, without having gone through it?
I dunno, could he create the universe in any fashion he wanted? If so, then the answer is yes,he could.
This answer is silly, though, as it assumes that virtues are necessary in a world without evil.
Quote:But this argument is meant to show this is not true, and not only that, since all suferring bring about some character building in any human...then it's worth it, since sufferring is trivial given a gazillion years of peace.
"Basically, what good came to the mental guy? He can never improve. This is injustice, an evil inflicted directly by God."
Literally the next sentence.
Quote:It's possible his suferring for a short period relative to the infinite period of peace, and is worth the character building of those trying to find cures and help him, because in the long run, as well, given I don't suscribe to a religion, it can be that he will be sane in another world to come with memory of whom he was, and that world has conflict and evil, and allows character building as well but the final destination, is peace without suferring..
So you got to it after all?
You are nw stacking unproven claims on top of unproven claims. Another world with conflict and evil stands as justification for another world's natural evil?
This is just silly.
Quote:From the perspective, of the hard things people face, and we face as humanity together, they give opportunity for character building, which according to premise 3, is a worthy goal.
Nope- like I have said before, why not simply create a universe where humans inherently have these qualities at birth?
Quote:lol so if God creates a world with perfect peace and no death, you say it's sufferring too, you might as well not want of God to created anything?
Wait, hold on. Who is claiming that God could create any universe he wants? Is that not true?
If it is true and he could have created whatever world he wanted, then why does it seem impossible for there to be a world without suffering?
It's not my burden to prove there are worlds without suffering. It was my point that a world with no death is a world of infinite boredom where you can't even phase to nonexistence to escape. That, to me, is true torture.
Quote:Well it's similar to how only the Designer sets up a system where we die, but no one has the right to kill an innocent person, just because God has the right to.
That literally explained nothing. Like, I got less from those sentences than from the 20 minute period I tried to meditate in my deconversion process.
I am pretty sure you just rephrased the sentence.
Quote:But how we react to it makes us whom we are. Without evil and good in combat, there is less potential of higher character building....
I thought your God could make te universe as he pleased? Once again, why not make humans inherently moral with great virtue and character?
Quote:True wrote this at around 3:00 am.
K.
(July 20, 2012 at 10:46 am)MysticKnight Wrote:
Skepsis Wrote:Why is it a virtue to combat evil if there isn't any and never will be?
Exactly a world without evil, would lack those virtues. And we wouldn't be able to choose our character and build our character out of free-will, as much as we are able to do so now.
Wait, what? Why do virtues have any value at all if they are unnecessary? If they play no part in the universe because they are unneeded, then why are they inherently good?
The theists wouldn't touch this thread with a ten-foot pole. They know the argument of evil is the bane of any goodness they see in their God, and want to avoid that revelation if possible.
My conclusion is that there is no reason to believe any of the dogmas of traditional theology and, further, that there is no reason to wish that they were true.
Man, in so far as he is not subject to natural forces, is free to work out his own destiny. The responsibility is his, and so is the opportunity.
-Bertrand Russell
