evil and God
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
23-06-2016, 08:01 AM
RE: evil and God
(23-06-2016 07:48 AM)godisinspiteofevil Wrote:  
(22-06-2016 10:17 PM)WhiskeyDebates Wrote:  OP question for you:

Do you accept the Biblical account that Adam and Eve ate from the forbidden tree and at that point gained knowledge of good and evil?

Yes.

Do you think this is a literal account of the events? If so, what about this story makes you think it must be taken literally?

Why can't it be an allegorical story about humanity becoming increasingly enlightened?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-06-2016, 08:17 AM
RE: evil and God
(23-06-2016 07:51 AM)godisinspiteofevil Wrote:  Thanks for this summation. Would you elaborate on the purpose of life? For example, if life has no meaning or purpose how would we be able to determine that? If we did not know what purpose was how would we know whether it could or could not be achieved?

So, I can assume that you are not going to answer my questions?

Help for the living. Hope for the dead. ~ R.G. Ingersoll

Freedom offers opportunity. Opportunity confers responsibility. Responsibility to use the freedom we enjoy wisely, honestly and humanely. ~ Noam Chomsky
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-06-2016, 08:18 AM
RE: evil and God
(23-06-2016 07:51 AM)godisinspiteofevil Wrote:  Thanks for this summation. Would you elaborate on the purpose of life? For example, if life has no meaning or purpose how would we be able to determine that? If we did not know what purpose was how would we know whether it could or could not be achieved?

Life is both a cosmic accident and an inevitability. I believe we live in a largely deterministic universe. It is inevitable in such a universe with the conditions present that eventually life will come to be. Our specific existence is the result of a great deal of lucky breaks. No more no less. Our lives will have no effect on the cosmos at large. Our entire galaxy could cease to exist tomorrow and the universe would not notice.

It is hard to explain how I came to reject teleology, the assigning of purpose. I suppose you could say I see no reason to assign purpose. Why should our lives be different? What reason do I have to think otherwise?

The idea of each human life having purpose comes from a time when society was much more structured. People were born, lived, and died in one social sphere. They knew what they would do with their lives. But today this is not the case. When every road is open to you, how do you know which to pick? It is up to you and your own agency to create your own purpose. There is none given to you. This is the problem of the branch of philosophy known as existentialism.

If you want to argue for intrinsic or objective purpose a positive argument needs to be made for it. So far there has been none given. You could argue that intrinsic purpose is determined by our natural abilities and what is most needed by society. But that only goes so far. I'll take myself. I am VERY good with math and science. My dad thinks I should have been a physicist. And I do have talent there. But I have chosen engineering. Is he wrong? Am I wrong? Which one is the correct purpose?

I tend to favor Sartre, who says that the only true purpose we have is to live authentically. I have made the choice and it is the only right choice because it is mine.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like natachan's post
23-06-2016, 08:27 AM
RE: evil and God
(22-06-2016 01:26 PM)unfogged Wrote:  Which version of the cosmological argument do you think is compelling?

Bumping the question...

Atheism: it's not just for communists any more!
America July 4 1776 - November 8 2016 RIP
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like unfogged's post
23-06-2016, 08:30 AM
RE: evil and God
(23-06-2016 08:27 AM)unfogged Wrote:  
(22-06-2016 01:26 PM)unfogged Wrote:  Which version of the cosmological argument do you think is compelling?

Bumping the question...

I don't think he wants to play with us.... Evil_monster

Help for the living. Hope for the dead. ~ R.G. Ingersoll

Freedom offers opportunity. Opportunity confers responsibility. Responsibility to use the freedom we enjoy wisely, honestly and humanely. ~ Noam Chomsky
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-06-2016, 08:36 AM
RE: evil and God
(23-06-2016 08:18 AM)natachan Wrote:  
(23-06-2016 07:51 AM)godisinspiteofevil Wrote:  Thanks for this summation. Would you elaborate on the purpose of life? For example, if life has no meaning or purpose how would we be able to determine that? If we did not know what purpose was how would we know whether it could or could not be achieved?

Life is both a cosmic accident and an inevitability. I believe we live in a largely deterministic universe. It is inevitable in such a universe with the conditions present that eventually life will come to be. Our specific existence is the result of a great deal of lucky breaks. No more no less. Our lives will have no effect on the cosmos at large. Our entire galaxy could cease to exist tomorrow and the universe would not notice.

It is hard to explain how I came to reject teleology, the assigning of purpose. I suppose you could say I see no reason to assign purpose. Why should our lives be different? What reason do I have to think otherwise?

The idea of each human life having purpose comes from a time when society was much more structured. People were born, lived, and died in one social sphere. They knew what they would do with their lives. But today this is not the case. When every road is open to you, how do you know which to pick? It is up to you and your own agency to create your own purpose. There is none given to you. This is the problem of the branch of philosophy known as existentialism.

If you want to argue for intrinsic or objective purpose a positive argument needs to be made for it. So far there has been none given. You could argue that intrinsic purpose is determined by our natural abilities and what is most needed by society. But that only goes so far. I'll take myself. I am VERY good with math and science. My dad thinks I should have been a physicist. And I do have talent there. But I have chosen engineering. Is he wrong? Am I wrong? Which one is the correct purpose?

I tend to favor Sartre, who says that the only true purpose we have is to live authentically. I have made the choice and it is the only right choice because it is mine.

Thanks. Isn't living authentically living with a purpose? If so, then perhaps the universe has meaning and purpose and therefore one should determine the overarching purpose. What do you think?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-06-2016, 08:44 AM
RE: evil and God
(23-06-2016 08:36 AM)godisinspiteofevil Wrote:  Thanks. Isn't living authentically living with a purpose? If so, then perhaps the universe has meaning and purpose and therefore one should determine the overarching purpose. What do you think?

It is not objective or outside purpose. It is internal to each person. There is no overarching purpose. That is what it means to live authentically, to find your own purpose in a universe which has none. To confront the absurd (the fact that we are creatures that crave purpose in a universe without it) and to persevere in spite of it.

If you want to argue for universal or objective purpose there needs to be a positive reason to believe that. A positive argument must be put forth to justify this.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes natachan's post
23-06-2016, 08:45 AM
RE: evil and God
(23-06-2016 08:27 AM)unfogged Wrote:  
(22-06-2016 01:26 PM)unfogged Wrote:  Which version of the cosmological argument do you think is compelling?

Bumping the question...

Sorry for the delay. The Kalam Cosmological argument which proposes that anything within the natural realm must adhere to the below--

1. Whatever begins to exist has a cause of its beginning.
2. The universe began to exist.
3. Therefore, the universe has a cause of its beginning.

Several discoveries determine that universe is expanding which demonstrates it had a beginning.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-06-2016, 08:48 AM
RE: evil and God
(23-06-2016 08:45 AM)godisinspiteofevil Wrote:  
(23-06-2016 08:27 AM)unfogged Wrote:  Bumping the question...

Sorry for the delay. The Kalam Cosmological argument which proposes that anything within the natural realm must adhere to the below--

1. Whatever begins to exist has a cause of its beginning.
2. The universe began to exist.
3. Therefore, the universe has a cause of its beginning.

Even if we were to accept those premises (it is not certain that we should), that says nothing at all about what form that cause takes.
This type of argument invariably requires other assumptions which have not been justified or even specified.

Quote:Several discoveries determine that universe is expanding which demonstrates it had a beginning.

Not necessarily. It may be an eternal cycle of expansion and contraction.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Chas's post
23-06-2016, 08:50 AM
RE: evil and God
GIISOE in order to further the discussion, you need to give as much as take. If You wish to have further questions answered, I think it's only right to answer some that have been directed at you.

Don't Live each day like it's your last. Live each day like you have 541 days after that one where every choice you make will have lasting implications to you and the world around you. ~ Tim Minchin
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Commonsensei's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: