SimWorld without suffering

[Willamena]

Well, yep. I understand their argument (rather, their claimed attributes) and the PoE as Epicurus put it and my defense of PoE. Where's the problem?

The only problem I have is that you are the one attributing benevolence if you are the one making a logical argument based on it.

 

[Thief]

All of this...and toward what effect?
Denouncing God?

So the world is a place of misery and pain.
Physical life sucks.

Want to blame God?...go ahead.
He is still bigger, faster, stronger, more intelligent, and greatly experienced.
(Almighty)

Notice I left out...benevolent.

Life after death...without God?
Might be more misery and pain....on a spiritual level.

Think you can get on His good side by complaining?

 

[Blackdog22]

It depends. I was making a different argument and yours is trying to say heaven and hell are somehow not universal. I don’t see how anyone can understand the concept of heaven if you can’t distinguish the difference between that and hell or what is good and bad or right and wrong. If you have a scratch on the surface of something, painting over it isn’t going to do anyone any good, until someone actually takes the time to buff the scratch out and then put a better finish on it. There is no point in doing things halfway, or doing incompetent work. You might as well setup a staircase, not put nails in and set a video camera up to see who the first one is to fall down it.

Ah, my apologies. Well, yeah it takes evil to understand good. However, this knowledge of evil could also be instilled in us. For example, I understand the concept of genocide and the evil associated with it by reading books based on it and seeing actual pictures of it in action. I would imagine a God could give us the full realization of the concept of evil, being omniscient, without much hassle. It appears that suffering is indeed put here for no reason other than for kicks, at least from a human perspective.

 

[Gloone]

I think Meow studies the art of illusion. I'm pretty sure I just hit a new all time low because of this thread. I guess it is time for some Jesus Juice and the world series now. :drunk:

 

[Blackdog22]

This is all just another form of whining.

Well of course it is. Those people who died in the holocaust are nothing, but a bunch of cry babies. That is my point exactly. You are completely right. My life filled rollercoaster would never of been complete without the holocaust and Hitler. He is a stand up guy, that between you and me, is just fantastic!

I actually go to rooms full of cancer patients and call them all out for the big babies they are. For some reason the staff doesn't like me, but I explain I enjoy roller coasters! I don't get why they just don't share my happiness for how miserable and necessary the suffering by these cancerous babies are.

Oh, and real quick, I saw this movie the other night called Braveheart. This guy named William Wallace loses his wife and cries. Wow, I started laughing and laughing, what a cry baby. He then gets his head cut off and my mom cried and I slapped her. All a bunch of babies.

Have you seen the Westboro baptist church? They are some of the most stand up individuals ever. I think you would really like them.

 

[Blackdog22]

Yeah, that'd be the straw part...

Yeah, which makes your argument a strawman. Which was my point.

The only problem I have is that you are the one attributing benevolence if you are the one making a logical argument based on it.

Okay, lets clear this up really quick. Do you believe God is benevolent? In other words, do you think God is good like the BIble says? If not you have just called out your Bible as false. If so, then Meows point suffers nothing at all. Either way, your argument is just an attempt at stopping progression of the topic at hand. An argument that isn't even relevant.

 

[Meow Mix]

Tell me what PoE is then please, I may be ill-informed. If you already explained it once then just refer me the post or link please.

PoE is essentially what Epicurus said:

If God is willing to prevent evil but unable, then he is impotent.
If He is able but untilling, then he is malevolent.
If He is both able and willing, then whence cometh evil?
If He is neither able or willing, then why call Him God?

Basically PoE is an argument that raises a contradiction with certain assumed characteristics of God.

If God is omnipotent then God can actualize any possible state of affairs. If God is omniscient then God knows of all logically possible state of affairs. If God is benevolent, then God would actualize the universe in a benevolent way (i.e. without unnecessary suffering).

It's logically possible to imagine a world with less suffering (or even no suffering in some contexts).

Therefore God didn't actualize the most ostensibly benevolent universe: this is a contradiction. Either God didn't have the power to create the best universe (isn't omnipotent), didn't know how (isn't omniscient), or didn't want to (isn't benevolent).

The PoE forces a theist who believes in an omnipotent, omniscient, benevolent God to drop one of those attributes since they cause a contradiction.

