Author Topic: The Evil Problem  (Read 6800 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online ParkingPlaces

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6592
  • Darwins +787/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • If you are religious, you are misconcepted
Re: The Evil Problem
« Reply #145 on: July 11, 2013, 11:00:10 AM »
If you know how to end war then why don't you do it?   Because you don't have the ability/power to put your plan into action?   Then that is what the aspect of God that knows how to end war (i.e. you) believes.   This aspect doesn't know it has any power to put the plan into action, and that's why it doesn't.

Suppose you are having a dream in which you have broken both of your legs.   In the dream, you can't stand up due to your apparently broken legs.   Within the dream, you have no power to stand up.   It's the same thing.

So you are worshipping a customized god that is powerless but nonetheless worthy of our worship. It takes a lot of work to be on the fringe of the fringe, but you're doing a good job.

Why don't I do it? Because I have no idea how to make other people as nice as I am. And I'm too nice to try forcing the issue.

By the way, in my dreams, if my legs were broken,t here would be no need to stand up. Because in my dreams I can fly.

Your god is sounding more like a nightmare to me. But of course, all of them do.

Jesus! The cracker-flavored treat!

Offline nebula

  • Undergraduate
  • ***
  • Posts: 123
  • Darwins +5/-2
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: The Evil Problem
« Reply #146 on: July 11, 2013, 11:00:44 AM »
Nebula, there is no way you know this stuff. How could you possibly say what god knows and does not know? Are you in personal contact with god? If you are, please call CNN and let the world know.

It's just a theory/conception of God.   I'm not saying I know.   The post I was replying to asked for 'opinions.'   

Offline nebula

  • Undergraduate
  • ***
  • Posts: 123
  • Darwins +5/-2
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: The Evil Problem
« Reply #147 on: July 11, 2013, 11:57:23 AM »
So you are worshipping a customized god that is powerless but nonetheless worthy of our worship. It takes a lot of work to be on the fringe of the fringe, but you're doing a good job.

Why don't I do it? Because I have no idea how to make other people as nice as I am. And I'm too nice to try forcing the issue.

By the way, in my dreams, if my legs were broken,t here would be no need to stand up. Because in my dreams I can fly.

Your god is sounding more like a nightmare to me. But of course, all of them do.

Who said I 'worship' anything?   

Can you fly in all of your dreams?   In God's dream flight isn't possible for humans unless you have an airplane or something.   And God isn't in any way a lucid dreamer.   The illusion of the universe is much more persistent than the illusion of the dreams we have when we sleep.  The entities or dream characters that God thinks it is have no control over the physical laws.   

Offline epidemic

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 902
  • Darwins +61/-14
Re: The Evil Problem
« Reply #148 on: July 11, 2013, 12:53:21 PM »
No evidence of god would be personal appearances, better outcomes for believers, or worse outcomes for non believers
Epidemic.
Do you wish there were a god?

I don't know. 

A guy in the sky who will let me live forever in paradise vs an all knowing being that creates sentient life and then tortures it for eternity because it made a poor decision when only presented with some of the facts.

Assuming that this god can make me enjoy eternity it is tempting.

But a god that tortures some of his creations infinitely (and seemingly petty) for finite crimes might weigh heavy on me. 

If I were to die today and meet god and he was the god I have read about in the bible I might be very torn.  I don't like vengeful, selfconsious people, who are compelled by peoples worship.  Now if god is able to put my fallible mind at rest and I have infinite paradise.

Ok having talked myself into this and reflected a bit. 

I would not mind living forever assuming my mind would not eventually become bored.  My moral compass already keeps me from worrying about the poor in other countries so I could probably deal with those tortured in hell as long as I did not think about it too much.


Offline screwtape

  • The Great Red Dragon
  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 12534
  • Darwins +700/-28
  • Gender: Male
  • Karma mooch
Re: The Evil Problem
« Reply #149 on: July 11, 2013, 01:36:53 PM »
Do you wish there were a god?

Yes.  And I wish it was me. 

I would be a great god.  I would actually stop people from doing horrible things in my name.  9/11 would be remembered as the day I appeared on 4 airplanes at the same time and made 19 arab men disappear.  They would appear later that day with a more charitable perspective on life.

