Abour rejecting God - Page 3

Lestat · #21 11-03-2006, 11:41 PM

There is no reality in which suffering is good in itself. 

This isn't true. Surely you would suffer the loss of your next meal if you knew for a fact it would save 1000 people from starvation. There are different levels of suffering and ours are bound to earthly types. We do not know what else is possible or what merit it has if the Christian God turned out to be true.

chezlaw · #22 11-03-2006, 11:42 PM

[ QUOTE ]
But that's an anthrocentric viewpoint. It's entirely likely that, if there is an objective good out there, defined by god or not, its yardstick and goal is not maximizing human happiness.

That contradiction does arise if you wanted to talk about god declaring suffering 'enjoyable' or similar tho - so point taken.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes that's the point. Although they are not clearly defined the meanings of 'suffering' and 'good' conflict. Anyone can declare suffering to be good but they're just using words in a different way not actually changing reality.

[it doesn't matter if the goal isn't to maximise human happiness does it?. Whatever the goal is, it would either justify suffering in its cause or make suffering irrelevent]

chez

guesswest · #23 11-03-2006, 11:43 PM

I don't follow your meaning with that analogy...?

Are you talking about going to hell? If so it's true that you'd be going regardless or his honesty, either by disregarding his dictates or by disregarding his dictates and sinning. But I wasn't meaning to suggest otherwise - just that god announcing something doesn't make it true, even if he does get to define truth.

luckyme · #24 11-03-2006, 11:43 PM

[ QUOTE ]
There is no reality in which suffering is good in itself. 

This isn't true. Surely you would suffer the loss of your next meal if you knew for a fact it would save 1000 people from starvation. There are different levels of suffering and ours are bound to earthly types. We do not know what else is possible or what merit it has if the Christian God turned out to be true.

[/ QUOTE ]

Shouldn't the "in itself" kick in sometime?

luckyme

guesswest · #25 11-03-2006, 11:50 PM

[ QUOTE ]
it doesn't matter if the goal isn't to maximise human happiness does it?. Whatever the goal is, it would either justify suffering in its cause or make suffering irrelevent]

chez

[/ QUOTE ]

I think that's the same problem - drawing arbitrary distinctions in human action. A world that was 'all good' by this definition would contain no action at all, it'd just be a brain in a vat receiving pleasant electrical impulses.

I 'suffer' a cramped flight to go somewhere I want to go. If I viewed the flight in isolation it'd be bad, if I viewed the trip overall it'd be good. But the flight has no meaning and in fact makes no sense without reference to the destination, even just in terms of language, nevermind experience.

chezlaw · #26 11-04-2006, 12:13 AM

[ QUOTE ]
There is no reality in which suffering is good in itself. 

This isn't true. Surely you would suffer the loss of your next meal if you knew for a fact it would save 1000 people from starvation. There are different levels of suffering and ours are bound to earthly types. We do not know what else is possible or what merit it has if the Christian God turned out to be true.

[/ QUOTE ]
Of course I would 'suffer' the loss of the meal but its good for the reasons you gave not in itself.

It illustrates the point that to say suffering is a good thing it has to be justified in terms of benefits to others or future benefits to yourself.

chez

chezlaw · #27 11-04-2006, 12:22 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
it doesn't matter if the goal isn't to maximise human happiness does it?. Whatever the goal is, it would either justify suffering in its cause or make suffering irrelevent]

chez

[/ QUOTE ]

I think that's the same problem - drawing arbitrary distinctions in human action. A world that was 'all good' by this definition would contain no action at all, it'd just be a brain in a vat receiving pleasant electrical impulses.

I 'suffer' a cramped flight to go somewhere I want to go. If I viewed the flight in isolation it'd be bad, if I viewed the trip overall it'd be good. But the flight has no meaning and in fact makes no sense without reference to the destination, even just in terms of language, nevermind experience.

[/ QUOTE ]
Its not the flght that should ve viewed in isolation but the suffering. You wouldn't 'suffer' the experience of a cramped flight except in expectation of something that made it worthwhile.

That brain in the vat world would be fairly good just not neccesarily maximally good. We still await DS cantoring along with his proof.

chez

Lestat · #28 11-04-2006, 12:48 AM

It illustrates the point that to say suffering is a good thing it has to be justified in terms of benefits to others or future benefits to yourself. 

But why do you consider it inconceivable that God has plans that you/we are not privvy to? Or that He has an understanding of things that you don't, or that doesn't make sense to you now, but might in a million years from now?

chezlaw · #29 11-04-2006, 01:14 AM

[ QUOTE ]
It illustrates the point that to say suffering is a good thing it has to be justified in terms of benefits to others or future benefits to yourself. 

But why do you consider it inconceivable that God has plans that you/we are not privvy to? Or that He has an understanding of things that you don't, or that doesn't make sense to you now, but might in a million years from now?

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't consider that inconceivable at all. It seems hard to conceive that my support matters in the least for this plan but its at least as likely that withholding my support for seemingly unjustified suffering is what god wants for this plan.

chez

Lestat · #30 11-04-2006, 01:24 AM

It seems hard to conceive that my support matters in the least for this plan 

Why is that so hard to conceive? If you are indeed His child, why wouldn't He want you to obey Him just as you might want of your child?

but its at least as likely that withholding my support for seemingly unjustified suffering is what god wants for this plan. 

Do you really believe that even if the bible turned out to be true, that it is just as likely God is lying?