Or, the theist can argue that suffering is somehow necessary or otherwise justify the existence of suffering.

 

[Meow Mix]

In computer science, there are various classes of "machine", which are basically constructs that can solve problems, and they are classed based on what set of problems they can solve. However, some machines are more powerful than others, as the more powerful machines can compute the results of the lesser machines, but not vice-versa.

However, of particular note is the machine at the top of the hierarchy, Alan Turing's Universal machine. The reason this is important is that any Turing machine is itself calculable by a Turing machine. Thus, any construction that can simulate a Turing machine (such as the computer you're viewing this on) can also simulate every other Turing-machine-like construct.

The universe, and everything in it, must either be equivalent to a Turing machine, or be even greater than it. This becomes obvious when you consider that, if it weren't, we wouldn't be able to build Turing machines.

However, now we've ran into a problem. The only theoretical devices that are greater than a Turing machine is a hypercomputer, and, as you can see from the page, all of them involve computing an infinite number of things in a finite time.

Since it's generally assumed that this isn't possible, we must conclude that the universe is a Turing machine-equivalent, and thus simulatable by a Turing machine. Since simulating the universe involves simulating everything in it, the brain is thus simultable by a Turing machine with sufficiently large memory and/or a sufficiently long time. As mentioned earlier, your computer's processor is Turing-equivalent. As is Conway's Game Of Life.

Yeah, that's the one. Very interesting argument. I'm a bit tipsy right now and have company so I can't devote a lot of time, but I'd like to talk about the implications of GIT on this.

 

[Meow Mix]

The only problem I have is that you are the one attributing benevolence if you are the one making a logical argument based on it.

No, benevolence was attributed by certain theists -- which is who the argument is aimed at.

 

[Thief]

PoE is essentially what Epicurus said:

If God is willing to prevent evil but unable, then he is impotent.
If He is able but untilling, then he is malevolent.
If He is both able and willing, then whence cometh evil?
If He is neither able or willing, then why call Him God?

Basically PoE is an argument that raises a contradiction with certain assumed characteristics of God.

If God is omnipotent then God can actualize any possible state of affairs. If God is omniscient then God knows of all logically possible state of affairs. If God is benevolent, then God would actualize the universe in a benevolent way (i.e. without unnecessary suffering).

It's logically possible to imagine a world with less suffering (or even no suffering in some contexts).

Therefore God didn't actualize the most ostensibly benevolent universe: this is a contradiction. Either God didn't have the power to create the best universe (isn't omnipotent), didn't know how (isn't omniscient), or didn't want to (isn't benevolent).

The PoE forces a theist who believes in an omnipotent, omniscient, benevolent God to drop one of those attributes since they cause a contradiction.

Or, the theist can argue that suffering is somehow necessary or otherwise justify the existence of suffering.

Let's run with that....

And after you lay down to breathe your last breath ...
You get to face a God that is apathetic?

 

[Willamena]

Okay, lets clear this up really quick. Do you believe God is benevolent? In other words, do you think God is good like the BIble says? If not you have just called out your Bible as false. If so, then Meows point suffers nothing at all. Either way, your argument is just an attempt at stopping progression of the topic at hand. An argument that isn't even relevant.

I'm not a Christian. I'm not a theist. Meow's points suffer nothing at all --which, incidentally, helps make my earlier point.

Thanks.

No, benevolence was attributed by certain theists -- which is who the argument is aimed at.

That's true, but ... Nevermind.

 

[Gloone]

I'm not a Christian. I'm not a theist. Meow's points suffer nothing at all --which, incidentally, helps make my earlier point.

Thanks.


That's true, but ... Nevermind.

No Meows points do suffer because she is trying to create a fictitious imaginary world that doesn't exist.

 

[Quagmire]

Well of course it is. Those people who died in the holocaust are nothing, but a bunch of cry babies.

I wonder how they'd feel about you trying to capitalize on their suffering in order to make a point (and failing).

That is my point exactly. You are completely right. My life filled rollercoaster would never of been complete without the holocaust and Hitler. He is a stand up guy, that between you and me, is just fantastic!

Sorry: didn't realize you were a Holocaust survivor.

I actually go to rooms full of cancer patients and call them all out for the big babies they are.

