What ruins life

For the love of the pursuit of knowledge

Moderator: Moderators

Compassionist
Sage
Posts: 634
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 5:56 pm
Has thanked: 345 times
Been thanked: 40 times

What ruins life

Post #1

Post by Compassionist »

Life would be awesome if there were no suffering, unfairness and deaths. These things ruin what could be an amazing experience. I feel so much grief about all the suffering, unfairness and deaths. I wish I could go back in time and prevent all suffering, unfairness and deaths but I can't. If I were all-knowing and all-powerful, there would be no suffering, unfairness and death. I would just make every being equally all-knowing and all-powerful and give them an infinite number of universes each so all will be equally weatlhy and healthy and wise and eternal.

User avatar
The Tanager
Prodigy
Posts: 3207
Joined: Wed May 06, 2015 11:08 am
Has thanked: 12 times
Been thanked: 47 times

Re: What ruins life

Post #31

Post by The Tanager »

Compassionist wrote: Fri Jan 01, 2021 5:53 amI am not asking anyone to agree with me. Nor am I trying to get anyone to leave their religion. 99.9% of all species to evolve so far on Earth are already extinct. Unless we adapt to change the 0.1% who are still extant will also go extinct. Living things behave according to their genes, environments, nutrients and experiences. My conclusion is based on a lifetime of observations.
I mainly come to these online forums to hear the observations of others so that I can also take them into account. So far my lifetime of observations disagree with your conclusion here. I can't make you share your reasonings, but I would love to hear them.
Compassionist wrote: Fri Jan 01, 2021 5:53 amIf God is omniscient and omnipotent then God is also omniculpable.
I agree.
Compassionist wrote: Fri Jan 01, 2021 5:53 amSince God failed to prevent all suffering, unfairness and deaths God is evil. “Ethics, too, are nothing but reverence for life. This is what gives me the fundamental principle of morality, namely, that good consists in maintaining, promoting, and enhancing life, and that destroying, injuring, and limiting life are evil.” – Albert Schweitzer, “Civilization and Ethics”, 1949. Using this definition anyone who destroys or injures or limits life is evil.
Yes, but then why that definition for evil? I think it begs the question I'm asking about.
Compassionist wrote: Fri Jan 01, 2021 5:53 amYou mentioned in an earlier post that 100% certainty is impossible outside mathematics. That's false. When I slap myself, I feel pain. When I massage myself, I feel pleasure. When I eat a ripe sweet banana, I enjoy its taste. When I eat an unripe banana which is not sweet, I dislike its taste. I am 100% certain of all of these experiences.
You can't be 100% certain that you are actually slapping yourself, massaging yourself, eating a banana, etc. You could be a brain in a vat, in the matrix, etc. Now, do I think that's true? Not in the slightest. But we can't be 100% certain.

Compassionist
Sage
Posts: 634
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 5:56 pm
Has thanked: 345 times
Been thanked: 40 times

Re: What ruins life

Post #32

Post by Compassionist »

