The Problem of Evil, Messiah, and Wrath.

[Koldo]

Yes. In this hypothetical, 'freedom' implies 'limited freedom' because complete freedom is anarchy and carries with it other disadvantages.

Great.

Well, sort of. My approach goes passed a person being a quadriplegic. Being a quadriplegic has unique challenges. Being unique increases diversity. If diversity is valued, then more diversity is better, less diversity is worse. A world without quadriplegics would be less diverse and therefore less perfect to a creator who values diversity.

The problem with this line of reasoning is that you would need to argue for the specific diversity we have, rather than diversity itself. If you watch fantasy movies, for example, you will see much more diversity among humans than what exists in our world.

agreed

Bold. I like it. Overcoming/containing evil and reducing suffering are improvements? If improvment is valued, then more opportunity for improvement is better and the perfect creation would have many many flaws to improve on. Evil and suffering are the worst, but all that means is that overcoming and reducing them would be that much more valuable.

In which case we would be living in a hell-like world rather than Earth?

OK. It's easily resolved if the creator also values empathy.

Ok, you've made some good points here. But it's all irrelevent if empathy is valued. Even if you're right that empathy has no value out of context, it could still be a subjective value held by the creator for an arbitrary reason.

But then why do psycopaths exist?

Right. It's pointless. One less thing to learn, one less way to improve, less perfect per the creator's values.

But it is not an actual improvement if it serves no purpose.

Don't they have "Poison Control" in Brazil? It's good to know what'll kill'ya.

But not how to best torture someone, right?

Yes, I propose that the pleasure itself is a flaw. It could have been designed as a challenge.

What's the flaw in feeling pleasure?

 

[dybmh]

The problem with this line of reasoning is that you would need to argue for the specific diversity we have, rather than diversity itself. If you watch fantasy movies, for example, you will see much more diversity among humans than what exists in our world.

OK, no problem I wasn't specific enough. "Diversity of challenges" is valued, not "diversity" in general. Now the perfect creation doesn't need to mimic fantasy movies. Or another way to look at it; diversity of challenges encourages resilience which is an improvement. So really valuing diversity of challenges isn't needed on its own because it is included in the value for improvement.

In which case we would be living in a hell-like world rather than Earth?

Yes, for an innocent child who encounters evil and extreme suffering, they are living in a hell-like world.

But then why do psycopaths exist?

Easy, if empathy is valued, then a psychopath is a negative role model in that pursuit.

But it is not an actual improvement if it serves no purpose.

It serves no purpose in the hypothetical perfect world of your design where everyone is impervious to harm. It's an opportunity in the hypothetical perfect world of my design where people learn from harm and work to reduce it. If improvement is valued, which world is better, yours or mine? Isn't that a subjective choice? If so, then as stated an imperfect creation does not necessarily come from an imperfect creator.

But not how to best torture someone, right?

Right. Development into the best torture methods is not an improvement. It would be discouraged by a creator who values it.

What's the flaw in feeling pleasure?

The context got lost. It's not just generic pleasure which is a flaw/challenge. It's the pleasure that is derived from inappropriate actions. Examples: the rush from shoplifting, the passion of adultry, the saticfaction from cheating, etc. The pleasure exists in the perfect creation as a challenge which leads to improvement.

 

[Koldo]

OK, no problem I wasn't specific enough. "Diversity of challenges" is valued, not "diversity" in general. Now the perfect creation doesn't need to mimic fantasy movies. Or another way to look at it; diversity of challenges encourages resilience which is an improvement. So really valuing diversity of challenges isn't needed on its own because it is included in the value for improvement.

Fantasy movies have a higher diversity of challenge than the real world though. Sandworms, goblins, vampires, dragons, zombies, diseases... All expanding over what we have as challenges in the real world.

Yes, for an innocent child who encounters evil and extreme suffering, they are living in a hell-like world.

But why aren't we all living in a hell-like world? If overcoming evil and suffering is always a room for improvement, and improving is extremely important, then the world is lacking room for improvement by not having more evil.

Easy, if empathy is valued, then a psychopath is a negative role model in that pursuit.

What is the purpose of a negative role model?
Did Hitler have to exist for us to know we shouldn't go around on a killing spree? Not at all.

It serves no purpose in the hypothetical perfect world of your design where everyone is impervious to harm. It's an opportunity in the hypothetical perfect world of my design where people learn from harm and work to reduce it. If improvement is valued, which world is better, yours or mine? Isn't that a subjective choice? If so, then as stated an imperfect creation does not necessarily come from an imperfect creator.

Right. Development into the best torture methods is not an improvement. It would be discouraged by a creator who values it.

But by following your rationale, figuring out by youself the best method to deal with torture, since it is a challenge, would be valued by the creator? Meaning that torturing people is ok?