Bet you don't go to rooms full of cancer patients for any reason, or let them enter your thoughts at all unless you're trying to capitalize on their suffering in order to make a point (and failing).

For some reason the staff doesn't like me,

Yes: I remember that Pm we all agreed to send that said "We don't like you Blackdog".

but I explain I enjoy roller coasters! I don't get why they just don't share my happiness for how miserable and necessary the suffering by these cancerous babies are. Oh, and real quick, I saw this movie the other night called Braveheart. This guy named William Wallace loses his wife and cries. Wow, I started laughing and laughing, what a cry baby. He then gets his head cut off and my mom cried and I slapped her. All a bunch of babies.

Let me know when you've gotten it all out, big guy.

Have you seen the Westboro baptist church? They are some of the most stand up individuals ever. I think you would really like them.

That's all just spiffy, Blackdog. So, are you actually going to address the topic at some point, or are you just going to keep trying to provide the comic relief (and failing)?

 

[Quagmire]

And now, for reference, the logical deduction that physical suffering is bad:

Physical suffering is the experiance of pain.
Pain indicates damage to the body.
Damage to the body impedes the body's ability to survive.

If survival is the imperative, (and it is in almost all cases) anything stopping you from surviving is bad. Thus, suffering is a bad thing.

Not bad. :yes:

(Much better than the whiny, off-topic one liners my question usually gets)

Problem is: you're talking about survival as the imperative for the individual, and in that scenario, this applies:

Physical suffering is the experiance of pain.
Pain indicates damage to the body.
Damage to the body impedes the body's ability to survive.

And yes, damage to the body is "bad" in terms of survival for the individual.

But, all you have to do is take one step back to get a wider view, and the whole situation changes:

If we re-apply your formula In terms of survival of the species, the weeding out of the weak and vulnerable---via the same devices that cause damage to the body of the individual--- obviously suffering becomes a "good" thing.

That was just one step back. Since we're theorizing about "God" obviously we'd have to take quite a few more steps back (and in the dark).


Really though, equating "pain", "suffering" and "damage" and talking about them as if they were the same thing isn't entirely reasonable. It would be much more reasonable to say pain ALERTS us to damage, thereby enabling us to avoid further damage, thus helping ensure the survival of the individual.

So even in the sense of individual survival, suffering, according to your formula, is actually a good thing.

 

[Walkntune]

And now, for reference, the logical deduction that physical suffering is bad:

Physical suffering is the experiance of pain.
Pain indicates damage to the body.
Damage to the body impedes the body's ability to survive.

If survival is the imperative, (and it is in almost all cases) anything stopping you from surviving is bad. Thus, suffering is a bad thing.

The suffering is nothing more than the indicator.Without it we would not know there was damage to the body so this pain is a good thing, no?

 

[Gloone]

I would like to give you a quick rundown on religion and god, but I don’t see how it is possible.

PoE is essentially what Epicurus said:

Also remember Epicurus came before Jesus and it was when the Romans and Greeks were trying to set up a democracy. You probably wouldn’t even acknowledge mythology as being relevant either, even though certain people like Spartans actually communicated with oracles and realized they had certain choices to take to uphold it.

If God is willing to prevent evil but unable, then he is impotent.

Do you know what Jealousy is? Most people acknowledge god as being jealous aside from being great. Others see Satan as being ruler of this world. While Jesus was someone that came to fulfill prophecies and eradicate people from harm the best he could because natural sin was left from creation. I could actually toss out a lot of blame if I wanted to, but what purpose does that really serve. Satan might be flattered by it and a higher god may never get the message.

If He is able but unwilling, then he is malevolent.

You already know how bad pain and suffering is. You realize how awful that pain can be. Do realize how great Gods love or have any understanding of what it may be. What if God wants to do something about it, but the only way God can do anything is by sending some type of messenger. I could venture into this further, but if you really care to know about people being locked up in hell then read revelations and come to know who Alpa – Omega, Jesus and his Angels are.

If He is both able and willing, then whence cometh evil?

I don’t – provide a good example why Jesus and theism should be practiced over paganism then we might be able to take this question further.

If He is neither able or willing, then why call Him God?

Depends on who you call god and how you perceive god to be.

Basically PoE is an argument that raises a contradiction with certain assumed characteristics of God.

