|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
The problem of evil |
Post Reply 
|
Page <12 |
| Author |
 Share Topic Printable Version Delicious Digg Facebook Furl Google Boomarks Google Buzz MySpace Newsvine reddit StumbleUpon Translate Twitter Windows Live Yahoo Bookmarks Topic Search  Topic Options
|
TX2k7 
Forum Moderator 
Requiescat In Pace Joined: 08 Nov 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 2340 |
 Post Options
 Quote Reply
 Topic: The problem of evilPosted: 15 Oct 2011 at 12:21pm |
|
im liking these responses :)
gotta address these 1 at a time, so ill start with aqua: well supposing all we are and all that exists was created by God as is held by theists, then even in regards to natural evil, God either has a hand in creating it or allowing it. if God did create evil, this would suggest that he also has the power to destroy it. as an omnibenevolent being, he is bound to make the world as good as possible, this entails the prevention of evil that is not necessary to serve some greater good right? and yet such events take place anyway, however, phantaci brings up a good point, imo a very strong counter argument. why cant a person be an asshole all their own? that comes down to ur view on the matter of free will. |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
ax412
Team iAM 
Duel Champ Joined: 29 Jan 2009 Location: Cali Online Status: Offline Posts: 4833 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Posted: 15 Oct 2011 at 10:48am |
|
If God were to oust evil. Then free will would be abolished.
Evil can only exist because of good.
|
|
|
|
|
warfare
Ultra Member 
Joined: 29 Sep 2009 Online Status: Offline Posts: 326 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Posted: 15 Oct 2011 at 10:14am |
|
Proving or Disproving the existence of God in terms that would satisfy your "logical" and "evidentiary" problems seems inherently false for the following reason: Those who ask the question (as your paper does), insist on couching their arguments in scientific or even mathematical terms. They use words such as logic, evidence, and rational to discuss a topic which is wholly emotional, intuitive, deeply personal and entirely subjective. Decidedly NOT a subject susceptible of being PROVEN in their science based terms.It seems to me, as unsatisfactory as it may be, one can only attempt to argue such a point by drawing comparisons to those things in our universe that likewise show a disposition towards opposites just as the God-Devil (evil) conundrum does. Our natural universe is apparently filled with opposing forces, balance, and symetry that are not clearly understood yet seem to exist: matter/antimatter, negative/positive charges, energy, dark energy, etc.
In this way, the supposed good/evil inconsistency is truly consistent with what we see in the natural universe.
|
|
|
Do you realize that in about forty years, we'll have millions of old ladies running around with tatoos and pierced navels? O.o
|
|
|
|
|
Aquaknot
Godlike Member 
Wheres my sock?! Joined: 22 Feb 2010 Online Status: Offline Posts: 778 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Posted: 15 Oct 2011 at 7:00am |
|
evil for the greater good...
See, there's the conundrum. How can God allow this to happen? We attribute good and bad things that happen to a God or to Evil. I would suggest that sh1t just happens in nature. It's that "if a tree falls in the forest and nobody is there, does it make a sound?" argument. Plate Tectonics or simple physics are not dependent on the presence of human or supreme beings. Of course; group psychology, the horrors of war and the dumbing down of the masses are entirely dependent on human presence and human nature. History, as short as it is, reveals that while a "person" is intelligent, "people" are dumb. Entire countries have been swayed by fear and anger. This led to some of the worst acts in human history. If we're going to assume that there is in fact a supreme, omnipotent being that created all things, then by applying logic, we must also conclude that this entity created evil as well. I've heard extreme far right evangelicals claim that "an evil spirit is using that person to destroy you". Why can't that person be an asshole all on their own? The 24 hour news cycle is filled with atrocities we commit against each other and our children. As I get older, I struggle more and more with the concept of a supreme being. I certainly struggle with the concept of a benevolent supreme being. This is a matter I'm not settled with personally and suspect I never will be.
|
|
|
A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have.
