unfairness? if you are born with a disability at birth, how would you feel?
then there are some who are born in rich family and those who are born poor at birth. these are practical questions in society.
Exactly my point, you know how we would feel.
I am not belitting the feeling of unfairness. But my question is... does this feeling of unfairness have any meaning is it significant?
How different is this feeling of unfairness then from say a toothache? Is unfairness really bad or is it just an instinct that is evolved in us simply to make us seek better things for ourselves? But if that is the case then unfairness is not good or bad, it's just a feeling with no real relation to the morality of the universe.
Indeed, it means that the universe, our reality is not fair or unfair... it's just arbitary values we have chosen to attach to our instincts and emotions.
Nietzsche puts forward the point that this feeling of unfairness is meaningless at best, and enslaves us at worst. There is no unfairness in the universe because it is natural for the strong to rule over the weak and this sense of "unfairness" is actually an illusion created by human society in order to exert control over it's members so that no one will become very dominant, most choosing to be unquestioning sheep.
He then goes on to argue that truly smart men will see through the illusion and realize that there is no good or evil or fairness or unfairness, the only thing that exists is power, and our ability to use that power to make our will reality in the universe.
As such, it is not wrong (in fact wrong does not exist at all) or objectionable for the strong to opress the weak or what have you not because by the law of the universe... this is exactly the case it is.
In his own words:
. . . --do you want a name for this world? A solution for all its riddles? A light for you, too, you best-concealed, strongest, most intrepid, most midnightly men?--This world is the will to power--and nothing besides! And you yourselves are also this will to power--and nothing besides!1
And this is what he says of altruism
The whole of ‘altruism' reveals itself as the prudence of the private man: societies are not ‘altruistic' towards one another--The commandment to love one's neighbor has never yet been extended to include one's actual neighbor.3
And there is no crime, just people that go against social norms
Crime belongs to the concept "revolt against the social order." One does not "punish" a rebel; one suppresses him. A rebel can be a miserable and contemptible man; but there is nothing contemptible in a revolt as such--and to be a rebel in view of contemporary society does not in itself lower the value of a man. There are even cases in which one might have to honor a rebel, because he finds something in our society against which war ought to be waged--he awakens us from our slumber.5
Of course he reaches a particular conclusion in that if anything we should not reduce the amount of unfairness in our world, but increase it, because it is actually the way to progress the human race.
Schopenhauer wanted rascals to be castrated and silly geese to be shut up in convents: from what point of view would this be desirable? The rascal has this advantage over many other men, that he is not mediocre; and the fool has this advantage over us, that he does not suffer at the sight of mediocrity. It would be more desirable that the gulf should be made wider; so rascality and folly should increase. In this way human nature would be expanded--But, after all, this is dictated by necessity; it does not depend on whether we desire it or not. Folly, rascality increase: that is part of "progress."9
Sounds strange? Not really if you think about it, what he says does make a lot of sense.
Why will God send good people to hell JUST BECAUSE they don't believe in him?
And by good people, I mean people like Buddha, Confucious, chinese sages, gandhi, and other well known people for their good works.
Such a God seems very egoistic to me, and very immoral, too.
Who told you that is the reason God sends people to hell?
That isn't true, in my opinion at least.
The reason is probably far more complex, and I am not sure if you might want to hear it.
Originally posted by SingaporeTyrannosaur:No doubt there are serious issues the the fundamentalist Christian narrative of the world... it is too simple and if anything it seem to be anti-faith. Personally, I don't think that's what Christianity is... it's the popular-culture version and image of it, but it's as real as say, Hollywood showing the trope that all cars must explode after they collide with something.
It's easy to be a fundamentalist, all you need to do is to accept a few mantras and dogmas, turn off your mind and be as loud and radical about it as possible. The measure of your "faith" will be the increasingly extreme measures you take for it, even if these actions are foolish, harmful, or even go against the principles of the very faith you believe in.
Unfortunately being loud means that they are the voices that often drown out the narrative of the rest, they are the ones pushing their cardboard-thin idea and image of Christianity into our culture and soceity and I am not surprised when people find holes in that who set up.
Now personally I am not one of those religion ought to be personal and quiet things... if you believe the world is a certain way, and believe it truly... then you ought to be living out that conviction beyond mere convention and facades. I don't think faith should be private and timid ideas we hold in our head, but one of the most radical things a human being can do. But more on that later because we digress.
Back to topic.
The interesting thing is that C.S. Lewis raised a rather good point on how our sense of the unfairness of the world is actually a good indication that we have an innate sense of an appeal to the transcendent.
Interestingly C.S. Lewis, who was an athiest at a point in time, turns the statement on it's head... in his thesis, pure, naturalistic atheism is just too simple a notion to explain everything.
So, one step at a time...
We all have issues with the unfairness of the world.
Where does this sense of unfairness come from?
It comes from our desire for everyone in this world to be happy. And we desire everyone in this world to be happy because we are good.
Okay I am having trouble keeping up with all the posts here, I'll try responding to the parts that I think are more important:
I think people are good because from my memories, even as a child, without being taught by anyone, I had always wanted to be a good person.
In fact, I was so worried about being a bad person that I pray to an "unknown god" to help me be a good person. I admire confucious and other chinese sages who advocate being civil and moral to the people around them.
You make an interesting point.
Now let's try a little logic, and I'm serious, not trying to be funny.
If you think that people are born good, then how come you have a sense and worry of being bad?
A perfect or good person will not have the desire to be good, because he is already there. I will not think of wanting to be in Japan for a vacation if I am already there for a vacation.
I think you misunderstand when we say that people are born evil. I do not mean that a baby is born lying, cheating, stealing. But that we are born to be imperfect, that is, with a flaw. In us is the capacity for evil, and unfortunately this means that sooner or later we will indeed find that we have done some evil in our lives.
I think the more precise term is that people are born fallen and flawed, rather then evil, because the term evil is confusing. I do not for any stretch of the imagination, think of a baby as an evil thing. Lol.
We are indeed born knowing that we ought to be something that we are not, that there is some standard we must live up to.
It comes from our desire for everyone in this world to be happy. And we desire everyone in this world to be happy because we are good.
And what is the meaning of good?
Is good just an irrational instinct with no meaning?
If it has no meaning beyond our instinct, then do we not have no reason to follow it any more then our other instincts? For example there are plenty of times the happiness of others are in direct conflict with mine, so should I act for their happiness or for mine?
What about those people we know that have no desire for the happiness of others but for themselves?
People like Stalin or Hitler certainly acted for their own happiness and they got a lot of it while the going was in their favour... but if goodness does not matter what they did is not evil nor wrong... it's just natural.
Originally posted by SingaporeTyrannosaur:And what is the meaning of good?
Is good just an irrational instinct with no meaning?
If it has no meaning beyond our instinct, then do we not have no reason to follow it any more then our other instincts? For example there are plenty of times the happiness of others are in direct conflict with mine, so should I act for their happiness or for mine?
What about those people we know that have no desire for the happiness of others but for themselves?
People like Stalin or Hitler certainly acted for their own happiness and they got a lot of it while the going was in their favour... but if goodness does not matter what they did is not evil nor wrong... it's just natural.
People who are evil or bad usually have bad environmental influences.
Originally posted by SingaporeTyrannosaur:Okay I am having trouble keeping up with all the posts here, I'll try responding to the parts that I think are more important:
You make an interesting point.
Now let's try a little logic, and I'm serious, not trying to be funny.
If you think that people are born good, then how come you have a sense and worry of being bad?
A perfect or good person will not have the desire to be good, because he is already there. I will not think of wanting to be in Japan for a vacation if I am already there for a vacation.
I think you misunderstand when we say that people are born evil. I do not mean that a baby is born lying, cheating, stealing. But that we are born to be imperfect, that is, with a flaw. In us is the capacity for evil, and unfortunately this means that sooner or later we will indeed find that we have done some evil in our lives.
I think the more precise term is that people are born fallen and flawed, rather then evil, because the term evil is confusing. I do not for any stretch of the imagination, think of a baby as an evil thing. Lol.
We are indeed born knowing that we ought to be something that we are not, that there is some standard we must live up to.
People are born good. Children are usually good. It is environmental influences that make people bad.
