First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  Next  Last
It makes no sense for god to create beings who do evil
20259 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M / The centroid of a...
Offline
Posted 5/28/08

YouAreDumb wrote:
The hole in the argument exist, but as an argument against someone who believes in a higher morality (such as a Christian) it is logically valid.


You're right, but I'm not a Christian, so I was picking it apart with logic only. =)
1283 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Everywhere you wa...
Offline
Posted 5/28/08

excalion wrote:


YouAreDumb wrote:
The hole in the argument exist, but as an argument against someone who believes in a higher morality (such as a Christian) it is logically valid.


You're right, but I'm not a Christian, so I was picking it apart with logic only. =)


We don't need to convince you. You are already part of the Evil Atheist/Agnostic Conspiracy.
11704 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / TN
Offline
Posted 5/28/08

YouAreDumb wrote:


excalion wrote:


YouAreDumb wrote:
The hole in the argument exist, but as an argument against someone who believes in a higher morality (such as a Christian) it is logically valid.


You're right, but I'm not a Christian, so I was picking it apart with logic only. =)


We don't need to convince you. You are already part of the Evil Atheist/Agnostic Conspiracy.


are you christian? judging others for their beliefs. who are you to call someone evil? your the one who is going against god judging someone
908 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25
Offline
Posted 5/28/08
"Evil is charismatic. A famous question: Why is Milton's Satan in Paradise Lost so much more attractive, so much more interesting, than God himself? The human mind romances the idea of evil. It likes the doomed defiance. Satan and evil have many faces, a flashy variety. Good has only one face. Evil can also be attractive because it has to do with conquest and domination and power. Evil has a perverse fascination that good somehow does not. Evil is entertaining. Good, a sweeter medium, has a way of boring people.

...

Perhaps God has other things on his mind. Perhaps man is to God as animals are to man--picturesque, interesting and even nourishing. Man is, on the whole, a catastrophe to animals. Maybe God is a catastrophe to man in the same way. Can it be that God visits evils upon the world not out of perversity or a desire to harm, but because our suffering is a byproduct of his needs? This could be one reason why almost all theodicies have about them a pathetic quality and seem sometimes undignified exertions of the mind." -- Excerpts from Lance Morrow's EVIL, an essay in TIME Magazine June 10, 1991.

Another way to look at it is Milton's thought provoking Paradise Lost. In the poem, we learn that Adam and Eve's suffering because they ate the fruit may very well be what God had intended all along, and put Satan into hell to preform because he as a parent was unable to teach his creations such a harsh lesson. Evil exists to define what Good is. Without Evil, what would we define as Good?

"Without the fear of hell and Satan, there is no God."--Brother Jorge, "Name of the Rose" film.

Evil and suffering exist so that we can appreciate good and joy. That is the lesson that God may have wanted to teach Adam and Eve, and further down the line, us.
1283 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Everywhere you wa...
Offline
Posted 5/28/08 , edited 5/28/08

Nessarose wrote:

"Evil is charismatic. A famous question: Why is Milton's Satan in Paradise Lost so much more attractive, so much more interesting, than God himself?
Because as Lord Byron said the is the real hero of he work.


The human mind romances the idea of evil. It likes the doomed defiance. Satan and evil have many faces, a flashy variety. Good has only one face.
Thats stupid. Good and evil are equally varied if they are opposites.



Evil can also be attractive because it has to do with conquest and domination and power. Evil has a perverse fascination that good somehow does not. Evil is entertaining. Good, a sweeter medium, has a way of boring people.
A morally perfect being would no find it attractive to start with, since they are morally perfect.




...

Perhaps God has other things on his mind. Perhaps man is to God as animals are to man--picturesque, interesting and even nourishing. Man is, on the whole, a catastrophe to animals. Maybe God is a catastrophe to man in the same way. Can it be that God visits evils upon the world not out of perversity or a desire to harm, but because our suffering is a byproduct of his needs? This could be one reason why almost all theodicies have about them a pathetic quality and seem sometimes undignified exertions of the mind." -- Excerpts from Lance Morrow's EVIL, an essay in TIME Magazine June 10, 1991.
Such a god is not the tri omni god I state I am arguing against in my OP is it? So this is irrelevant.