The context got lost. It's not just generic pleasure which is a flaw/challenge. It's the pleasure that is derived from inappropriate actions. Examples: the rush from shoplifting, the passion of adultry, the saticfaction from cheating, etc. The pleasure exists in the perfect creation as a challenge which leads to improvement.

Sure, but what's the flaw in feeling pleasure when we do those things? I am talking about the feeling itself, not the improper action that triggered it.

 

[muhammad_isa]

..what's the flaw in feeling pleasure when we do those things? I am talking about the feeling itself, not the improper action that triggered it.

That is pretty meaningless.
People get pleasure from doing evil things .. so what?
Does that mean that reality is "wrong", or does it mean that we are wrong, for ignoring the consequences of our actions?

Where does it get us exactly, for saying that "reality is wrong"?
Nowhere!
..or worse, we ignore righteousness.

 

[dybmh]

Fantasy movies have a higher diversity of challenge than the real world though. Sandworms, goblins, vampires, dragons, zombies, diseases... All expanding over what we have as challenges in the real world.

I disagree, most of the major challenges in fantasy movies are solved in 3 hours or less. The challenges of a quadriplegic ( and others ) are not solved in a lifetime. Because of this, one can't compare the challenges depicted in movies with the challenges experienced in real life.

But why aren't we all living in a hell-like world? If overcoming evil and suffering is always a room for improvement, and improving is extremely important, then the world is lacking room for improvement by not having more evil.

Because, the world has been improving since it was created. We're in the middle of the process. There was much much more suffering and evil in the past. Evil in the modern world is contained in jails and prisons. Suffering is reduced by social saftey nets and increased access to medical technology. If these did not exist yet, you would be able to observe the hell-like quaities more often and more obviously.

What is the purpose of a negative role model?

To have a real world example to study.

Did Hitler have to exist for us to know we shouldn't go around on a killing spree? Not at all.

Hitler had to exist so that we could identify the indicators leading up to a genocidal dictator taking power and then prevent it in the future. Learning to prevent it ourselves without divine intervention is an improvement.

But by following your rationale, figuring out by youself the best method to deal with torture, since it is a challenge, would be valued by the creator? Meaning that torturing people is ok?

No, because "figuring it out by yourself" does not reduce harm and therefore is not an improvement. I think we agree, though, that knowledge of the best methods for torturing someone could be useful and acceptable in the case of a known ticking time bomb where an individual with the location is in custody refusing to talk. In fact, I'm struggling to think of any examples where knowledge, used in a responsible way, is detrimental. All knowledge can be used to improve if improvment is defined as reducing suffering and evil, right? If so, then the challenge of learning about anything is an improvement as long as the knowledge is used for reducing suffering and evil when the topic is destructive.

Sure, but what's the flaw in feeling pleasure when we do those things? I am talking about the feeling itself, not the improper action that triggered it.

The flaw in feeling pleasure from an improper action is that it is counter-intuitive. It encourages when it should discourage. But it's not all bad, because it's a challenge and those who learn to determine their actions based on more than than the immediate pleasure response have greatly improved.

 

[Koldo]

That is pretty meaningless.
People get pleasure from doing evil things .. so what?

Why do people get pleasure from evil things?

 

[Koldo]

I disagree, most of the major challenges in fantasy movies are solved in 3 hours or less. The challenges of a quadriplegic ( and others ) are not solved in a lifetime. Because of this, one can't compare the challenges depicted in movies with the challenges experienced in real life.

Haha... Sure, neither are they actual challenges. That was just illustrative. If fantasy worlds actually existed, they would provide more challenges than our world. Also, I am not saying that dealing with a sandworm is harder than dealing with being quadraplegic. It is not a dichotomy, fantasy world expand upon our challenges.

Because, the world has been improving since it was created. We're in the middle of the process. There was much much more suffering and evil in the past. Evil in the modern world is contained in jails and prisons. Suffering is reduced by social saftey nets and increased access to medical technology. If these did not exist yet, you would be able to observe the hell-like quaities more often and more obviously.

It was never hell-like though. Why?

To have a real world example to study.
Hitler had to exist so that we could identify the indicators leading up to a genocidal dictator taking power and then prevent it in the future. Learning to prevent it ourselves without divine intervention is an improvement.

Was it strictly necessary though as a mean of improvement?
Hitler also inspired other people though to be like him.

No, because "figuring it out by yourself" does not reduce harm and therefore is not an improvement.

How come?

I think we agree, though, that knowledge of the best methods for torturing someone could be useful and acceptable in the case of a known ticking time bomb where an individual with the location is in custody refusing to talk. In fact, I'm struggling to think of any examples where knowledge, used in a responsible way, is detrimental. All knowledge can be used to improve if improvment is defined as reducing suffering and evil, right? If so, then the challenge of learning about anything is an improvement as long as the knowledge is used for reducing suffering and evil when the topic is destructive.