And I worry that I will be bad becuase of environmental influences. (In times of wars, I may be forced to kill another person. I don't want to do so.)
Environmental influences turn a child from someone good to someone less good. Most adults are not that bad. They actually give sometimes to charity and want others to be happy.
It is only a few black sheeps that make the world bad. And unfortunately, evil seems often to have more power than good. That is, do you notice how it is the less good people who move to the top of a career ladder? Do you notice how the good people are usually contented with lesser pay and it is the less good people who stab others' back and climbs to the top ladder.
These less good people get power, and with the power they have, they impose laws, set up the environment in such a way that good people may be forced to become bad themselves. (For example, less good people in leadership position starts wars).
This is also why I don't believe in God. The system in this world is set in such a way that evil people get to become leaders. And it is these few bad leaders who make the world such a bad place. The majority of the people simply wants to be good.
I think evil exists as a challenge to good people to rise up against less good people, to persuade and convince them to become good leaders. When a leader is good, everyone in this world is happy.
It is my belief that one day, good will finally triumps over evil.
Originally posted by S.gal83:This is also why I don't believe in God. The system in this world is set in such a way that evil people get to become leaders. And it is these few bad leaders who make the world such a bad place. The majority of the people simply wants to be good.
I think evil exists as a challenge to good people to rise up against less good people, to persuade and convince them to become good leaders. When a leader is good, everyone in this world is happy.
It is my belief that one day, good will finally triumps over evil.
If evil people prosper, why is that God's fault?
Of course good will triumph over evil one day, if not there will be no hope at all.
Hmm... have you ever tried looking at it another way?
This is my take on this.
The problem at least the way I see it of us thinking that God does not exist because there is evil in this world is a bit too simple.
Why would we then have this concept of evil if there is no external principle in the universe that we have to make this judgement from?
And why should good triumph over evil? Is there any reason to believe in this other then that this is some idea that we happen to fancy? What about people who want evil to triumph over good? What's so wrong with what they are thinking?
Without appealing to an external, and higher principle... it is impossible to make any judgement... good and evil then becomes a case of wanting Man U to win over Liverpool because I just so happen to be on the side of Man U... this does not make sense.
Additionally if evil is simply the result of the environment... then it follows that evil does not result from a choice that good people make at all, but they were just affected by things beyond their control. This means that what they are doing is not inherently moral at all because they have no choice in the affair. This means that if evil is simply due to environmental factors and not the choice of the human will... then it really has no real bearing or meaning other then it is just a "condition".
So what you are really saying is that evil does not really matter... it's not wrong... it's just a condition like a skin rash and nobody should be held accountable for it. It's not a question of will.
And this is a problem... if it's not a question of will then it's can't be moral... and if it can't be moral then by definition there is really no evil to begin with... it's a self-defeating point of view. If evil does not really matter... then how can it be used as an argument against God.
But of course you will disagree, you will say that evil certainly exists and it matters... this means that you are admitting (though you may not understand it), that there is a higher principle in the universe beyond naturalistic laws that all of us have to appeal to. But where does this principle come from?
The naturalistic, atheistic worldview has no answer to this... in fact they don't have to... all this is nonsense to it as in such a worldview good and evil are all illusions and we are just animals acting out our instincts. Choice is nothing more then an illusion of choice caused by the workings of our brain... complex, but entirelly naturalistic.
So to accept that evil is a problem, you have to by definition believe in a Higher Principle and Standard that all creation is subject to. This Higher Principle and Standard has to given to us by an Intelligence, a Sentient entity that obviously understands all this.
So what you have in effect, is that you cannot logically say that there is evil in the world, and that because of that God does not exist. It is impossible... in fact I dare say that if we believe in the concept of evil as we describe it, an effect and concept that is beyond pure naturalism and which applies to the entire human race without exception... then we must believe that God exists.
Now the problem is that when people think God they think Christian God. Which is what I believe for my reasons in but of course you may not agree. But the point is this... you can disagree with the Christian conception of God but it does not follow that disagreeing that the Christian (or even religious) concept of God means that you must automatically think that He does not exist... it only means you think the Christian ideas of Him are wrong.
