Theists: how do you account for psychopaths?

[Amarok]

I'm only a little human living in a tiny part of the universe for a tiny amount of time, in the face of all eternity. All I can see is the here and now, this tiny portion, not even close to the big picture. I'm not going to presume to know better than a being who can see everything. It makes sense logically, but I understand how hard it is to accept, emotionally. Especially when going through very difficult times.

Nope if god can't give a good reason here and now it's a safe bet there is not one . We would never accept that kind of logic from some else so why should anyone do so for a god . It's terrible reason .

---

I'm only a little human living in a tiny part of the universe for a tiny amount of time, in the face of all eternity. All I can see is the here and now, this tiny portion, not even close to the big picture. I'm not going to presume to know better than a being who can see everything. It makes sense logically, but I understand how hard it is to accept, emotionally. Especially when going through very difficult times.

But you do presume that such a being has a good reason for allowing awful things to happen to innocent children and animals.

A line of reason i doubt she would accept from anyone else .But a god gets a pass .

[Catholic_Lady]

I'm only a little human living in a tiny part of the universe for a tiny amount of time, in the face of all eternity. All I can see is the here and now, this tiny portion, not even close to the big picture. I'm not going to presume to know better than a being who can see everything. It makes sense logically, but I understand how hard it is to accept, emotionally. Especially when going through very difficult times.

But you do presume that such a being has a good reason for allowing awful things to happen to innocent children and animals.

I presume He has a good reason for allowing the natural world to take its course as it may. Sometimes good comes of that, sometimes bad comes of that. I presume overall the net good is greater, in the grand scheme of things.

[Paraselene]

I presume He has a good reason for allowing the natural world to take its course as it may. Sometimes good comes of that, sometimes bad comes of that. I presume overall the net good is greater, in the grand scheme of things.

Overall, I think the way you think is something that stinks of a septic tank.

[Amarok]

I presume He has a good reason for allowing the natural world to take its course as it may. Sometimes good comes of that, sometimes bad comes of that. I presume overall the net good is greater, in the grand scheme of things.

That's pretty naive and unreasonable presumption.There is zero logic in having any bad .

[vulcanlogician]

If you think I haven't stretched myself on that rack, you are sorely mistaken. Since you mentioned moral Platonism, I will say that Plato has been a huge influence upon my ethics, second only perhaps to Spinoza.

Your "infinite regression" is nothing new. Plato covers it in Book II of the Republic. A well-ordered soul demands cohesion with the truth. The truth is that there is an objectively discernible good.

The issue  with your moral quandary is that you assume there is no underlying truth... that there is no answer to the question "Why is that wrong?"--there is an answer.

My last sentence was a bit inaccurate. You think there IS an answer.

Why is that wrong?
-because God.

To me, that answer is incoherent. It dodges the question and confuses the issue and in no way represents moral objectivity.

I'd be curious to hear about this, if you dont mind me asking.

Playing devil's advocate here, why is murder objectively wrong?

So the answer to this is not an easy one. And my reason is philosophical (though hopefully it's clear by now I don't use big, obtuse words when I philosophize). Still, your question is a tall order, and I have broken into three questions. Please choose which of the three is the sticking point for you (or if more than one is, choose more than one).

1) Is anything right or wrong at all? (metaethics- I think this is what you really want to know.).
2) Why is murder wrong? (this is what you asked, but without me filling in #1, the answer to this may be dissatisfying).
3) Even assuming that it can be demonstrated that murder is wrong, why should I not murder someone if I can easily get away with it? ("If God is dead, everything is permitted"-Dostoevsky).

[Paraselene]

Vulcan doing the naughty. You don't win by answering a question with questions.

[vulcanlogician]

You don't win by answering questions with a five page essay, either. With a five page essay, nobody wins.

[Paraselene]

I've yet to see the wonder of a five page essay on here.

[Catholic_Lady]

I think everything will make sense to us someday, and we will understand why.

---

I'd be curious to hear about this, if you dont mind me asking.

Playing devil's advocate here, why is murder objectively wrong?

So the answer to this is not an easy one. And my reason is philosophical (though hopefully it's clear by now I don't use big, obtuse words when I philosophize). Still, your question is a tall order, and I have broken into three questions. Please choose which of the three is the sticking point for you (or if more than one is, choose more than one).

1) Is anything right or wrong at all? (metaethics- I think this is what you really want to know.).
2) Why is murder wrong? (this is what you asked, but without me filling in #1, the answer to this may be dissatisfying).
3) Even assuming that it can be demonstrated that murder is wrong, why should I not murder someone if I can easily get away with it? ("If God is dead, everything is permitted"-Dostoevsky).

If I didn't believe in God and thought morality was subjective, I still wouldn't murder anyone because of the whole empathy thing.

My question is #2, but since you said you have to answer 1 for it, go ahead lol.

[Amarok]

If I didn't believe in God and thought morality was subjective, I still wouldn't murder anyone because of the whole empathy thing. 

If god doesn't exist morality is still objective . And no most atheist don't believe it's subjective.

---

I think everything will make sense to us someday, and we will understand why.

That's some weak reasoning. There is no reason it should not make sense now . We would never accept that reasoning in any other scenario it seems like special pleading.