Wait. Are you defining improvement as reducing suffering and evil? Destroying every single life form in an instant would achieve that. This is why I think it is more proper to say that increasing well-being is the actual improvement, whereas reducing suffering and evil is just a way to achieve tha goal, when done properly. Would you agree?

The flaw in feeling pleasure from an improper action is that it is counter-intuitive. It encourages when it should discourage. But it's not all bad, because it's a challenge and those who learn to determine their actions based on more than than the immediate pleasure response have greatly improved.

Then it is not a flaw?

 

[muhammad_isa]

Why do people get pleasure from evil things?

..because evil is part of reality, and people often have a warped sense of humour, getting pleasure from other's misfortunes etc.

Does that mean that reality is "wrong", or does it mean that we are wrong, and should avoid evil? ...

..saying we have no choice but to commit evil, is not accepted in a court of law, unless you are certified insane.

 

[dybmh]

Haha... Sure, neither are they actual challenges. That was just illustrative. If fantasy worlds actually existed, they would provide more challenges than our world. Also, I am not saying that dealing with a sandworm as harder than dealing with being quadraplegic. It is not a dichotomy, fantasy world expand upon our challenges.

OK, ok, how about this?

In order to improve, creation needs challenges AND the means to resolve those challenges. A perfect creation would not mimic fantasy movies because the means to resolve the challenges in fantasy movies require breaking the laws of nature. In fact, the existence of these fantasy challenges requires breaking the laws of nature. That's the definition of fantasy.

Improving on challenges by breaking the natural laws has an unintended negative consequence which renders this creation less perfect than one that conforms to natural laws. A world where challenges are regularly overcome by breaking nature's laws would be a very scary unpredictable world. I don't think it's possible to improve in a world without consistent rules. One would not be able to use past successes to contribute to solving current problems. People would be reduced to never-ending random trial and error without any patterns to recognize. Thus improvement would be compromised if the perfect creation included all the challenges that exist in fantasy. It all goes back to the value of improvement.

It was never hell-like though. Why?

Hell-like is subjective. Can we agree that the past was more hell-like. Disease, starvation, slavery, child-brides, capital punishment, infant mortality, etc... by every conceivable metric, the past was more hell-like.

Was it strictly necessary though as a mean of improvement?

There's more opportunity for improvement with Hitler rather than without.

Hitler also inspired other people though to be like him.

That's a good point. But really all it means is that humanity hasn't fully overcome the challenge of preventing genocidal dictators from gaining power.

How come?

OK, I think the context got lost again. We were talking about people figuring out the best ways to torture individually, not from books or research, but a hands-on investigation. You're asking how come this approach does not reduce harm. Because, doing hands-on research on torture requires torturing someone/something. The more people doing hands-on research increases the number of someones/somethings which are tortured. This is not an improvement. More torture is a less perfect creation.

Wait. Are you defining improvement as reducing suffering and evil? Destroying every single life form in an instant would achieve that. This is why I think it is more proper to say that increasing well-being is the actual improvement, whereas reducing suffering and evil is just a way to achieve tha goal, when done properly. Would you agree?

OK, I agree. 'well-being' works better as a definition of improvement.

Then it is not a flaw?

Sure it is. Compare instant temporary pleasure to delayed permanent pleasure. When the two are competing, the instant temporary pleasure is a flaw which prohibits the delayed permanent pleasure. For example: a person who engages in the instant gratification of cheating on an exam, does not get to experience the permanent pleasure of learning and understanding the material. When this happens, the instant gratification is a flaw, because it is preventing the more favorable long term outcome.

 

[Koldo]

..because evil is part of reality, and people often have a warped sense of humour, getting pleasure from other's misfortunes etc.

Does that mean that reality is "wrong", or does it mean that we are wrong, and should avoid evil? ...

..saying we have no choice but to commit evil, is not accepted in a court of law, unless you are certified insane.

But it could be the case that we lived in a realoty where doing evil doesn't grant the evil doer any pleasure, right?

This is not about whether reality is wrong specifically. But why it is in a given way.

 

[muhammad_isa]

But it could be the case that we lived in a realoty where doing evil doesn't grant the evil doer any pleasure, right?

I don't know, and I don't care.
I know that reality is reality.
That is what I have to deal with.

 

[Koldo]

OK, ok, how about this?

In order to improve, creation needs challenges AND the means to resolve those challenges. A perfect creation would not mimic fantasy movies because the means to resolve the challenges in fantasy movies require breaking the laws of nature. In fact, the existence of these fantasy challenges requires breaking the laws of nature. That's the definition of fantasy.

Depends on what you mean by laws of nature. Do you mean the current laws of nature? A fantasy would have different, albeit similar, laws of nature.