-- Thomas Jefferson |
|
|
|
|
TX2k7
Forum Moderator
Requiescat In Pace Joined: 08 Nov 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 2340 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Posted: 15 Oct 2011 at 4:31am |
|
well aqua we are supposing that this being is omnipotent, omniscient, & omnibenevolent, as is held in western theology. now, in regards to right & wrong, i get what you are saying, our understanding of right/wrong might be limited where as God, being omniscient, is free of this, however, this would not relieve God of his responsibility to etake evil out of the equation, at the very least pointless evil.
evil for the greater good...i agree with you, however, one might argue where was the greater good in the holocaust or in Haiti after the earthquake, how can God allow this to happen? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Aquaknot
Godlike Member
Wheres my sock?! Joined: 22 Feb 2010 Online Status: Offline Posts: 778 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Posted: 15 Oct 2011 at 4:08am |
|
Consider that apparently mankind is the only sentient being on the planet. Complete with long and short term memory, emotions, a conscience and a persistant curiosity. It seems to me that the combination of these traits woud automatically force the creation of one or more deities. We use these deities to fill in the gaps in our understanding and to assign fault or explain mysteries that have no other apparent answer. It is impossible to prove a negative. That means you can't prove something doesn't exist. It occurs to me that an omnipotent and omniscient being would not be bound by what we may consider to be "wholly good", or what we may decide is right or wrong. This entity would be free to function in any manner it sees fit with regard to manipulating the outcome of any given circumstance. Evil for the greater good = Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Someone decided that it was better to drop nukes on the civilian population of our enemy than to risk another 250k military men. It worked and many lives were saved, but at a terrible price. I make no judgement here, but use this as an example for me to try to understand "the needs of the many" in my own mind.
|
|
|
A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have.
-- Thomas Jefferson |
|
|
|
|
YINYANG
Forum Moderator
Ho's And Disco's Joined: 19 Mar 2009 Online Status: Offline Posts: -19563 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Posted: 14 Oct 2011 at 9:12pm |
|
If you break it down to it all comes down to scientific proof, and blind faith, you believe becasue it gives you hope that the world has a silver lining, in reality we are all out there for ourselves, We create evil because we put our needs first as individuals, there is no divine intervention for war, only peace treaties brought on by man, diseases occur frequently and man himself must find the cure, we survive so we can consume more.
A greater power, makes the burden of daily life easier, when there is no one to turn to there is god, when you feel sad or seek guidance the easiest thing to do is pray to whomever you believe in. Think about it, if you had a personal problem who better to confide in then a being that cannot be seen or heard. It allows you to get things off your chest and relieve some of the burden or pain you feel. Evil presents itself when you have nothing *GOOD* left to believe in, whether it be god or yourself as an individual, Also the term necessary evil plays a role in many peoples lives. Sometimes you have to be bad for the greater good. |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
TX2k7
Forum Moderator
Requiescat In Pace Joined: 08 Nov 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 2340 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Posted: 14 Oct 2011 at 9:02pm |
|
yes i know lol when im workn on my paper i do citations correctly, anyway back to the discussion.....
