Doing God's will.

[Habitat]

6 hours ago, Sherapy said:

The Problem of Evil argument addresses two points, the logical problem of evil and the evidential problem of evil.

The logical deals with how god is defined if god is  all perfect, all good, how could there be evil?

The evidential aspect of evil deals with natural evil, natural disasters or Alzheimer’s disease, how can there be such things if god is all benevolent? 

 

 

Common sense defeats all such arguments. They seem to me childish at best. I have little faith in people who take it upon themselves to dictate what this supposed God should be, it is more them saying " I don't like the way the world is, had I been God, I'd have done it better and different". They usually compound the madness by saying they don't think there is a God, anyway ! It does not take great intelligence to see that assigning values, as we are apt to do, and obliged to do, in practical living, proceeds along a spectrum between extremely beneficial, to extremely detrimental, which some call "evil". It is an absurdity to say no benevolent God would allow that "bad" end of the spectrum, the spectrum is a range that we created in our heads, in response to objective realities, the realities change and the spectrum changes, it does not disappear, or not unless our ability to make value judgements does, and that would effectively be to mandate unconsciousness. Without discrimination, there is no consciousness. With discrimination, there are always value judgements. Such is life.

[Habitat]

14 minutes ago, Sherapy said:

Childhood abuse, neglect, lack of attention, or validation, overly critical, claiming the tendency to abuse  in the adult is triggered as a result of the child’s behavior, these and more are just some of the constributing factors to future evil behaviors.

Ted Bundy was a Psychology major, he had an opportunity to apply the tenets of what he was learning in a way that could have helped him.  He chose not to, he chose to use what he learned to be Evil instead. 

It doesn’t matter that his childhood contributed to his behavior, what matters is as an adult he did nothing to change himself and he had the tools and the intelligence. 

 

 

As I say, all the lemons lined up on the slot machine, and voila ! That is a better explanation than the mysterious "evil", unless you say that the concurrence of a whole range of psychological issues equals "evil", I'd more likely call it misfortune, for all concerned, including Bundy.

[Habitat]

5 hours ago, danydandan said:

To quote a great philosopher, "there is only one evil, ignorance."

And most particularly, ignorance of our own motives.

[psyche101]

19 hours ago, Habitat said:

Technically speaking yes, elsewhere in the universe they'd have another name for "that which surpasses all understanding".

There's nothing to indicate such a presence exists outside of man's writings. There's also nothing to say that others surpassed the religious stage of development. We might be the only species in the universe to arrive at such a nonsensical idea. 

This is one that we just don't know, and haven't anything to base possibilities on. 

[Mr Walker]

16 hours ago, danydandan said:

Really you have a massive sample size and are willing to offer evidence for this notion?

There is no way of knowing how anything with self awarenesses and language will evolve.

Do dolphins have language? They do!

Are dolphins self aware? They are!

Do I see dolphins going to Mass every Sunday? I don't!

Sample  size has nothing to do with it. It is the neuro- linguistic and cognitive abilities required

However studies of human children all over the world show they all have the same cognitive ability and imperative to construct 'gods/magical agents" and believe in supernatural forces 

So, where are your objective evidences that dolphins and some primates have human level self aware consciousness? 

No the y do not have language as defined by human language  The y can communicate but do not have a language sophisticated enough to express or create abstract concepts  For example one dog was trained to recognise 400 words and obey commands using those words but it had no language .