And I can accept that, but what I find logically unpassable is to believe in evil and then NOT believe that a God exists. By all means you may critique that the Christian narrative of Him is inadequate for answering your answers on evil but for your critique to hold true you have to by logic, believe in God. If you didn't then your argument destroys itself because evil by that definition... would not matter or even exist... and we should not get so worked up over it.
So yes, I think if you believe that there is evil in this world then you must by definition be a theist (believe in God), don't get it mixed up with agreeing with the Christian ideas of Him, or needing to become a Christian.
But the thing you cannot do and still be logically consistent is to say that God does not exist because of evil. Evil would not exist if there was no God.
to singapore tyrannosaur
i tink we r heading for more n more apple-orange arguments here...cos apparently the critics in tis thread have very diff definitions n understandings of the impt issues being discussed...for one, s.gal83 believes God exist but she doesnt tink he is gd simply becos evil exist...marcteng belives tat God doesnt exist cos the concept of God seems too simplistic to him...the most impt issue is the view on gd n evil...while u r looking at it from a broader picture, they look at it from a personal picture...in other words, u r outside in while they r inside out...when ppl have perspectives moving in diff directions, the arguments wil amount to nth...
my take on tis is tat certain things cun be understood sorely by logic. love is sth tat cannot be rationalised. r/s has always been known to be complex cos theres no 1 definite solution for all r/s. the main problem is many ppl see christianity as juz another religion along wif the rest of the religions. moreover, their understanding of relationships is diff from the christian perspective. for eg, cos we r all created by God, hence we r all His children, hence y r we given diff treatment?(a pt raised by marcteng several times) personally, tis underlines the fact tat his understanding of a r/s is diff from the christian perpsective cos to chistianity, being God's creation does not mean we r all His children. if tats the case, then plants n animals also r His children? they also have a r/s wif Him? can u have a r/s wif someone whom u dun even tok to? the crux of the matter is a r/s, by christian definition is mutual. there must be reciprocation from both parties. if God desires r/s wif us but we dun desire one wif Him, is there still a r/s???
Well despondent I precisely understand the perspectives of the people that I am talking to, that's why I am encouraging them to examine their personal points of view from a wider perspective.
Basically for our personal perspectives to matter and be valid, they have to have a certain connection and relation to reality, if they do not then our personal perspectives and opinions are completely useless because they are not real, or a misperception of reality.
Hence it is important to examine the logical premises behind our opinions, no matter how emotional they are. So it is important for a Christian to justify their relationship with God beyond the personal level, because for all things to be valid they have to be justified.
For example a common error is that when faced with a question we cannot answer easily some of us often take the easy way out and say "God is illogical, you cannot use your mind to understand Him", which is of course entirely untrue.
If this is true then ALL things would not need to be justified because they have no relation to logic. A Christian could kill a baby and say to another Christian that "God told me to do it, don't try to understand it, God is illogical". And this is the attitude I often get when I see some of my Christian peers do things that are questionable.
The truth is of course God is not illogical, If He is the creator of reality and everything then it follows that He is the source of perfect logic. The difficulties arise when we lack the ability to understand Him due to the fact that our minds are limited and finite. This does not mean He's illogical, just mysterious. From that point of view we can see how it might be hard to understand some things about God just as a dog will be confused about why humans need to do certain things that seem to be entirely illogical and unnecessary to it.
So yes, it is important to see our personal perspectives from a wider point of view. If they are soley personal then they are worthless about saying anything about reality. For example if my opinion that God is good is just personal and does not apply to everyone then I cannot say it to another person because God could be bad to him.
So their opinions that God does not exist are hardly personal opinions... they are personal in that they are personally-held, but they are perspectives that they believe reflect a wider reality that ALL humans are subject to. Hence it means that their perspectives can be and should be explored and adressed from a wider perspective.
Originally posted by SingaporeMacross:If evil people prosper, why is that God's fault?
Of course good will triumph over evil one day, if not there will be no hope at all.
God is the one who creates this world. Therefore, if the system in the world works in such a way that evil people prospers, something is definitely in question about the one who creates this system in the first place.
Originally posted by S.gal83:
God is the one who creates this world. Therefore, if the system in the world works in such a way that evil people prospers, something is definitely in question about the one who creates this system in the first place.