People would not behave like tribalistic, superstitious monkeys.  I would make humans actually rational.  I would make people incapable of intentionally doing harm to others. 

I would make people able to perform miracles when in need.  A starving child could conjure his own bread and fish.

I would make life such that it need not kill and devour other life to survive.  I would get rid of germs and viruses. 

I would get rid of boy bands.   I would make teenage girls sensible enough that boy bands could never succeed in the first place.

Links:
Rules
Guides & Tutorials

What's true is already so. Owning up to it does not make it worse.

Offline nebula

  • Undergraduate
  • ***
  • Posts: 123
  • Darwins +5/-2
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: The Evil Problem
« Reply #150 on: July 11, 2013, 02:30:06 PM »
Then why call him "God"?
I find this to be a valid question.  I'd like to respin it another way for you nebula:
Is there a difference between what you call 'god' and 'the sum total of reality'?  If so, what are those differences?  If not, why not just refer to 'sum total of reality' and ditch the other baggage that usually comes with the word 'god' (independent, sentient will, omni-capabilities, etc.)?

No, there is no difference between God and the sum total of reality, with the caveat that the universe we know isn't reality, it's virtuality, i.e. the output of nonphysical, quantum processing of qubits.

I use the word God just because I'm a westerner and I'm comfortable with that simple word and with conceiving of reality in terms of a deity.     
« Last Edit: July 11, 2013, 04:10:15 PM by nebula »

Offline nogodsforme

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6864
  • Darwins +925/-6
  • Gender: Female
  • Jehovah's Witness Protection Program
Re: The Evil Problem
« Reply #151 on: July 11, 2013, 04:21:45 PM »
Do you wish there were a god?

Yes.  And I wish it was me. 

I would be a great god.  I would actually stop people from doing horrible things in my name.  9/11 would be remembered as the day I appeared on 4 airplanes at the same time and made 19 arab men disappear.  They would appear later that day with a more charitable perspective on life.

People would not behave like tribalistic, superstitious monkeys.  I would make humans actually rational.  I would make people incapable of intentionally doing harm to others. 

I would make people able to perform miracles when in need.  A starving child could conjure his own bread and fish.

I would make life such that it need not kill and devour other life to survive.  I would get rid of germs and viruses. 

I would get rid of boy bands.   I would make teenage girls sensible enough that boy bands could never succeed in the first place.

If you could make my 16-year-old daughter sensible, I would fall down and worship you yesterday. :D
Extraordinary claims of the bible don't even have ordinary evidence.

Kids aren't paying attention most of the time in science classes so it seems silly to get worked up over ID being taught in schools.

Offline One Above All

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 11092
  • Darwins +290/-37
  • Supreme ruler of the multiverse; All In One
Re: The Evil Problem
« Reply #152 on: July 11, 2013, 04:45:22 PM »
If you could make my 16-year-old daughter sensible, I would fall down and worship you yesterday. :D

Would that apply to, say... Me? I could use a new worshiper. All My old ones are getting kinda... well, old. You know how it is (metaphorically speaking), living forever and all.
The truth is absolute. Life forms are specks of specks (...) of specks of dust in the universe.
Why settle for normal, when you can be so much more? Why settle for something, when you can have everything?
We choose our own gods.

A.K.A.: Blaziken_rjcf/Lucifer/All In One.

Online jdawg70

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2248
  • Darwins +406/-8
  • Ex-rosary squad
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: The Evil Problem
« Reply #153 on: July 12, 2013, 12:01:43 PM »
No, there is no difference between God and the sum total of reality, with the caveat that the universe we know isn't reality, it's virtuality, i.e. the output of nonphysical, quantum processing of qubits.

I use the word God just because I'm a westerner and I'm comfortable with that simple word and with conceiving of reality in terms of a deity.     
Unfortunately, I don't think the word 'god' is simple.  The word 'god' usually comes with a whole lot of additional semantic baggage - independent sentience/will, vast, phenomenal powers, desires for relationships with his/her/its creations, etc.  For the most part, especially in the western world, you'd have to lop a whole lot of that semantic baggage off when having a discussion with people.  'Sum total of reality' doesn't really suffer from that problem.  Insofar as I understand your beliefs (which, honestly, I'm not sure I really do), you've got semantic baggage that you'd need to lop off a well with 'sum total of reality', but you'd have to lop that same baggage off with the word 'god'.

