In order for a hypothetical creator and sustainer of all...

[Ecmandu]

In order for such a being to have any meaning, proof, falsifiability...

It needs to be omnibenevolent.

The other possible omnis don't make for a meaningful quality of such being as all beings desire, when they contemplate such things ...

[Ecmandu]

I'll extend this...

The only quality we NEED from the idea of the BIG ONE... is omnibenevolence!

Otherwise it has zero or negative meaning

[Ecmandu]

I want to expand upon this.

An omnibenevolent creator would create a universe where even with freewill, it would not only be impossible to make a bad decision, everything we do makes our lives better and better

[Mr Reasonable]

You should read David Lewis, "Evil for Freedom's Sake?".

[Ecmandu]

I want to expand upon this.

An omnibenevolent creator would create a universe where even with freewill, it would not only be impossible to make a bad decision, everything we do makes our lives better and better

It would do this for each of us in some, potentially, mysterious omnipotent way

[Ecmandu]

You should read David Lewis, "Evil for Freedom's Sake?".

No, and I think the idea is absurd. People may want to be evil, but it doesn't take much life experience to realize that they don't want evil to happen to them.

Everyone wants omnibenevolent creation, there are no exceptions. Perhaps there's reality splitting when something gets harmed, so that it continues on without being harmed, for example

[Mr Reasonable]

Clearly you didn't read the paper. It doesn't advocate evil.

[Ecmandu]

Clearly you didn't read the paper. It doesn't advocate evil.

Ok

[phyllo]

I want to expand upon this.

An omnibenevolent creator would create a universe where even with freewill, it would not only be impossible to make a bad decision, everything we do makes our lives better and better

It would do this for each of us in some, potentially, mysterious omnipotent way

" ... there is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so" - Hamlet

[Prismatic567]

In order for such a being to have any meaning, proof, falsifiability...
It needs to be omnibenevolent.
The other possible omnis don't make for a meaningful quality of such being as all beings desire, when they contemplate such things ...

This is merely a subset of my thesis, God is an impossibility because an absolutely perfect holistic God is an impossibility.

This omnibenevolent is equivalent an absolutely perfect God who is absolutely benevolent or omnibevolent. This is impossible in reality due to the Problem of Evil. In addition who is to judge what is good and evil - thus ultimately this is subjective or intersubjective, therefore cannot be omnibenevolent.

Note omnibenovolent is merely an ideal in thought only and such an ideal is an impossible rational empirical reality.

The other omnis that make up an totally absolutely perfect God is critical. If your God is not all-powerful, then your God is inferior and dominated by another ALL-powerful God, e.g. has a smaller 'dick' than another.
If your god is not omnipresent, then your god could be existing within a piece of shit excreted by another God.

[Ecmandu]

Nothing good or bad, but thinking makes it so.

Thinking occurs, therefor the first part is wrong.

Like I stated earlier, some people like to be wicked, but not one being in existence wants wickedness to fall upon them. Every being wants an omnibenevolent universe. In order to be omnibenevolent, a being is likely required to have the other omnis as well.

The tools for omnibenevolence are, molding/formation, copying, pasting, splitting

[Prismatic567]

Nothing good or bad, but thinking makes it so.

Thinking occurs, therefor the first part is wrong.

Like I stated earlier, some people like to be wicked, but not one being in existence wants wickedness to fall upon them. Every being wants an omnibenevolent universe. In order to be omnibenevolent, a being is likely required to have the other omnis as well.

The tools for omnibenevolence are, molding/formation, copying, pasting, splitting

All normal human beings, except the psychopathic and the evil prone would expect benevolence. This is why we have the Golden Rule to promote it.
In addition, the trend of evolution in parallel with apes and other higher animals, the inherent compassionate and empathy tendencies represented by mirror neurons and others are increasing with time.

In addition, Iacoboni has argued that mirror neurons are the neural basis of the human capacity for emotions such as empathy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mirror_neuron

However you are going too far in postulating the existence of a "being" as an omnibenevolent universe.

The most we can expect is, human beings [not a Universal Being] will be more benevolent in time in relation in the increasing numbers of mirror neurons and its connectivity.

The normal inclinations of one in veering towards some kind of Universal Being with whatever omni-properties is merely psychological like what Hume discovered for induction.

[phyllo]

"Nothing good or bad, but thinking makes it so."

Thinking occurs, therefor the first part is wrong.

"Good" and "bad" are not properties of objects and events ... they are evaluations of objects and events. They are thoughts about objects and events. You can choose your thoughts. You can decide how you evaluate things, whether good, bad or neither.

"The happiness of your life depends upon the quality of your thoughts" - Marcus Aurelius

No copying, cutting or pasting required.

[Ecmandu]

"Nothing good or bad, but thinking makes it so."

Thinking occurs, therefor the first part is wrong.

"Good" and "bad" are not properties of objects and events ... they are evaluations of objects and events. They are thoughts about objects and events. You can choose your thoughts. You can decide how you evaluate things, whether good, bad or neither.

"The happiness of your life depends upon the quality of your thoughts" - Marcus Aurelius

No copying, cutting or pasting required.

Bad states of being exist, actually, only a really deranged person would argue otherwise ... probably because they are self serving as a sadist. But even the sadist doesn't want those returned upon them; thus: copy, paste, molding / forming, splitting, to form a cohesive omnibenevolent whole for all beings

[Ecmandu]

"Nothing good or bad, but thinking makes it so."

Thinking occurs, therefor the first part is wrong.

"Good" and "bad" are not properties of objects and events ... they are evaluations of objects and events. They are thoughts about objects and events. You can choose your thoughts. You can decide how you evaluate things, whether good, bad or neither.

"The happiness of your life depends upon the quality of your thoughts" - Marcus Aurelius

No copying, cutting or pasting required.

Bad states of being exist, actually, only a really deranged person would argue otherwise ... probably because they are self serving as a sadist. But even the sadist doesn't want those returned upon them; thus: copy, paste, molding / forming, splitting, to form a cohesive omnibenevolent whole for all beings

Let me explain it this way, people are individuals and it is self evident to them when they experience reality molded to it, that it is good. To say there is no bad, is to make the claim that I don't like or am allergic to certain foods, that I do enjoy - both are expressions of bad in my individuality.

[phyllo]

Reminds me of this story:

A very old Chinese Taoist story describes a farmer in a poor country village. His neighbors considered him very well-to-do. He owned a horse which he used for plowing and for transportation. One day his horse ran away. All his neighbors exclaimed how terrible this way, but the farmer simply said "Maybe."

A few days later the horse returned and brought two wild horses with it. The neighbors all rejoiced at his good fortune, but the farmer just said "Maybe."

The next day the farmer's son tried to ride one of the wild horses. The horse threw him and the son broke his leg. The neighbors all offered their sympathy for his misfortune, but the farmer again said "Maybe."

The next week conscription officers came to the village to take young men for the army. They rejected the farmer's son because of his broken leg. When the neighbors told him how lucky he was, the farmer replied "Maybe."

Of course, I might be deranged.

[Ecmandu]

I wanted to add this post here:

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=193545

[Ecmandu]

It's important to note:

The path: fantasy becoming reality in a no harm way

The desire of all beings: omnibenevolent universe

The method: molding / forming, copying, pasting, splitting - all into a cohesive whole

The evolution - mass media about what to manifest and how

Since all beings want an omnibenevolent universe, one will manifest for everyone if it already hasn't