Another way to look at it is Milton's thought provoking Paradise Lost. In the poem, we learn that Adam and Eve's suffering because they ate the fruit may very well be what God had intended all along,
Which should be logically obvious anyway.



and put Satan into hell to preform because he as a parent was unable to teach his creations such a harsh lesson. Evil exists to define what Good is. Without Evil, what would we define as Good?
The concept of evil can exist without it's actual presence. Simple really. A man could know evil but never do it. After all we can not do evil in heaven can we? So therefore a state exists where there is good, but no evil to define it that is not conceptual. If god determines what is evil he can tell the morally perfect what it is when he makes them (i.e. give them the ten commandments). Nice try though.



"Without the fear of hell and Satan, there is no God."--Brother Jorge, "Name of the Rose" film.

Evil and suffering exist so that we can appreciate good and joy. That is the lesson that God may have wanted to teach Adam and Eve, and further down the line, us.


Argument refuted above. Go back to Oz.
1283 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Everywhere you wa...
Offline
Posted 5/28/08

Katorulez93 wrote:


YouAreDumb wrote:


excalion wrote:


YouAreDumb wrote:
The hole in the argument exist, but as an argument against someone who believes in a higher morality (such as a Christian) it is logically valid.


You're right, but I'm not a Christian, so I was picking it apart with logic only. =)


We don't need to convince you. You are already part of the Evil Atheist/Agnostic Conspiracy.


are you christian? judging others for their beliefs. who are you to call someone evil? your the one who is going against god judging someone


I was joking. I am an agnostic.
11704 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / TN
Offline
Posted 5/28/08

YouAreDumb wrote:


Katorulez93 wrote:


YouAreDumb wrote:


excalion wrote:


YouAreDumb wrote:
The hole in the argument exist, but as an argument against someone who believes in a higher morality (such as a Christian) it is logically valid.


You're right, but I'm not a Christian, so I was picking it apart with logic only. =)


We don't need to convince you. You are already part of the Evil Atheist/Agnostic Conspiracy.


are you christian? judging others for their beliefs. who are you to call someone evil? your the one who is going against god judging someone


I was joking. I am an agnostic.


wasnt a funny joke, rather lame actually
1283 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Everywhere you wa...
Offline
Posted 5/28/08

Katorulez93 wrote:


YouAreDumb wrote:


Katorulez93 wrote:


YouAreDumb wrote:


excalion wrote:


YouAreDumb wrote:
The hole in the argument exist, but as an argument against someone who believes in a higher morality (such as a Christian) it is logically valid.


You're right, but I'm not a Christian, so I was picking it apart with logic only. =)


We don't need to convince you. You are already part of the Evil Atheist/Agnostic Conspiracy.


are you christian? judging others for their beliefs. who are you to call someone evil? your the one who is going against god judging someone


I was joking. I am an agnostic.


wasnt a funny joke, rather lame actually


Sort of like the Christian religion?
908 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25
Offline
Posted 5/28/08
Aren't you a pleasant ball of sunshine? I never once stated an opinion of my own up there, I simply interpreted the opinion of John Milton, and QUOTED an essay.

Evil didn't exist until Satan entered Eden. Evil exists to define good, and vice versa. If everything is good, there is no need for a term for it. If everything is evil, there is no need for a term for it. That's not the case. They're to sides of the same coin.

When you have no suffering, you can't comprehend that what you're experiencing is bliss, because there's nothing to compare it too. Adam and Eve did not even have the concept of covering till they ate the fruit and were booted out of Eden. It's simply the way things were. It was only through the suffering that followed that they deteremined that they were in bliss in the garden, and longed to return there.




And for your information, there IS evil in Oz, five seconds with a nose in a Baum book will tell you that much...
11704 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / TN
Offline
Posted 5/28/08

YouAreDumb wrote:


Katorulez93 wrote:


YouAreDumb wrote:


Katorulez93 wrote:


YouAreDumb wrote:


excalion wrote:


YouAreDumb wrote:
The hole in the argument exist, but as an argument against someone who believes in a higher morality (such as a Christian) it is logically valid.


You're right, but I'm not a Christian, so I was picking it apart with logic only. =)


We don't need to convince you. You are already part of the Evil Atheist/Agnostic Conspiracy.


are you christian? judging others for their beliefs. who are you to call someone evil? your the one who is going against god judging someone


I was joking. I am an agnostic.


wasnt a funny joke, rather lame actually


Sort of like the Christian religion?


no not even close. I have a question. Why do you make fun of other's beliefs? is it bc it makes you feel better? Because your jealous that christians have something to look foward to? bc they have someone to protect them? maybe you were raised to be bad to others. either way i feel sorry for you

908 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25
Offline
Posted 5/28/08

YouAreDumb wrote:
In more simple form:


1. A maximally good being will always choose the best option it can.
2. A maximally powerful being can choose any logically possible option.
3. A maximally good being is possible.
4. Creating a maximally good being is a better option than creating a less-than-maximally good being.
5. Therefore a maximally good and powerful being will never create a less-than-maximally good being.
6. Less-than-maximally good beings exist.
7. Therefore, the less-than-maximally good beings were not created by a maximally good and powerful being.