I just don't see how using the word 'god' is anything but detrimental to the goal of explaining your beliefs.
"When we landed on the moon, that was the point where god should have come up and said 'hello'. Because if you invent some creatures, put them on the blue one and they make it to the grey one, you f**king turn up and say 'well done'."

- Eddie Izzard

http://deepaksducttape.wordpress.com/

Offline nebula

  • Undergraduate
  • ***
  • Posts: 123
  • Darwins +5/-2
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: The Evil Problem
« Reply #154 on: July 12, 2013, 12:32:21 PM »
Unfortunately, I don't think the word 'god' is simple.  The word 'god' usually comes with a whole lot of additional semantic baggage - independent sentience/will, vast, phenomenal powers, desires for relationships with his/her/its creations, etc.  For the most part, especially in the western world, you'd have to lop a whole lot of that semantic baggage off when having a discussion with people.  'Sum total of reality' doesn't really suffer from that problem.  Insofar as I understand your beliefs (which, honestly, I'm not sure I really do), you've got semantic baggage that you'd need to lop off a well with 'sum total of reality', but you'd have to lop that same baggage off with the word 'god'.

I just don't see how using the word 'god' is anything but detrimental to the goal of explaining your beliefs.

I know what you mean but it creeps me out a little to constantly use some other word, often several times in a single sentence.   I guess 'the sum total of reality' would work and I could call it 'reality' for short or perhaps 'being itself' and call it 'being' for short.   

In a way though, I would kind of expect comments like this:  "You can't fool us with your 'sum total of reality' nonsense.   We know you worship Jesus.   Don't be afraid to admit that you love biblegawd.   Embrace it!"   

So whatever….I totally see your point but I use the word the same way I used it when I was 4 years old, as a symbol for something of which I know nothing.   My speculations about what it is are of course just that.

This is the dude right here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absolute_%28philosophy%29


Offline nogodsforme

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6864
  • Darwins +925/-6
  • Gender: Female
  • Jehovah's Witness Protection Program
Re: The Evil Problem
« Reply #155 on: July 12, 2013, 01:26:36 PM »
Why do you have to ascribe a living consciousness to reality, then? You still haven't gotten any closer to explaining anything by saying, "See, I think the whole universe is powered by this even bigger living thing. That I don't know jack about. But here's some sh!t I just made up about it."
Extraordinary claims of the bible don't even have ordinary evidence.

Kids aren't paying attention most of the time in science classes so it seems silly to get worked up over ID being taught in schools.

Offline Star Stuff

  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 5783
  • Darwins +151/-4
  • Gender: Male
  • Carbon-based life form.
Re: The Evil Problem
« Reply #156 on: July 12, 2013, 01:30:30 PM »
Why do you have to ascribe a living consciousness to reality, then? You still haven't gotten any closer to explaining anything by saying, "See, I think the whole universe is powered by this even bigger living thing. That I don't know jack about. But here's some sh!t I just made up about it."

Theism defined.
God is an Imaginary Friend for Grown-ups

Offline nebula

  • Undergraduate
  • ***
  • Posts: 123
  • Darwins +5/-2
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: The Evil Problem
« Reply #157 on: July 12, 2013, 02:20:07 PM »
Why do you have to ascribe a living consciousness to reality, then? You still haven't gotten any closer to explaining anything by saying, "See, I think the whole universe is powered by this even bigger living thing. That I don't know jack about. But here's some sh!t I just made up about it."

The only consciousnesses or awarenesses I ascribe to God are the ones that each individual particle, object and life form in our universe has.   I do not ascribe any overall awareness to God, as I've said many times.   I will explain why but put on your goggles because we're going deep into woo country.

Awareness has to do with duality.   To be aware, there must be two things, the awareness and what the awareness is aware of.   God, the non-deluded, non-dreaming aspect, is not aware.   It just is.   It doesn't need to be aware because it IS everything.  It's non-dual.  I will stop there.   I don't want to woo you guys out too much.   