So in effect you do believe in God, you are just not sure on what exactly is the nature/character of this God.
It's quite different from saying that God does not exist because there is evil, what you are saying you feel that He has goofed up in allowing evil to exist and we shouldn't really be bothered with Him.
But the bottom line is, you are saying that He exists...
Originally posted by SingaporeTyrannosaur:
So in effect you do believe in God, you are just not sure on what exactly is the nature/character of this God.It's quite different from saying that God does not exist because there is evil, what you are saying you feel that He has goofed up in allowing evil to exist and we shouldn't really be bothered with Him.
But the bottom line is, you are saying that He exists...
I had never denied he exists.
Originally posted by S.gal83:
I had never denied he exists.
So you believe that He exists, you just don't agree with the way He runs stuff because you think He's incompetent?
i can answ tat qn on behalf of s.gal83 n the ans is yes...
i don't believe there is god....and the bible is in my point of view a book of lies.....wanna noe why...PM me or smth
Originally posted by A.T.R:i don't believe there is god....and the bible is in my point of view a book of lies.....wanna noe why...PM me or smth
I don't really think you could come up with any more new arguments that have been raised already... it has after all been a topic that has been done quite to the death.
Originally posted by SingaporeTyrannosaur:
I don't really think you could come up with any more new arguments that have been raised already... it has after all been a topic that has been done quite to the death.
just sharing my thoughts onli..
Originally posted by S.gal83:
God is the one who creates this world. Therefore, if the system in the world works in such a way that evil people prospers, something is definitely in question about the one who creates this system in the first place.
Let me just bring up an example.
If i bring out a herd of deer and i put them on a deserted island with no predators. Let's say for argument's sake that there is no natural diseases to inflict them.
So, from a casual perspective the deers are very happy now isn't it? They are free to eat, to breed and to run with no fear. Free from what we understand as evil yes?
What would happen then? Their population size would explode expotentially, consuming everything in sight and they would ultimately destroy themselves with no outside influence.
Historically this has happened before in Easter Island, and as an experiment (Yeast in a petri dish). And in the perspective of the animal and plant life in the world, we humans are the most evil existence on this planet.
But Evil, as we understand it functions as part of the system. As a neccessary control mechanism, not as a moral perspective.
But Evil, as we understand it functions as part of the system. As a neccessary control mechanism, not as a moral perspective.
Probably seems fine and dandy until somebody comes along and mugs you and murders your family, and then we demand for "justice" but why does there need to be justice when all that has happened is just a necessary control mechanism?
In fact no action can be considered moral, nor immoral, they are just actions. It does not matter if you save a thousand lives or end them for your own ends, what matters at the end of the day is the ability to bring your will and power into the universe.
hey singapore tyrannosaur,
theres realli not much pt in discussing cos u see, ppl like s.gal r seeing things from inside out while we r seeing things from outside in...i dunno if u understand these 2 terms but it simply means tat one party determines the world by looking at self while one determines self by looking at the world...the sequence n priority in viewing life issues is vital as they lay the premise for discussions...the parties involved in the discussions must 1st agree to look at the issues from the same premise but it seems tat in tis forum, the non-believers r unable to view issues from the same premises as us n vice-versa...i have tried to explain our premises in the past, but they either dun understand or they refuse to discuss on level ground...when tat happens, the apple-orange argument happens n there wil be no outcome...
Actually I think our premises are the same, it's just that we have drawn different conclusions from it.
For example we both believe in evil and the existence of God, this is the premise that we share from which we build our worldviews.
The difference is that she thinks that due to the existence of evil, that means that God is incompetent and not really worthy for faith to be placed in, my point of view is that for us to be truly good, it follows through that our choices have to matter. In order for there to be morality and true love, there has to be free will and choice.
So the problem is this, if God moves to prevent us from doing anything possible to do evil, that is if I try to shoot someone the bullet will turn to gas, knives stabbed with turn to paper and people trying to commit suicide by jumping will float to the ground... it's actually not a world that is evil... but it's a world that is not good as well. It is devoid of morality, totally sterile.
