RE: Perfect, Best of Possible, or Better than Nothing: Which criterion?
May 16, 2015 at 10:06 am
(May 16, 2015 at 8:57 am)Rhythm Wrote: Meh, the counter doesn't actually address the statement....so calling it a counter is a bit of an exaggeration, I think.
(May 16, 2015 at 9:01 am)robvalue Wrote: I don't know why anyone needs testing or rewarding. He's just fucking around for his own amusement. Well, I'm not amused.
I think the question of whether merit, or earned status, exists in a "benevolent" world is quite legitimate. Americans generally consider "advancing from humble beginnings to success through hard work" a great virtue. Sure, the Horatio Alger myth glosses over a lot of the rigid class structure actually seen in the USA, yet a society without incentives stagnates. As eastern Europe did back in the Warsaw Pact days, when the shelves in the store were all empty, except that one bin that had a glut of shoddy boots.
Because I'm not an authority on God, I don't know whether deity tests people or not. In some theologies, it does, in others, it refrains. Some of the tests which have been postulated over the years are clearly petty or cruel. The truth of that still doesn't affect how we humans do seem to get stronger and more competent by overcoming challenges. We don't get physically fit by sitting on our rumps. Which means I'd better get out for my walk today, as soon as it stops raining....