Some dolphins, along with some apes pass the mirror test used to decide when a child can recognise itself in a mirror  but that doesn't mean they have either sophisticate language nor concpetual development greater than say, a 3 year old human 

Now 3 year old humans DO create god concepts.  It is true we cant test dolphins for this abilty BUT the y show no evidences, in non verbal ways, of doing so.  And that was my point ; we have NO evidences of this form of thinking in other animals 

I would LOVE to see dolphins and apes uplifted to human level consciousness, and their association with humans seems to increase their  individual abilty in this area

quote

Animal languages are forms of non-human animal communication that show similarities to human language. Animals communicate by using a variety of signs such as sounds or movements. Such signing may be considered complex enough to be called a form of language if the inventory of signs is large, the signs are relatively arbitrary, and the animals seem to produce them with a degree of volition (as opposed to relatively automatic conditioned behaviors or unconditioned instincts, usually including facial expressions). In experimental tests, animal communication may also be evidenced through the use of lexigrams (as used by chimpanzees and bonobos). While the term "animal language" is widely used, researchers agree that animal languages are not as complex or expressive as human language.

Many researchers argue that animal communication lacks a key aspect of human language, that is, the creation of new patterns of signs under varied circumstances. (In contrast, for example, humans routinely produce entirely new combinations of words.) Some researchers, including the linguist Charles Hockett, argue that human language and animal communication differ so much that the underlying principles are unrelated.[1] Accordingly, linguist Thomas A. Sebeok has proposed to not use the term "language" for animal sign systems.[2] Marc Hauser, Noam Chomsky, and W. Tecumseh Fitch assert an evolutionary continuum exists between the communication methods of animal and human language.[3]

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_language

 

[Mr Walker]

6 hours ago, Stubbly_Dooright said:

 Well, I happened to be a fan of Douglas Adams books or most of them anyways. Take that as you will.     

How about David Brin's series on uplifted animals (including dolphins) travelling to new worlds with humans?  

[+Hammerclaw]

When I see a Black Widow Spider(orb spider) I step on it. I don't plead with it to be a good little spider and not bite anyone. Now, a Black Widow Spider can't help it. It's in it's nature to respond that way to certain stimuli--and that's the point. Sociopaths are flawed from birth and it is not in their nature tohave  empathy or sympathy for human life and they act according to their nature. They are like soulless automatons and must be  excised from the group, isolated and dealt with.On a killing spree, they should be eliminated with extreme prejudice. I'll save my sympathy for their victims.

[psyche101]

19 hours ago, Habitat said:

Not at all, I am milder than mild, but am realistic enough about these things to realise we are all capable of doing someone in, if the circumstances get bad enough.

Interesting that you see yourself that way. It's not a view shared by most. 

[Habitat]

Just now, psyche101 said:

Interesting that you see yourself that way. It's not a view shared by most. 

That would just be me being realistic, in the right circumstances, we can all become killers, the law does allow "justifiable homicide", which more or less recognizes that. But I am talking "last resort". But aside from that, the occasional impulse to do harm to others, or wish harm upon them, is virtually universal, though usually well constrained by the sense we would harm ourselves by acting out. It is the "hot heads" who lack such restraint, that attract the attention of the criminal justice system.

[Jon the frog]

36 minutes ago, Habitat said:

And most particularly, ignorance of our own motives.

Nope some old book say that good is omnipotent and omnipresent, if your motives is god will, you cannot be ignorant of anything ! 

[Habitat]

17 minutes ago, Jon the frog said:

Nope some old book say that good is omnipotent and omnipresent, if your motives is god will, you cannot be ignorant of anything ! 

Where there's a will, with humans, there's a way, 'tis said, but if God is/was the way the universe came to be, I don't think it necessarily follows there is/was a will involved. That is just anthropomorphizing matters.

[Habitat]

8 hours ago, Sherapy said:

The Problem of Evil argument addresses two points, the logical problem of evil and the evidential problem of evil.

The logical deals with how god is defined if god is  all perfect, all good, how could there be evil?

The evidential aspect of evil deals with natural evil, natural disasters or Alzheimer’s disease, how can there be such things if god is all benevolent? 

 

 

It does seem to me that you have conscripted this idea of objective evil, to do a hatchet job on the concept of a God, by implying  that the presence of "evil", indicates the absence of God, that no God worthy of the name,, would stand for what you call "evil". And of course you are very resistant to the idea that evil is just a value judgement we make, that can vary widely with the circumstance, and who is making the judgement. You are treating it like it has an existence, independent of human thought, like the environment generally. 

[Jon the frog]

28 minutes ago, Habitat said:

Where there's a will, with humans, there's a way, 'tis said, but if God is/was the way the universe came to be, I don't think it necessarily follows there is/was a will involved. That is just anthropomorphizing matters.

Was just being sarcastic... if some kinda god exist (beside the sun, the great one who feed life with his energy) , we puny human are the least of their concern.

Edited February 21, 2019 by Jon the frog

[Habitat]

1 minute ago, Jon the frog said:

Was just being sarcastic... if some kinda god exist (beside the sun, the great one who feed life with his energy) , we puny human are the least of their concern.

The putative God may have more than enough bandwidth to plot the progress of every little thing that we regard as insignificant, for all I know.

[+Sherapy]

1 hour ago, Hammerclaw said:

When I see a Black Widow Spider(orb spider) I step on it. I don't plead with it to be a good little spider and not bite anyone. Now, a Black Widow Spider can't help it. It's in it's nature to respond that way to certain stimuli--and that's the point. Sociopaths are flawed from birth and it is not in their nature tohave  empathy or sympathy for human life and they act according to their nature. They are like soulless automatons and must be  excised from the group, isolated and dealt with.On a killing spree, they should be eliminated with extreme prejudice. I'll save my sympathy for their victims.

Indeed, and we call them evil too. 

 

 

[+Hammerclaw]

24 minutes ago, Sherapy said:

Indeed, and we call them evil too. 

 

 

Spiders? They are not evil. We instinctively know some of them are potentially painful, even lethal. That is source of our fear and dread. The sad fact is human nature can so easily morph into something as dreadful and lethal.

[+Sherapy]

13 minutes ago, Hammerclaw said:

Spiders? They are not evil. We instinctively know some of them are potentially painful, even lethal. That is source of our fear and dread. The sad fact is human nature can so easily morph into something as dreadful and lethal.

No people. 

[+Sherapy]

1 hour ago, Habitat said:

It does seem to me that you have conscripted this idea of objective evil, to do a hatchet job on the concept of a God, by implying  that the presence of "evil", indicates the absence of God, that no God worthy of the name,, would stand for what you call "evil". And of course you are very resistant to the idea that evil is just a value judgement we make, that can vary widely with the circumstance, and who is making the judgement. You are treating it like it has an existence, independent of human thought, like the environment generally. 

I have simply asked if you think humans can be evil under certain circumstances, such as, Hitler, Ted Bundy, John Gacy, Timothy McVeigh.

I asked if you thought some acts could be concluded as evil, such as, rape, slavery, serial murder.

I am going to conclude based on your answers that you do not see evidence of evil in any circumstance.

Would this be correct? 

 

[Habitat]

3 minutes ago, Sherapy said:

No people. 

If some people are evil, we are all evil, to some extent, because we share a common biological heritage. I think once the idea that we, personally, are very "good" people, insinuates itself, then it becomes necessary that there be very "bad" people out there, or the equation just does not add up. My reaction to hearing that someone is a "good person", is "lucky for them", they could have bombed-out in the lottery of life and been a "bad" person. Don't think of yourself as a good or bad person, and a load is lifted off you.

[Habitat]

10 minutes ago, Sherapy said:

I have simply asked if you think humans can be evil under certain circumstances, such as, Hitler, Ted Bundy, John Gacy, Timothy McVeigh.

I asked if you thought some acts could be concluded as evil, such as, rape, slavery, serial murder.

I am going to conclude based on your answers that you do not see evidence of evil in any circumstance.

Would this be correct? 

 

I see extreme examples, like a freak show, of people with amplified expressions of human traits, that nevertheless we all have, to some degree, but not expressed sufficiently to make the six o'clock news.