There will be no evil, but there will be no good as well because we would have been robbed of our ability to choose anything. We would be a race that is nothing but puppets on a string.
In my point of view we were not created evil, but we are given the choice to choose or reject evil. The problem with the "environmental" view of evil, that is, people becoming evil because of their environment only is that it removes this element of morality, of choice from our actions. This means that there is no evil, just people being forced by their environment to make bad choices... this is not a position I believe in. I believe circumstances matter... but that the responsibility and choice is still on us to do the right thing.
The thing is this, I don't think God is incompetent, if anything He respects our free will to do as we please so much, as seperate, sentient individuals that He tolerates (for now) the consquences from all our actions. It hardly means He is incompetent, or will not deal with the problem of evil eventually.
I don't think suffering in our world is the result of God's judgement on us, most of the time... it is really our fault. If I buy a car from someone and don't listen to his instructions and fill it with water instead of petrol, and my car does not move and gets spoilt, this is not the result of that person's judgement on me. If he told me to use the brakes and I don't and knock somebody down, I can't blame
Basically my disagreement with S.gal83 is that we blame God for the results of our actions that are really the results of our own bad decisions. He blame Him for not stopping us from making these decisions and bearing out the consquences when by all measures... He has already made it quite clear what He expects of us and how to do it, just read the ten commandments.
I don't think people are sent to hell for not accepting God, it's less of a vengeful punishment then reality slapping us in the face. If a person tells me not to walk over the edge of a cliff because of the natural laws of gravity will cause me to fall and I choose to disregard and do so, falling to my death. The person isn't being vengeful or inflexible... this is simply the way reality is.
So if we believe that God sustains all of reality and has set the natural and moral laws in it, but we want to reject Him that actually sustains the very reality that we live in what are we left with? Nothing. That is hell. As C.S. Lewis said in hell the person who rejects God gets what he really wants, because he really does not get God in the end.
We can't reject the Source of all reality and yet still live in this reality and think it'll play to our fancies. That just does not make sense.
Originally posted by S.gal83:
God is the one who creates this world. Therefore, if the system in the world works in such a way that evil people prospers, something is definitely in question about the one who creates this system in the first place.
Surely God is good to Israel,
to those who are pure in heart.
But as for me, my feet had almost slipped;
I had nearly lost my foothold.
For I envied the arrogant
when I saw the prosperity of the wicked.
They have no struggles;
their bodies are healthy and strong.
They are free from the burdens common to man;
they are not plagued by human ills.
Therefore pride is their necklace;
they clothe themselves with violence.
From their callous hearts comes iniquity ;
the evil conceits of their minds know no limits.
They scoff, and speak with malice;
in their arrogance they threaten oppression.
Their mouths lay claim to heaven,
and their tongues take possession of the earth.
Therefore their people turn to them
and drink up waters in abundance.
They say, "How can God know?
Does the Most High have knowledge?"
This is what the wicked are like—
always carefree, they increase in wealth.
Surely in vain have I kept my heart pure;
in vain have I washed my hands in innocence.
All day long I have been plagued;
I have been punished every morning.
If I had said, "I will speak thus,"
I would have betrayed your children.
When I tried to understand all this,
it was oppressive to me
till I entered the sanctuary of God;
then I understood their final destiny.
Surely you place them on slippery ground;
you cast them down to ruin.
How suddenly are they destroyed,
completely swept away by terrors!
As a dream when one awakes,
so when you arise, O Lord,
you will despise them as fantasies.
When my heart was grieved
and my spirit embittered,
I was senseless and ignorant;
I was a brute beast before you.
Yet I am always with you;
you hold me by my right hand.
You guide me with your counsel,
and afterward you will take me into glory.
Whom have I in heaven but you?
And earth has nothing I desire besides you.
My flesh and my heart may fail,
but God is the strength of my heart
and my portion forever.
Those who are far from you will perish;
you destroy all who are unfaithful to you.
But as for me, it is good to be near God.
I have made the Sovereign LORD my refuge;
I will tell of all your deeds. Psalms 73
Originally posted by SingaporeTyrannosaur:
So you believe that He exists, you just don't agree with the way He runs stuff because you think He's incompetent?
I believe he is competent. I just don't believe he is good.