« Last Edit: July 12, 2013, 04:19:08 PM by nebula »

Offline nogodsforme

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6864
  • Darwins +925/-6
  • Gender: Female
  • Jehovah's Witness Protection Program
Re: The Evil Problem
« Reply #158 on: July 13, 2013, 03:24:29 PM »
Why stop there? As long as you are going to make stuff up, with no basis in reality. &)
Extraordinary claims of the bible don't even have ordinary evidence.

Kids aren't paying attention most of the time in science classes so it seems silly to get worked up over ID being taught in schools.

Offline Astreja

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3031
  • Darwins +270/-3
  • Gender: Female
  • Agnostic goddess with Clue-by-Four™
    • The Springy Goddess
Re: The Evil Problem
« Reply #159 on: July 14, 2013, 12:15:51 AM »
Awareness has to do with duality.   To be aware, there must be two things, the awareness and what the awareness is aware of.   God, the non-deluded, non-dreaming aspect, is not aware.   It just is.   It doesn't need to be aware because it IS everything.  It's non-dual.  I will stop there.   I don't want to woo you guys out too much.

As a {mostly} reformed wooist, I am intrigued by the idea of non-duality.  At very least, I concede that it may be possible to view reality from that perspective.  Could you suggest one or two methods for getting into (or at least approaching) that frame of mind?
Reality Checkroom — Not Responsible for Lost Articles

Offline wheels5894

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2677
  • Darwins +114/-1
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Evil Problem
« Reply #160 on: July 14, 2013, 09:34:07 AM »
Why do you have to ascribe a living consciousness to reality, then? You still haven't gotten any closer to explaining anything by saying, "See, I think the whole universe is powered by this even bigger living thing. That I don't know jack about. But here's some sh!t I just made up about it."

The only consciousnesses or awarenesses I ascribe to God are the ones that each individual particle, object and life form in our universe has.   I do not ascribe any overall awareness to God, as I've said many times.   I will explain why but put on your goggles because we're going deep into woo country.

Awareness has to do with duality.   To be aware, there must be two things, the awareness and what the awareness is aware of.   God, the non-deluded, non-dreaming aspect, is not aware.   It just is.   It doesn't need to be aware because it IS everything.  It's non-dual.  I will stop there.   I don't want to woo you guys out too much.

So, really, Nebula, you don't have any significant belief in anything except the 'totality of everything'. Then I suggest a different name rather than using the word 'god' as, to most people, the word 'god' carried too much meaning with it, especially the Christian god and Allah. A nice short word is need for what you have come up iwht but I can't think of one right now.

Oh, and you mention that what we see here and in the universe is not actual reality. How do you know this?
No testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle, unless the testimony be of such that its falshood would be more miraculous than the facts it endeavours to establish. (David Hume)

Online jaimehlers

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5039
  • Darwins +578/-18
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: The Evil Problem
« Reply #161 on: July 14, 2013, 09:49:55 AM »
Seems to me that instead of thinking of it as 'God' (since it doesn't appear that you actually believe in a god which can do things for believers or listen to prayer or any of the other things that believers normally ascribe to their god(s)), you could instead call it something else.  Like, maybe, "the universe".  Saying that the universe exists and is not aware, and it's only the individual things in the universe that exist and have awareness (based on what they are; for example, an electron is 'aware' of gravity and of electromagnetism, because it is affected by both), holds together a lot better than saying God exists and is not aware, etc.

In other words, the problem here appears to be mainly that you've affixed the moniker 'God' to this non-dual entity, and thus think of it as the equivalent of a person (with all that implies).  Because ultimately, if you leave out that part, what you're saying is very similar to what we've discovered so far through naturalistic science.

Just consider this my attempt to provide the solution to a Gordian knot.

Offline wheels5894

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2677
  • Darwins +114/-1
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Evil Problem
« Reply #162 on: July 14, 2013, 11:49:05 AM »
Good idea,  jaimehlers, what a great name for it too - 'the universe'. now why didn't I think of that...
No testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle, unless the testimony be of such that its falshood would be more miraculous than the facts it endeavours to establish. (David Hume)

Offline nebula

  • Undergraduate
  • ***
  • Posts: 123
  • Darwins +5/-2
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: The Evil Problem
« Reply #163 on: July 14, 2013, 12:29:17 PM »
As a {mostly} reformed wooist, I am intrigued by the idea of non-duality.  At very least, I concede that it may be possible to view reality from that perspective.  Could you suggest one or two methods for getting into (or at least approaching) that frame of mind?

