Philosophy Now Forum

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sat Jul 24, 2021 9:31 am ... without an opposite to relate to, no conceptual word has any meaning whatsoever.

Jori wrote: ↑Tue Jul 20, 2021 7:55 am Many philosophers offer solutions to the problem of evil while maintaining that God is perfect. They reconcile evil with an all-powerful and all-good God by such concepts as free will, uniformity of nature, and that this is the best possible evolutionary world.
However we can also explain evil with an imperfect God. Evil exists because God is not all-powerful, not all-good, or both. But philosophers cannot accept an imperfect God. God must be perfect. Why? Can you accept an imperfect God, like those in Greek mytholgy?

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Jul 20, 2021 1:51 pm

Jori wrote: ↑Tue Jul 20, 2021 7:55 am God must be perfect. Why? Can you accept an imperfect God, like those in Greek mytholgy?

You're mixing concepts, Jori. The concept "a god" is different from "God." I know that looks odd, but it's the reason that writers conventionally mark the former with a lower-case "g" and the latter with an upper-case one. "God" doesn't denote something like the Greek pantheon, with many "gods" of limited power and duration. Rather, the convention is that "God" marks the singular Supreme Being, the First Cause of Reality itself, and it's only in regard to Him that the term "perfect" applies.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Tue Jul 20, 2021 1:51 pm Zeus was not perfect. Nor was Poseidon, or Athena, or any collection of multiple "gods." Their mythologies tell of their origins and their endings, as well as their flaws and peccadillos. Zeus sprang from the head of Chronos, it is said; and as for the Norse Pantheon, they were all to be doomed at Ragnarok. Such "gods" were much more like a squabbling soap opera on a mountain than anything. And that's how the Greeks and Norse saw them, too.

It's a little hard to see how having flawed "gods" helps with the question of evil, anyway. It seems to me that it just makes the situation worse; it supposes that not only is evil a permanent and natural feature of the order of things, but that agencies of significant power and undetermined duration are also producing it. That would seem to put us, as humans, in a rather bad position. And it explains why polytheistic societies are characterized by both fear and shamanism -- one has a problem navigating the realm of the supernatural when nothing is predictable, which is the product of the "gods" idea.

So it's not about what a person can or cannot "accept." We can accept belief in anything, if we wish. It's more about whether or not it's true, in the first place, and afterward, whether or not it's possible to live with the implications. But whatever is true or not true about the existence of "gods" or "God," the facts about that will remain unchanged whether we refuse to believe them or not.

Jori wrote: ↑Wed Jul 21, 2021 8:07 am I see. the concept of God with the capital G is perfection. God must be perfect, otherwise he is not God. I remember someone saying that God is beyond time and space. If not, then he is not God. That is why philosophers refute (not cannot accept) that God can be imperfect.

Jori wrote: ↑Wed Jul 21, 2021 8:07 am I like the idea that if God is imperfect, then evil is permanent. If God is perfect, then evil can be overcome.

Jori wrote: ↑Wed Jul 21, 2021 8:07 am But what if the universe was created and "ruled" by a being, not God,. who is imperfect.

Jori wrote: ↑Wed Jul 21, 2021 8:07 am I mean he doesn't have to be perfect; he just have to be capable enough to create and rule the universe.. Is that possible?

bahman wrote: ↑Fri Jul 23, 2021 5:57 pm

Jori wrote: ↑Tue Jul 20, 2021 7:55 am Many philosophers offer solutions to the problem of evil while maintaining that God is perfect. They reconcile evil with an all-powerful and all-good God by such concepts as free will, uniformity of nature, and that this is the best possible evolutionary world.
However we can also explain evil with an imperfect God. Evil exists because God is not all-powerful, not all-good, or both. But philosophers cannot accept an imperfect God. God must be perfect. Why? Can you accept an imperfect God, like those in Greek mytholgy?

Good and evil come together.

bahman wrote: ↑Fri Jul 23, 2021 5:57 pm They are both necessary for a healthy life.

bahman wrote: ↑Fri Jul 23, 2021 5:57 pm Imagine if it was very enjoyable to cut yourself to pieces!