Does it raise questions with monotheism or paganism? You have to remember the Epicurus probably didn’t even know what a single deity was back then.

If God is omnipotent then God can actualize any possible state of affairs. If God is omniscient then God knows of all logically possible state of affairs. If God is benevolent, then God would actualize the universe in a benevolent way (i.e. without unnecessary suffering).

You are right about omnipotent, omniscient, and benevolent, but that power is worthless if people have no control over it. People have to understand god’s will before they can understand its purpose. You have to remember, people as gods and gods as people. In other words people are capable of god vision.

It's logically possible to imagine a world with less suffering (or even no suffering in some contexts).

You are absolutely right!~ There is really no reason not to.

Therefore God didn't actualize the most ostensibly benevolent universe: this is a contradiction. Either God didn't have the power to create the best universe (isn't omnipotent), didn't know how (isn't omniscient), or didn't want to (isn't benevolent).

Depends on who or what you are calling God. Wish I could give you a better answer but this is just the kind of answer you will get when making blunt statements.

The PoE forces a theist who believes in an omnipotent, omniscient, benevolent God to drop one of those attributes since they cause a contradiction.

And how about theist that believe in Jesus? You might as well just look at the cross. That would tell you enough about evil without resorting to Epicurus.

Or, the theist can argue that suffering is somehow necessary or otherwise justify the existence of suffering.

I hate pain and suffering just as much as the next person. Everyone has to deal with the same amount of crap as the next. If you think Christianity is all about heaven and fairies then think again because it isn’t.

 

[Blackdog22]

No Meows points do suffer because she is trying to create a fictitious imaginary world that doesn't exist.

So your admitting Heaven is impossible?

 

[Blackdog22]

I wonder how they'd feel about you trying to capitalize on their suffering in order to make a point (and failing).

So when you said they're all a bunch of whiners you were doing what exactly?

Sorry: didn't realize you were a Holocaust survivor.

Never said I was, I just simply stated how awesome it was that they suffered. It was an awesome thing that help my roller coaster ride continue.

Bet you don't go to rooms full of cancer patients for any reason, or let them enter your thoughts at all unless you're trying to capitalize on their suffering in order to make a point (and failing).

Actually, I am a sonographer. Do you always talk about things you know nothing about?

Yes: I remember that Pm we all agreed to send that said "We don't like you Blackdog".

Wow, you just blatantly forged a comment into my post that isn't there at all, and your a staff member? I will definitely be talking to some of the more responsible staff members about this.

Let me know when you've gotten it all out, big guy.

Suffering is neat though right? If you don't think so your nothing but a big baby right? So when your suffering with cancer (highly likely at some point in someones life) if you so much as make a peep your a hypocrite. We shall see how that goes.

That's all just spiffy, Blackdog. So, are you actually going to address the topic at some point, or are you just going to keep trying to provide the comic relief (and failing)?

Already did, and succeeded exceptionally well judging by this shallow response.

 

[Gloone]

So your admitting Heaven is impossible?

You should ask Meow that question. I am not a non-theist.

 

[Quagmire]

So when you said they're all a bunch of whiners you were doing what exactly?

And I said this where?

Never said I was, I just simply stated how awesome it was that they suffered. It was an awesome thing that help my roller coaster ride continue.

I see.

Actually, I am a sonographer. Do you always talk about things you know nothing about?

Figured you'd be less embarrassed if there were two of us.

Wow, you just blatantly forged a comment into my post that isn't there at all, and your a staff member? I will definitely be talking to some of the more responsible staff members about this.

Now you're just lying. Don't worry: there's always a record of what was posted, what was edited, and by whom.

Making unfounded accusations is a pretty serious offense. Which comment did I "blatantly forge" into your post that isn't there at all?

Suffering is neat though right?

I never said I liked suffering, I just implied that I'm disgusted by whining.

If you don't think so your nothing but a big baby right?

How about responding to something I actually said? LOL! Who's the "forger" here?

So when your suffering with cancer (highly likely at some point in someones life) if you so much as make a peep your a hypocrite. We shall see how that goes.

You really have no idea what this thread is about or what anyone else is trying to say, do you?

Already did, and succeeded exceptionally well judging by this shallow response.

Ah, so all that was supposed to be comedy.