Well, one way is to view everything in absolute totalities rather than separate, relative parts.   Blade of grass < Lawn, Trees < Forest,  Human < Humanity, Species < Biological life, Sun and planets < Solar system, Stars < Galaxy, Galaxies < Universe.   

So all of that stuff is in the universe.   In absolute terms, there is no individual blade of grass.   There is only one universe, which consists of one energy.   Some of this energy has been converted into complex matter through various processes, but it can be converted back to energy at any time due to mass-energy equivalence.   The blade of grass or the individual human exist in relative terms only.   

That's non-dual physicalism but it's not my kind of nondualism.   The kind I'm into is wooish because it will not make sense when looking at it from the perspective of classical logic and deductive reasoning but it makes sense if you approach it from paraconsistent logic or Dialetheism, which are admittedly not as strong in the way of 'proving' anything to someone else.   So here it is, take it or leave it.       

Reality is non-duality or oneness.   Illusion is duality.   This is why people use the phrase 'God is Love.'   The phrase isn't that God 'loves,' God IS love.   Absolute Love is oneness.   Fear or hatred is twoness or division.   Here is a little metaphorical mythology to illustrate it that uses temporal cause and effect to explain how duality started but none of it really happened.   It's just a metaphor.   You may want to put on your rubber boots because we're going to be mucking through some serious woo here.   

First, there was Love, oneness.   Then, somehow, a certain aspect of Love slipped into a delusion or dream.   The first part of the delusion was that it developed awareness, which implies twoness or the false idea that something other than Love is possible.   The aspect of Love that was aware felt guilty for considering the possibility of something other than perfect Love.   This led to fear and its solution was to hide from Love.   Since it was only an aspect of Love and not a separate entity, the only way that it could hide was through a fantasy in which it imagined as in a dream that it was hiding from Love.   In big bang cosmology, this would be the initial expansion after the big bang in which space and time themselves were forming. 

As this hot and dense state began to cool subatomic particles formed.   As these particles formed the awareness of the deluded aspect of Love was divided amongst the particles (neutral monism).   In this way, the fear and guilt of separating from Love was alleviated.   By separating awareness into individual units, there was no longer any overall awareness of the perfect Love it was imagining itself separate from.   Natural evil makes the illusion complete.  It convinces us that there is no Perfect Love, only a harsh, indifferent universe.   Apparently, this is preferable to knowing perfect Love exists and knowing that we (the deluded aspect of Love) considered the possibility of something other than Love.   Basically, we are Love or absolute oneness but we have managed to convince ourselves otherwise through a very vivid, detailed dream.       
       

Offline nebula

  • Undergraduate
  • ***
  • Posts: 123
  • Darwins +5/-2
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: The Evil Problem
« Reply #164 on: July 14, 2013, 12:31:17 PM »
Oh, and you mention that what we see here and in the universe is not actual reality. How do you know this?

We have already discussed this on page 4 of this thread.

http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/forums/index.php/topic,25146.msg561952.html#msg561952

http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/forums/index.php/topic,25146.msg562267.html#msg562267

Online ParkingPlaces

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6592
  • Darwins +787/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • If you are religious, you are misconcepted
Re: The Evil Problem
« Reply #165 on: July 14, 2013, 12:37:58 PM »
That's woo, alright. And it is impossible to argue against because the person who makes it up thinks they are brilliant.

Taking love, which is a byproduct of certain neurological propensities, and making it a universal property of all matter and energy, then tossing in dreams and poof, you have poof.
Jesus! The cracker-flavored treat!

Online jaimehlers

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5039
  • Darwins +578/-18
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: The Evil Problem
« Reply #166 on: July 14, 2013, 01:20:07 PM »
Frankly, nebula, your belief system is looking an awful lot like Daoism with a pinch of Christian theology mixed in.

Personally, though, I stand by what I said before.  If you leave out the 'woo' aspects, you get the actual universe and how it developed.  You're even describing it in Big Bang cosmology terms.

So the real question thus becomes - does your belief system add anything meaningful to the scientific explanations that already exist?  Or is it just for your own personal comfort?