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Fri Jul 23, 2021 6:21 pm

Jori wrote: ↑Wed Jul 21, 2021 8:07 am ...what if the universe was created and "ruled" by a being, not God,. who is imperfect. I mean he doesn't have to be perfect; he just have to be capable enough to create and rule the universe.. Is that possible?

The Gnostics thought that's how it worked. They thought the earth, and human bodies, flesh, were created by an inferior being called the "Demiurge." Above him was a hierarchy of other sort of "divine beings," with something at the top called "the Abyss."

But nowhere in that story was there a Creator who loves His creation, so it's quite different from, say, the Jewish or Christian understanding of the word "God." And certainly there was no issue of "perfection" in their thinking, except as it applied to human realizing that the Demiurge has them trapped, and then "enlightenment" and "transcendence" through following the world-despising teachings of a group of priests called "the Illuminati."

It's complicated, but that was it, in a nutshell.

RCSaunders wrote: ↑Sat Jul 24, 2021 12:42 pm

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sat Jul 24, 2021 9:31 am ... without an opposite to relate to, no conceptual word has any meaning whatsoever.

So exactly what is an anti-duck?

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sat Jul 24, 2021 6:35 pm

RCSaunders wrote: ↑Sat Jul 24, 2021 12:42 pm

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sat Jul 24, 2021 9:31 am ... without an opposite to relate to, no conceptual word has any meaning whatsoever.

So exactly what is an anti-duck?

It’s a duck.

RCSaunders wrote: ↑Sat Jul 24, 2021 8:38 pm

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Sat Jul 24, 2021 6:35 pm

RCSaunders wrote: ↑Sat Jul 24, 2021 12:42 pm
So exactly what is an anti-duck?

It’s a duck.

Then what's its opposite?

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jul 24, 2021 1:34 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Fri Jul 23, 2021 5:57 pm

Jori wrote: ↑Tue Jul 20, 2021 7:55 am Many philosophers offer solutions to the problem of evil while maintaining that God is perfect. They reconcile evil with an all-powerful and all-good God by such concepts as free will, uniformity of nature, and that this is the best possible evolutionary world.
However we can also explain evil with an imperfect God. Evil exists because God is not all-powerful, not all-good, or both. But philosophers cannot accept an imperfect God. God must be perfect. Why? Can you accept an imperfect God, like those in Greek mytholgy?

Good and evil come together.

Good and bad come together. Evil is something else, correct?

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jul 24, 2021 1:34 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Fri Jul 23, 2021 5:57 pm They are both necessary for a healthy life.

How is evil, supposedly, necessary for a healthy life? For example, if someone killed raped your mother or children, and then killed them, then how EXACTLY is this necessary for a healthy life?

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jul 24, 2021 1:34 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Fri Jul 23, 2021 5:57 pm Imagine if it was very enjoyable to cut yourself to pieces!

What has this got to do with what you are 'trying to' CLAIM here is true?

bahman wrote: ↑Sun Jul 25, 2021 12:11 pm

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jul 24, 2021 1:34 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Fri Jul 23, 2021 5:57 pm
Good and evil come together.

Good and bad come together. Evil is something else, correct?

No.

bahman wrote: ↑Sun Jul 25, 2021 12:11 pm

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jul 24, 2021 1:34 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Fri Jul 23, 2021 5:57 pm They are both necessary for a healthy life.

How is evil, supposedly, necessary for a healthy life? For example, if someone killed raped your mother or children, and then killed them, then how EXACTLY is this necessary for a healthy life?

Every action, good or evil, situationally could be right or wrong.

bahman wrote: ↑Sun Jul 25, 2021 12:11 pm

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jul 24, 2021 1:34 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Fri Jul 23, 2021 5:57 pm Imagine if it was very enjoyable to cut yourself to pieces!

What has this got to do with what you are 'trying to' CLAIM here is true?

How you could live healthy if you were enjoying harming yourself?

Age wrote: ↑Sun Jul 25, 2021 1:09 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Sun Jul 25, 2021 12:11 pm

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jul 24, 2021 1:34 pm

Good and bad come together. Evil is something else, correct?

No.

So, what, EXACTLY, is 'evil' then?