Improving on challenges by breaking the natural laws has an unintended negative consequence which renders this creation less perfect than one that conforms to natural laws. A world where challenges are regularly overcome by breaking nature's laws would be a very scary unpredictable world. I don't think it's possible to improve in a world without consistent rules. One would not be able to use past successes to contribute to solving current problems. People would be reduced to never-ending random trial and error without any patterns to recognize. Thus improvement would be compromised if the perfect creation included all the challenges that exist in fantasy. It all goes back to the value of improvement.

A fantasy world is not necessarily a completely chaotic world. Think of Lord of the Rings and Harry Potter, for example.

Hell-like is subjective. Can we agree that the past was more hell-like. Disease, starvation, slavery, child-brides, capital punishment, infant mortality, etc... by every conceivable metric, the past was more hell-like.

What I am referring as hell-like world would be a world where we, as in all of us, frequently experience major suffering. Earth has never been like that.

There's more opportunity for improvement with Hitler rather than without.

How come?

That's a good point. But really all it means is that humanity hasn't fully overcome the challenge of preventing genocidal dictators from gaining power.

And it never will. It is impossible... unless you sacrifice human autonomy, and therefore room for improvement.

OK, I think the context got lost again. We were talking about people figuring out the best ways to torture individually, not from books or research, but a hands-on investigation. You're asking how come this approach does not reduce harm. Because, doing hands-on research on torture requires torturing someone/something. The more people doing hands-on research increases the number of someones/somethings which are tortured. This is not an improvement. More torture is a less perfect creation.

Ah, by "figuring out by youself the best method to deal with torture" I meant figuring out how to deal with the experience of being harmed through torture.

Subjecting people to torture would provide them the opportunity to improve themselves since learning how to deal with harm is an improvement, right?

Sure it is. Compare instant temporary pleasure to delayed permanent pleasure. When the two are competing, the instant temporary pleasure is a flaw which prohibits the delayed permanent pleasure. For example: a person who engages in the instant gratification of cheating on an exam, does not get to experience the permanent pleasure of learning and understanding the material.

Allow me to disagree in a point that is probably irrelevant: There is no permanent pleasure of learning and understanding something. If there was, you would be feeling overjoyed every single moment of your life 'cause of the many things you have learned in your life. I don't think pleasure is the proper word you were looking for.

When this happens, the instant gratification is a flaw, because it is preventing the more favorable long term outcome.

But if it is necessary to reach a better outcome, how can it be a flaw?

 

[Koldo]

I don't know, and I don't care.
I know that reality is reality.
That is what I have to deal with.

I am afraid if I took your approach there would be nothing to talk about on this topic for when I look at reality I see no God.

 

[muhammad_isa]

I am afraid if I took your approach there would be nothing to talk about on this topic for when I look at reality I see no God.

That doesn't matter.

You ask questions about why there isn't an alternative reality, when there really isn't any need for one.
..that is, if we avoid doing evil, we get rewarded for it .. if we don't, we get punished.There doen't even have to be a life after death for that to be true, in general.

 

[Koldo]

That doesn't matter.

You ask questions about why there isn't an alternative reality, when there really isn't any need for one.

The rationale is that reality has to be congruent with the will of an omnipotent deity (particularly if we are talking about a creator god) and therefore any claims about what is God's will can be either supported or contradicted by our current reality. Do you agree?

 

[muhammad_isa]

The rationale is that reality has to be congruent with the will of an omnipotent deity (particularly if we are talking about a creator god) and therefore any claims about what is God's will can be either supported or contradicted by our current reality. Do you agree?

I don't know.
You chatter on about philosophical stuff like @mikkel_the_dane
To me, it is all hypothetical, and has no benefit.

Quite obviously, God created THIS REALITY and no other.
He has very good ressons why he is testing us. He wants us to learn something.

Some people just don't want to learn. They just want to find reasons why they can ignore it.
It is our loss. We carry on following our desires, whatever they may be, which eventually has the possibility of harm to us.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

I don't know.
You chatter on about philosophical stuff like @mikkel_the_dane
To me, it is all hypothetical, and has no benefit.

Quite obviously, God created THIS REALITY and no other.
He has very good ressons why he is testing us. He wants us to learn something.

Some people just don't want to learn. They just want to find reasons why they can ignore it.
It is our loss. We carry on following our desires, whatever they may be, which eventually has the possibility of harm to us.

To me God is all hypothetical, and has no benefit as such, unless you give it benefit yourself.

 

[muhammad_isa]

An "omnipotent deity" is one that is able to "do all things".
Now, for your agenda, you want this to include absurdity.
That is not the correct interpretation.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Fix your post please.

 

[muhammad_isa]

To me God is all hypothetical..

That's more or less what I said.
You prefer philosophy to theology.