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
YINYANG
Forum Moderator
Ho's And Disco's Joined: 19 Mar 2009 Online Status: Offline Posts: -19563 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Posted: 14 Oct 2011 at 9:00pm |
Well if you are using APA or chicago style you need to cite those correctly im sure. good luck dude!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TX2k7
Forum Moderator
Requiescat In Pace Joined: 08 Nov 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 2340 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Posted: 14 Oct 2011 at 8:58pm |
|
no no yangin u misunderstand, im not using this thread as subject matter, and the points are not my own, these points have been made by experts and are actual key arguments when it comes to philosophy and religion. i merely brought this discussion here to see how it would turn out. i do not plan on using this as a resource, as u said, i hv expert material at my disposal
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
YINYANG
Forum Moderator
Ho's And Disco's Joined: 19 Mar 2009 Online Status: Offline Posts: -19563 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Posted: 14 Oct 2011 at 8:57pm |
|
Also Tx I need you to run my IP Address , and let me know my location, ive been bouncing of Ottawa Canada when it should be downtown Toronto, let me know if you can do this tonight , because I will be at my cousins house tommorow and sunday
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
YINYANG
Forum Moderator
Ho's And Disco's Joined: 19 Mar 2009 Online Status: Offline Posts: -19563 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Posted: 14 Oct 2011 at 8:54pm |
There are so many variables to your arguement; my suggestion is look at peer reviewed articles on this subject first, This way you see experts opinions on the subject, what this will do is help you compare your points to someone who is an expert in the field, if you are in college there should be a database via online through your school. This will show you have done the research and make your arguements more valid.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TX2k7
Forum Moderator
Requiescat In Pace Joined: 08 Nov 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 2340 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Posted: 14 Oct 2011 at 8:53pm |
|
"God moves in mysterious ways" is a cop out, and ya im hoping not to encounter it here, while it is true we cannot FULLY understand such a God, we can gain at least some understanding of God thru logic and reason.
and yes it can hard to reconcile the 2 but ill wait for some more responses before supposing more about God's nature |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Aquaknot
Godlike Member
Wheres my sock?! Joined: 22 Feb 2010 Online Status: Offline Posts: 778 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Posted: 14 Oct 2011 at 8:30pm |
|
Observing the world around me, I see a near perfect habitat for life. I also see the incredible evil that mankind is capable of. "Omniscient" is the capability to know all things infinitely. This is where the Alpha and Omega comes from in the Bible. From the Jewish and Christian (many flavors) perspective, I struggle with the concept of creating mankind with the foreknowledge of the absolute horrors we woud commit against each other. It defies logic to create a perfect garden (habitat) and then allow someone you already had a problem with come in and spoil it, especially when you supposedly already knew the outcome. Argument 1: Get ready for "God moves in mysterious ways" responses. Argument 2: Difficult to reconcile "wholly good" against the hebrew and christian bibles. Jealous, vengeful, angry, etc. are used many times to describe God. I too will be interested in how this thread develops. |
|
|
A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have.
-- Thomas Jefferson |
|
|
|
|
TX2k7
Forum Moderator
Requiescat In Pace Joined: 08 Nov 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 2340 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Posted: 14 Oct 2011 at 7:47pm |
|
premise:
1) There exists instances of intense suffering which an omnipotent, omniscient being could have prevented without thereby losing some greater good or permitting some evil equally bad or worse. 2) An omnipotent, wholly good being would prevent the occurence of any intense suffering it could, unless it could not do so without thereby losing some greater good or permitting some evil equally bad or worse. Conclusion: there does not exist an omnipotent, omniscient, wholly good being so here you have two different arguments attempting to show the inconsistency with belief in such a being existing. i look forward to a good rebuttal :) and no this does not hold my personal view, i am providing only one side of the argument for discussions sake |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TX2k7
Forum Moderator
Requiescat In Pace Joined: 08 Nov 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 2340 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Posted: 14 Oct 2011 at 7:41pm |
|
so im going to be writing a research paper discussing the problem of evil and thought itd be interesting to see what kind of response this would get here. (note im going to provide only one side of the argument here so as to allow room for rebuttal and feedback...
For centuries, the problem of the existence of evil has been regarded as the most potent rational objection to theistic belief. two main arguments held are that of the "Logical Problem of Evil" and the"Evidential Problem of Evil" The logical problem: "On one hand hand, the theist affirms that (1) an omnipotent, omniscient, perfectly good God exists; on the other hand, he affirms that (2) evil exists in the world" (J.L. Mackie). Supposing the 2 statements are logically iconsistent, then it is irrational to believe both. The evidential problem: theists and nontheists both typically agree that God would prevent or eliminate the existence of any pointless or meaningless evil. however a problem arises as such evil does appear to exist. so heres the |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post Reply
|
Page <12 |
| Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |
