Moderator: Dan~
Ecmandu wrote: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 wrote:You should read David Lewis, "Evil for Freedom's Sake?".
Mr Reasonable wrote:Clearly you didn't read the paper. It doesn't advocate evil.
Ecmandu wrote:Ecmandu wrote: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
This is merely a subset of my thesis, God is an impossibility because an absolutely perfect holistic God is an impossibility.Ecmandu wrote: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 ...
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.Ecmandu wrote: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
wiki wrote: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
"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."Nothing good or bad, but thinking makes it so."
Thinking occurs, therefor the first part is wrong.
phyllo wrote:"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."Nothing good or bad, but thinking makes it so."
Thinking occurs, therefor the first part is wrong.
"The happiness of your life depends upon the quality of your thoughts" - Marcus Aurelius
No copying, cutting or pasting required.
Ecmandu wrote:phyllo wrote:"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."Nothing good or bad, but thinking makes it so."
Thinking occurs, therefor the first part is wrong.
"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
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."
Return to Religion and Spirituality
Users browsing this forum: No registered users