Edited February 21, 2019 by Habitat

[+Sherapy]

4 minutes ago, Habitat said:

I see extreme examples, like a freak show, of people with amplified expressions of human traits, that nevertheless we all have, to some degree, but not expressed sufficiently to make the six o'clock news.

I have never met anyone that didn’t think Hitler was an evil monster.

That argued that we are all really Hitler’s, some are just luckier. 

It is a bizarre position to take.

Alrighty then, thanks for the responses.

[Habitat]

Just now, Sherapy said:

I have never met anyone that didn’t think Hitler was an evil monster.

That argued that we are all really Hitler’s, some are just luckier. 

It is a bizarre position to take.

Alrighty then, thanks for the responses.

No-one wants to make a pariah out of themselves, in a social setting, by signalling something positive about Hitler, but let's not be silly about this, millions were enthusiastic about Hitler, and remained so, even after his death. Half the doctors in Germany were members of the Nazi Party. Hitler, by happenstance, unlikely happenstance even, got to become this figure that wielded power, and that was the key, the position of power. Millions would do the same or worse, they don't get that chance, Hitler was apparently a very persuasive man, mesmerizingly so. Otherwise you'd never have heard of him. One senses people like the idea of unloading on Hitler, he and those of like ilk, are a convenient place to locate "evil", it certainly wouldn't be in us, In the  least degree, but there it is, "out there" ! Hitler relieves us of the burden.

[Stubbly_Dooright]

4 hours ago, Habitat said:

Evil is a term I dislike, because it has no explanatory value, in fact it draws us away from real explanations, we hear how some teenager who killed his whole family, was just plain evil, that is just a way of curtailing a discussion of what antecedents existed, that upon examination, might yield the possibility of forestalling similar happenings in the future. The "bad egg" theory, advanced after some mayhem, is useless, and too late. Substituting "evil" for what is in many cases frank mental illness, is harmful, and no help in the current situation where the mentally ill are routinely at large, and committing awful crimes, that would not have occurred in the recent past, when many more were locked up. Apparently the "evil" these days, is seen to be in keeping them from being at liberty.

Ok, I get ya.  

 I should give you credit for your desire to restrain from quick judgment. I’ll give you that. 

 In fact, I can admire that I on a certain level. (And, I can respect your adversion to the quick POV of evil. For me though, I see it just as it is. 

[psyche101]

2 hours ago, Habitat said:

That would just be me being realistic, in the right circumstances, we can all become killers, the law does allow "justifiable homicide", which more or less recognizes that. But I am talking "last resort". But aside from that, the occasional impulse to do harm to others, or wish harm upon them, is virtually universal, though usually well constrained by the sense we would harm ourselves by acting out. It is the "hot heads" who lack such restraint, that attract the attention of the criminal justice system.

I don't think serial killers, Pedos or child murderers are pushed over the edge. Cretins who rape and kill little old ladies don't have any such excuses, and then there's religious terrorism. 

I don't see restraint as the option there, they are sick minded people to begin with. Many serial killers exhibit lonesome and cruelty traits as children. It strikes me as more deep seated than a short fuse. 

[Stubbly_Dooright]

3 hours ago, Habitat said:

3 hours ago, psyche101 said:

Interesting that you see yourself that way. It's not a view shared by most. 

That would just be me being realistic, in the right circumstances, we can all become killers, the law does allow "justifiable homicide", which more or less recognizes that. But I am talking "last resort". But aside from that, the occasional impulse to do harm to others, or wish harm upon them, is virtually universal, though usually well constrained by the sense we would harm ourselves by acting out. It is the "hot heads" who lack such restraint, that attract the attention of the criminal justice system.

There have been times when I talk about what I wish I could do harm to someone, I have had people come back to me with, “That’s not you “ I then realize, I guess that isn’t me. Point being, it seems ingrained in some to do what they do.