Offline junebug72

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2168
  • Darwins +73/-86
  • Gender: Female
  • "Question Everything"
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: The Evil Problem
« Reply #167 on: July 19, 2013, 07:12:50 AM »
Do you wish there were a god?

Yes.  And I wish it was me. 

I would be a great god.  I would actually stop people from doing horrible things in my name.  9/11 would be remembered as the day I appeared on 4 airplanes at the same time and made 19 arab men disappear.  They would appear later that day with a more charitable perspective on life.

People would not behave like tribalistic, superstitious monkeys.  I would make humans actually rational.  I would make people incapable of intentionally doing harm to others. 

I would make people able to perform miracles when in need.  A starving child could conjure his own bread and fish.

I would make life such that it need not kill and devour other life to survive.  I would get rid of germs and viruses. 

I would get rid of boy bands.   I would make teenage girls sensible enough that boy bands could never succeed in the first place.

If you were God there would have never been a 9/11.  We would all be under your control. 

How about giving that child some loving parents or just dictate from your throne who is worthy to have children and who ain't.

How would you create such life Screwtape.  If it can be done do it already.  I'm tired of spending all my money at the grocery store.

No freewill in Screwtape's kingdom. No Thanks!!!

That's what I think Love is using us for Screwtape.  To stop people from doing bad things in God's name. 
Belief in a cruel God makes a cruel man.
Thomas Paine

Read more at http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/t/thomas_paine.html#XXwlhVIMq06zWg2d.99

Offline wheels5894

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2677
  • Darwins +114/-1
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Evil Problem
« Reply #168 on: July 19, 2013, 07:45:12 AM »

If you were God there would have never been a 9/11.  We would all be under your control. 

How about giving that child some loving parents or just dictate from your throne who is worthy to have children and who ain't.

How would you create such life Screwtape.  If it can be done do it already.  I'm tired of spending all my money at the grocery store.

No freewill in Screwtape's kingdom. No Thanks!!!

That's what I think Love is using us for Screwtape.  To stop people from doing bad things in God's name.

But, June, love is a human emotion. It is our reaction to others. It is not some disembodied ideal like Plato's ideal. So what you are saying seems to be that whatever is wrong in the world, and there's plenty wrong, we should overcome it with our human emotion and the action that follows that emotion. Great!

Just one point - what happened to your 'god'?
No testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle, unless the testimony be of such that its falshood would be more miraculous than the facts it endeavours to establish. (David Hume)

Offline nogodsforme

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6864
  • Darwins +925/-6
  • Gender: Female
  • Jehovah's Witness Protection Program
Re: The Evil Problem
« Reply #169 on: July 19, 2013, 04:32:43 PM »
When it comes down to it, all the wonderful stuff gods supposedly do actually turns out to be the result of people doing stuff to make the world better. Like medicines that get rid of diseases. Or it is an accident, like finding money on the ground.  The bad stuff that happens, like being killed in a tornado, is just being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Otherwise it is caused by human action like someone denting your car in the parking lot.  You don't need supernatural explanations for any of that. Sometimes sh!t just happens.

Why is that so hard for people to get through their heads? &) :?
Extraordinary claims of the bible don't even have ordinary evidence.

Kids aren't paying attention most of the time in science classes so it seems silly to get worked up over ID being taught in schools.

Online jdawg70

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2248
  • Darwins +406/-8
  • Ex-rosary squad
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: The Evil Problem
« Reply #170 on: July 19, 2013, 05:26:19 PM »
When it comes down to it, all the wonderful stuff gods supposedly do actually turns out to be the result of people doing stuff to make the world better. Like medicines that get rid of diseases. Or it is an accident, like finding money on the ground.  The bad stuff that happens, like being killed in a tornado, is just being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Otherwise it is caused by human action like someone denting your car in the parking lot.  You don't need supernatural explanations for any of that. Sometimes sh!t just happens.

Why is that so hard for people to get through their heads? &) :?
I suspect that a large part of it has to do with the human tendency to favor some degree of control.  Accidents represent a lack of control of an outcome - we know that we can't dodge bullets, teleport away from danger, instantaneously change the weather, or otherwise directly prevent a large number of outcomes from manifesting.  It makes sense to think that the human cognitive engine has a bias favoring explanations that enable some directly actionable control over the consequences of that explanation.  It seems like that would be beneficial for the survival instinct - being in control of a situation should reasonably provide better odds of survival against a similar situation that one has no control over.