The Tanager wrote: Sat Jan 02, 2021 7:35 am
Compassionist wrote: Fri Jan 01, 2021 5:53 amI am not asking anyone to agree with me. Nor am I trying to get anyone to leave their religion. 99.9% of all species to evolve so far on Earth are already extinct. Unless we adapt to change the 0.1% who are still extant will also go extinct. Living things behave according to their genes, environments, nutrients and experiences. My conclusion is based on a lifetime of observations.
I mainly come to these online forums to hear the observations of others so that I can also take them into account. So far my lifetime of observations disagree with your conclusion here. I can't make you share your reasonings, but I would love to hear them.
Compassionist wrote: Fri Jan 01, 2021 5:53 amIf God is omniscient and omnipotent then God is also omniculpable.
I agree.
Compassionist wrote: Fri Jan 01, 2021 5:53 amSince God failed to prevent all suffering, unfairness and deaths God is evil. “Ethics, too, are nothing but reverence for life. This is what gives me the fundamental principle of morality, namely, that good consists in maintaining, promoting, and enhancing life, and that destroying, injuring, and limiting life are evil.” – Albert Schweitzer, “Civilization and Ethics”, 1949. Using this definition anyone who destroys or injures or limits life is evil.
Yes, but then why that definition for evil? I think it begs the question I'm asking about.
Compassionist wrote: Fri Jan 01, 2021 5:53 amYou mentioned in an earlier post that 100% certainty is impossible outside mathematics. That's false. When I slap myself, I feel pain. When I massage myself, I feel pleasure. When I eat a ripe sweet banana, I enjoy its taste. When I eat an unripe banana which is not sweet, I dislike its taste. I am 100% certain of all of these experiences.
You can't be 100% certain that you are actually slapping yourself, massaging yourself, eating a banana, etc. You could be a brain in a vat, in the matrix, etc. Now, do I think that's true? Not in the slightest. But we can't be 100% certain.
I have seen the effect of genes, environments, nutrients and experiences on many species including humans. I have also carried out experiments on myself e.g. I went without sleep to note the effect of not sleeping on my thoughts, emotions, perceptions, etc. I went without water or any other liquid to see the effect of such deprivation. I have also deprived myself of both water and food. Also, I went without food for several ten day periods with just plain tap water. I have compared my experiments with similar experiments by scientists on other people. Without any doubt, I am certain that if you were to alter my genes, environments, nutrients and experiences that would lead to alteration in my thoughts, emotions, perceptions, values, abilities and choices. I have never found any evidence of the existence of an immortal soul or spirit which is not affected by genes, environments, nutrients and experiences. You are most welcome to resurrect people who have actually died e.g. Stephen Hawking the Physicist or Mother Teresa the Catholic Nun or any other long-dead person to prove me wrong. They can tell us about heaven and hell if they are immortal souls.

Thank you for agreeing with me in that an omniscient and omnipotent God is omniculpable. Very few people have agreed with me about this.

How would you define evil? How would you define good? I have been searching for definitions of good and evil and I found the above definitions to be worthy.

I can be 100% certain about my experiences but I can't be certain about whether the experiences are happening in a simulation where I appear to be a sentient biological being with a point of view behind my eyes and between my ears with the ability to control my arms and legs within limits. It is entirely possible that we are in a Matrix-like simulation where we live in pods but experience a simulated world. We have no way to prove or disprove the Simulation Hypothesis. According to Hinduism, the world we perceive through our eyes, ears, skin, nose and tongue is not real but an illusion called the Maya. Allegedly, Gods created this illusion for us. Again, Maya Hypothesis is also impossible to prove or disprove. Just as it is impossible to prove or disprove the existence of evil God or Gods who enjoy causing suffering, unfairness and deaths to living things. It's possible that other beings are not actually sentient but are actually Philosophical Zombies who behave as if they are sentient but are not actually sentient. Again, it is impossible for me to know if anyone else is truly sentient or is actually a Philosophical Zombie. I know with 100% certainty that I am a sentient being. I suspect that you and other sentient beings are also 100% sure that you are sentient beings although I have no way to prove or disprove the Philosophical Zombie Hypothesis.

User avatar
The Tanager
Prodigy
Posts: 3207
Joined: Wed May 06, 2015 11:08 am
Has thanked: 12 times
Been thanked: 47 times

Re: What ruins life

Post #33

Post by The Tanager »