What if it is not logically possible to create a less-than-maximally good being. You don't address this anywhere. If you're going to try to get somewhere with a syllogism, make sure it leaves no window for argument.
1283 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Everywhere you wa...
Offline
Posted 5/28/08 , edited 5/28/08

Nessarose wrote:

Aren't you a pleasant ball of sunshine? I never once stated an opinion of my own up there, I simply interpreted the opinion of John Milton, and QUOTED an essay.

Evil didn't exist until Satan entered Eden. Evil exists to define good, and vice versa.
This is a gross over simplification of the issue. Good and evil can be defined anyway someone desires. If there is an objective morality good and evil are opposite. You have not addressed how evil can be a concpet that someone knows. This is enough to define good, and evil. If god is maximally good then he is the opposite of evil, and should not desire for evil to come into the world. If god could not know what evil was before it existed then he is not omnipotent. So, therefore the god you are describing it not my tri omni god- he is not the Christian god.


If everything is good, there is no need for a term for it. If everything is evil, there is no need for a term for it. That's not the case. They're to sides of the same coin.
Are you saying that evil can not exist as a concept? That would be quit a claim indeed. If god defines the two, then all he has to do is say evil is fill the blank. Bam. Done.



When you have no suffering, you can't comprehend that what you're experiencing is bliss, because there's nothing to compare it too.
I disagree with this. It also rules out god being happy, since he could never be really in danger or hurt. He is after all god and all things occur according to his will.. In any case one may understand the idea that a state of non bliss is possible. God must since he is omniscient, but is maximally good.



Adam and Eve did not even have the concept of covering till they ate the fruit and were booted out of Eden. It's simply the way things were. It was only through the suffering that followed that they deteremined that they were in bliss in the garden, and longed to return there.
A morally perfect being can exist who knows evil but will always choose good. God is an example of this. Why could he have not made Adam and eve in this fashion?




And for your information, there IS evil in Oz, five seconds with a nose in a Baum book will tell you that much...

I have read the entire series thanks. I was making a joke about your user name.
1283 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Everywhere you wa...
Offline
Posted 5/28/08 , edited 5/28/08

Nessarose wrote:


YouAreDumb wrote:
In more simple form:


1. A maximally good being will always choose the best option it can.
2. A maximally powerful being can choose any logically possible option.
3. A maximally good being is possible.
4. Creating a maximally good being is a better option than creating a less-than-maximally good being.
5. Therefore a maximally good and powerful being will never create a less-than-maximally good being.
6. Less-than-maximally good beings exist.
7. Therefore, the less-than-maximally good beings were not created by a maximally good and powerful being.


What if it is not logically possible to create a less-than-maximally good being.
Clearly for an omnipotent being it is. I do not think that has to be addressed, since it is included in the definition of omnipotence.



You don't address this anywhere. If you're going to try to get somewhere with a syllogism, make sure it leaves no window for argument.

Thats not an argument which attacks mine.
4945 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / France
Offline
Posted 5/28/08
We are good beings, But since Satan play his role, and Our minds play their roles..we creat destruction
908 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25
Offline
Posted 5/28/08

YouAreDumb wrote:


Nessarose wrote:


YouAreDumb wrote:
In more simple form:


1. A maximally good being will always choose the best option it can.
2. A maximally powerful being can choose any logically possible option.
3. A maximally good being is possible.
4. Creating a maximally good being is a better option than creating a less-than-maximally good being.
5. Therefore a maximally good and powerful being will never create a less-than-maximally good being.
6. Less-than-maximally good beings exist.
7. Therefore, the less-than-maximally good beings were not created by a maximally good and powerful being.


What if it is not logically possible to create a less-than-maximally good being.
Clearly for an omnipotent being it is. I do not think that has to be addressed, since it is included in the definition of omnipotence.



You don't address this anywhere. If you're going to try to get somewhere with a syllogism, make sure it leaves no window for argument.

Thats not an argument which attacks mine.


I'm only trying to say, if you're planning to sell your point on pseudo-logic, please make sure it works... If someone can spot it, you failed at it. You have to make sure your pseudo-logic is valid, or it's no good.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.