With some kind of ultra-powerful sentience in place, that provides an avenue for some means of control over certain consequences.  We can't stop bullets, but we can attempt to implore an ultra-powerful sentience to orchestrate the events of reality to unfold such that we are not in the situation in the first place.  Since we wish to act as morally good entities, it makes sense that we assume this sentience is benevolent as well, as we want to be rewarded for being good and (for some) see others be punished for being bad. 

Ergo, because it feels better, the human mind will be more willing to believe an explanation that involves a sentient entity that aids in providing more control over potential future consequences.

Does that make any sense?
"When we landed on the moon, that was the point where god should have come up and said 'hello'. Because if you invent some creatures, put them on the blue one and they make it to the grey one, you f**king turn up and say 'well done'."

- Eddie Izzard

http://deepaksducttape.wordpress.com/

Offline Ron Jeremy

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 559
  • Darwins +61/-2
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: The Evil Problem
« Reply #171 on: July 20, 2013, 03:55:21 AM »
I've just come back from a family holiday in France. We took the car, me driving with wife and kids. Was thinking as I drove "I hope the car doesn't break down' and almost added 'touch wood'. But I didn't. And its because these past 2-3 years I've gone from having a vague thought at the back of my mind that 'God' existed (I wasn't brought up in religious household) to being an ardent atheist thanks to sites like this and books from Dawkins, Hitchens, etc. Instead I purposely said to my wife "I love the reliability of this car, its never going to break down on this trip!". We came back on the ferry across the Channel and again I said to my wife "This ship is never going to sink on our way back!". She squirmed a bit both times, tempting fate and all that, but having thought all this stuff through as much as I can and come to the conclusion that gods don't exist and neither is there an entity called 'Fate', I felt so free that simply saying that stuff doesn't make it happen. Of course there's always a small chance the car will break down or an ever smaller one the ferry will sink; but it'll have nothing to do with me saying it.
I fly every week as part of my job and again it tickles me when I say to myself before take off "This plane is not going to crash!". I do love tempting non-existent fate!
Matthew 10:22 "and you will be hated by all for my name’s sake. But the one who endures to the end will be saved." - An example of a clearly demonstrably false biblical 'prophesy'.

The biblical myth of a 6000 year old Earth is proven false by the Gaia satellite directly measuring star age.

Online rev45

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1212
  • Darwins +37/-2
  • Gender: Male
  • Did your parents raise you to be an idiot?
Re: The Evil Problem
« Reply #172 on: July 20, 2013, 06:45:34 AM »
^If you're going to tempt fate you might try tempting it with something other than not dying.  Something along the lines of "this rich looking guy will not hand me free money" or "I will not utterly crush my family in this high stakes, high impact game of Scrabble."  Maybe you'll become a rich world champion Scrabble player.  It could happen.  Maybe.
Here read a book.  It's free.
http://www.literatureproject.com/

Could a being create the fifty billion galaxies, each with two hundred billion stars, then rejoice in the smell of burning goat flesh?   Ron Patterson

Offline nogodsforme

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6864
  • Darwins +925/-6
  • Gender: Female
  • Jehovah's Witness Protection Program
Re: The Evil Problem
« Reply #173 on: July 20, 2013, 02:24:02 PM »
I know what you mean about the whole "not tempting fate" jazz. I think about all the bogus stuff we were raised with, from religions to "unlucky 13" and "don't step on a crack" as if that really has anything to do with your mother's back condition.

The one thing I do worry about is pushing my luck by becoming more publicly atheist, like putting stickers on my car, making speeches or writing real published articles. I would have to continue to use a fake name to protect myself and my family. There appear to be many loving Christians, peaceful Muslims, etc. who are only too happy to show us how much their gods disapprove of us. After all, only a supernatural god would vandalize a car with a "gods are imaginary" sticker, or write hate mail to an atheist blogger, or send death threats to an atheist writer or speaker. :o
Extraordinary claims of the bible don't even have ordinary evidence.

Kids aren't paying attention most of the time in science classes so it seems silly to get worked up over ID being taught in schools.