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jul 24, 2021 1:34 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Sun Jul 25, 2021 12:11 pm

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jul 24, 2021 1:34 pm How is evil, supposedly, necessary for a healthy life? For example, if someone killed raped your mother or children, and then killed them, then how EXACTLY is this necessary for a healthy life?

Every action, good or evil, situationally could be right or wrong.

My question WAS: How, EXACTLY, is the raping and/or murdering of someone NECESSARY for a 'healthy life'?

Staying WITH the question, and NOT DEFLECTING, would be most appreciated here.

bahman wrote: ↑Sun Jul 25, 2021 12:11 pm

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jul 24, 2021 1:34 pm

What has this got to do with what you are 'trying to' CLAIM here is true?

How you could live healthy if you were enjoying harming yourself?

At first glance I do NOT see how you could. So, how, EXACTLY, is 'evil' NECESSARY for 'healthy life'?

bahman wrote: ↑Wed Jul 28, 2021 1:23 pm

Age wrote: ↑Sun Jul 25, 2021 1:09 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Sun Jul 25, 2021 12:11 pm
No.

So, what, EXACTLY, is 'evil' then?

Like suffering or cause suffering.

bahman wrote: ↑Wed Jul 28, 2021 1:23 pm

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jul 24, 2021 1:34 pm

bahman wrote: ↑Sun Jul 25, 2021 12:11 pm
Every action, good or evil, situationally could be right or wrong.

My question WAS: How, EXACTLY, is the raping and/or murdering of someone NECESSARY for a 'healthy life'?

Staying WITH the question, and NOT DEFLECTING, would be most appreciated here.

bahman wrote: ↑Sun Jul 25, 2021 12:11 pm
How you could live healthy if you were enjoying harming yourself?

At first glance I do NOT see how you could. So, how, EXACTLY, is 'evil' NECESSARY for 'healthy life'?

If evil did not exist people could harm each other while enjoying.

bahman wrote: ↑Wed Jul 28, 2021 1:23 pm That is against a healthy life. Therefore, evil is necessary.

Age wrote: ↑Thu Jul 29, 2021 12:40 am

bahman wrote: ↑Wed Jul 28, 2021 1:23 pm

Age wrote: ↑Sun Jul 25, 2021 1:09 pm
So, what, EXACTLY, is 'evil' then?

Like suffering or cause suffering.

Well NO one HAS TO live 'with' 'suffering', and, NO one HAS TO 'cause' suffering.

The ONLY reason WHY 'suffering' exists is because of what 'you', adult human beings do.

If ANY one lives with suffering because of constant pain due to the nerve endings of the physical body, then this is another matter. Which, by the way, can be reduced considerably anyway.

'Suffering' is just a mental process, which is ONLY created and caused by what 'you', adult human beings, do to "others" and "yourselves".

'Suffering' is CERTAINLY NOT a necessary part of living and being alive. Therefore, is also NOT a necessary part of Life AT ALL, either, to me.

But you only SEE 'things' DIFFERENTLY, correct?

bahman wrote: ↑Wed Jul 28, 2021 1:23 pm

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jul 24, 2021 1:34 pm

My question WAS: How, EXACTLY, is the raping and/or murdering of someone NECESSARY for a 'healthy life'?

Staying WITH the question, and NOT DEFLECTING, would be most appreciated here.


At first glance I do NOT see how you could. So, how, EXACTLY, is 'evil' NECESSARY for 'healthy life'?

If evil did not exist people could harm each other while enjoying.

LOL You people do harm "each other", while enjoying, in this world in the days when this is being written, ANYWAY.

bahman wrote: ↑Wed Jul 28, 2021 1:23 pm That is against a healthy life. Therefore, evil is necessary.

Okay. If this is what you want to define 'things' and BELIEVE is true, then continue on HAVING TO live with 'evil'. This will allow you to "justify" to "yourself" that the harm that you ACTUALLY DO onto "others" IS NECESSARY.

Here is a GREAT EXAMPLE of just HOW the peoples of those days could, and would, 'try to' "justify" their OBVIOUSLY Truly Wrong behaviors.

Also, noted is how you completely REFUSED to acknowledge and answer the CLARIFYING QUESTION I posed to you.