RE: The problem of evil revisited.
September 22, 2014 at 12:41 am
(This post was last modified: September 22, 2014 at 12:47 am by genkaus.)
(September 21, 2014 at 3:55 pm)MysticKnight Wrote: I think this solves the issue of the problem of evil. Let me know if there are any flaws.
Sure, let's start listing. But before that, let me state this for the record: I don't believe there is a god and the problem of evil is the logical consequence of belief in a particular brand of theology - a belief that I lack to begin with. Therefore, my involvement here is purely an intellectual exercise to point out any logical inconsistencies and even if the problem is resolved, it still wouldn't have any bearing on my belief in theology itself.
(September 21, 2014 at 3:55 pm)MysticKnight Wrote: I think in an attempt to a find a solution with the problem of evil, it's necessary to invoke the possibility of a afterlife that is perfect and everlasting.
Not necessary. There are many other options - the law of karma and moksha for example.
(September 21, 2014 at 3:55 pm)MysticKnight Wrote: If it is everlasting and of high happiness, in about a trillion years from now for example, any suffering in this world would be made trivial to the experience of bliss of a trillion years. This even more so as it goes on to infinity.
I think any emotional reward or punishment would be rendered meaningless and trivial given that long a time period.
Think of it like this - as a child you'd get inordinately happy or upset over small things. As you grow up, the intensity of those emotions decreases. Stretch it to a trillion years and you won't be able to experience bliss - just mild pleasure.
(September 21, 2014 at 3:55 pm)MysticKnight Wrote: Now the only thing that is required for benevolence of a wise creator is some purpose to the suffering in this world.
Well I think a world where we can build character that comes before a world were we enjoy eternal bliss, is better that no one world at all.
More so, whatever makes the system over all better to character building and moral choosing, is a worthy of a sacrifice of trivial suffering because of an infinite reward that is gained by it (the character building and goodness).
So, your basic argument is that suffering is required for character building and that makes it acceptable.
You'd first have to establish that suffering is necessary for character building - you haven't done so. But even if suffering was necessary, it should be limited to the amount required for character building and not extend to the point where it becomes detrimental - as it so often does.
Secondly, that suffering should only be dealt out to those who can build a character because of it. People lacking the rational capacity to understand what it means to develop your character or how to achieve it - infants or ones without proper brain function - shouldn't be subjected to suffering because there is no benefit in it for them. The argument their suffering is supposed to build someone else's character would show your god to be unjust - like a teacher to beats one student to teach a lesson to another.
Thirdly, if the only point of suffering is character development, then once the person has developed sufficiently, the person shouldn't suffer anymore and die immediately - so that he he doesn't have to sacrifice any more of his happiness and get to the eternal bliss part. Giving them extra time to suffer more or risk losing their character development would defeat the whole point of this life.
Fourthly, if the whole point of this life and suffering in it is to develop sufficient character for eternally blissful life, then no one should be shepherded out of this life without an opportunity to do that. Which means children shouldn't die before they've had a chance to develop and people with life-long incapacity to develop should either never be born or not die at all. And if you argue that these people are given that eternally blissful life without any character development then that means character development isn't the criteria for that achievement after all. And that makes it an unfair requirement for the rest of us.
(September 21, 2014 at 3:55 pm)MysticKnight Wrote: Death would have to have natural causes, and it seems also, that a system were God is not constantly intervening is better then a system that he is intervening. this is because in a world were he constantly intervened, it would be counter productive to character building.
Actually, the best system would be one where he does intervene to guide the right development and discourage any negative development.
(September 21, 2014 at 3:55 pm)MysticKnight Wrote: It can also be invoked that diversity of intelligent life in the universe is one of the goals of the universe. Evolution therefore perhaps is a natural best way in which God would spread intelligent life in the universe.
Given the spectacularly dismal success rate evolution has had in producing intelligent life, I'd hesitate to call it the "best way". To our knowledge, only one out of millions of species that exist (and billions that have existed before) can be called intelligent - that is, capable of reflecting upon things like suffering and the purpose of life. And they weren't intelligent for the majority of their existence. There is no diversity to intelligent life here - 1 is not a diverse number. Of the goal of universe is having a diverse intelligent life, then it has failed miserably.
(September 21, 2014 at 3:55 pm)MysticKnight Wrote: He would also not constantly interfere in the world as that would go against a better world set for character building and free-will.
Given the high rate of failure for the correct character development and overwhelming evidence that certain amount of intervention is necessary to correct it, this is clearly not the best possible model for your god to achieve his ends.
(September 21, 2014 at 4:03 pm)MysticKnight Wrote: Sure, he can give them bliss, but it would be without the character building. The character building brought out in the world with suffering along with bliss, is higher. Since the character building is a perpetual reward, it's worth trivial suffering which is nothing compared to infinite bliss.
So the people who aren't given the time or the capacity to build character - there should be no reason for their suffering.
(September 21, 2014 at 4:36 pm)MysticKnight Wrote: And since character building is a infinite reward....
I thought the infinite reward was eternal bliss.
(September 21, 2014 at 4:46 pm)MysticKnight Wrote: Sure, he can't change the fact 2 + 2 = 4, if this is what you mean by that he is omnipotent, then that's fine. I'm fine with him not being that.
But that doesn't mean he doesn't have power to do all logically possible things.
I think you mean logically "impossible" things.
However, our laws of logic are simply descriptive of the way universe works. So, if your god is bound by the laws of logic, he is then bound by how the universe works and therefore not superior to it.