Compassionist wrote: Sat Jan 02, 2021 3:49 pmI have seen the effect of genes, environments, nutrients and experiences on many species including humans. I have also carried out experiments on myself e.g. I went without sleep to note the effect of not sleeping on my thoughts, emotions, perceptions, etc. I went without water or any other liquid to see the effect of such deprivation. I have also deprived myself of both water and food. Also, I went without food for several ten day periods with just plain tap water. I have compared my experiments with similar experiments by scientists on other people.
I'm not arguing that these sorts of things won't affect our choices, some very much so. That's not determinism, though.
Compassionist wrote: Sat Jan 02, 2021 3:49 pmWithout any doubt, I am certain that if you were to alter my genes, environments, nutrients and experiences that would lead to alteration in my thoughts, emotions, perceptions, values, abilities and choices.
But how is this proof for determinism? Your choices may be constrained in different ways and the results are different choices, but that doesn't mean you had no freedom of will.
Compassionist wrote: Sat Jan 02, 2021 3:49 pmI have never found any evidence of the existence of an immortal soul or spirit which is not affected by genes, environments, nutrients and experiences. You are most welcome to resurrect people who have actually died e.g. Stephen Hawking the Physicist or Mother Teresa the Catholic Nun or any other long-dead person to prove me wrong. They can tell us about heaven and hell if they are immortal souls.
First, I'm not arguing those things don't affect us, I'm arguing they don't control our decisions. If you have never found evidence of the existence of an immortal soul or spirit, then you have also not found evidence of a determined will and you should be agnostic about this issue. Resurrecting immortal souls, while possibly helpful (although we'd have reason to mistrust them still), is not the only possible source to consider on the issue.
Compassionist wrote: Sat Jan 02, 2021 3:49 pmThank you for agreeing with me in that an omniscient and omnipotent God is omniculpable. Very few people have agreed with me about this.
Well, now I'm wondering if I understood you correctly. Ha. How do you define omniculpability?
Compassionist wrote: Sat Jan 02, 2021 3:49 pmHow would you define evil? How would you define good? I have been searching for definitions of good and evil and I found the above definitions to be worthy.
I haven't found great definitions. I think they are relative terms (although don't confuse that for me saying "good" for humans is a relative thing). I think those definitions are either too vague to be helpful (i.e., does a forest fire promote/enhance life or take it away, since forest growth improves after certain forest fires) or too narrow to be true (i.e., pulling a tooth might hurt/injure/discomfort a person and is therefore evil).
Compassionist wrote: Sat Jan 02, 2021 3:49 pmI can be 100% certain about my experiences but I can't be certain about whether the experiences are happening in a simulation where I appear to be a sentient biological being with a point of view behind my eyes and between my ears with the ability to control my arms and legs within limits. It is entirely possible that we are in a Matrix-like simulation where we live in pods but experience a simulated world. We have no way to prove or disprove the Simulation Hypothesis....
True. So we can be certain that something is having an experience, that certain terms are being used for certain concepts, and pure mathematics. That leaves a whole lot of certainty, and on the more important issues.

Compassionist
Sage
Posts: 634
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 5:56 pm
Has thanked: 345 times
Been thanked: 40 times

Re: What ruins life

Post #34

Post by Compassionist »

The Tanager wrote: Sat Jan 02, 2021 6:56 pm
Compassionist wrote: Sat Jan 02, 2021 3:49 pmI have seen the effect of genes, environments, nutrients and experiences on many species including humans. I have also carried out experiments on myself e.g. I went without sleep to note the effect of not sleeping on my thoughts, emotions, perceptions, etc. I went without water or any other liquid to see the effect of such deprivation. I have also deprived myself of both water and food. Also, I went without food for several ten day periods with just plain tap water. I have compared my experiments with similar experiments by scientists on other people.
I'm not arguing that these sorts of things won't affect our choices, some very much so. That's not determinism, though.
Compassionist wrote: Sat Jan 02, 2021 3:49 pmWithout any doubt, I am certain that if you were to alter my genes, environments, nutrients and experiences that would lead to alteration in my thoughts, emotions, perceptions, values, abilities and choices.
But how is this proof for determinism? Your choices may be constrained in different ways and the results are different choices, but that doesn't mean you had no freedom of will.
Compassionist wrote: Sat Jan 02, 2021 3:49 pmI have never found any evidence of the existence of an immortal soul or spirit which is not affected by genes, environments, nutrients and experiences. You are most welcome to resurrect people who have actually died e.g. Stephen Hawking the Physicist or Mother Teresa the Catholic Nun or any other long-dead person to prove me wrong. They can tell us about heaven and hell if they are immortal souls.
First, I'm not arguing those things don't affect us, I'm arguing they don't control our decisions. If you have never found evidence of the existence of an immortal soul or spirit, then you have also not found evidence of a determined will and you should be agnostic about this issue. Resurrecting immortal souls, while possibly helpful (although we'd have reason to mistrust them still), is not the only possible source to consider on the issue.
Compassionist wrote: Sat Jan 02, 2021 3:49 pmThank you for agreeing with me in that an omniscient and omnipotent God is omniculpable. Very few people have agreed with me about this.
Well, now I'm wondering if I understood you correctly. Ha. How do you define omniculpability?
Compassionist wrote: Sat Jan 02, 2021 3:49 pmHow would you define evil? How would you define good? I have been searching for definitions of good and evil and I found the above definitions to be worthy.
I haven't found great definitions. I think they are relative terms (although don't confuse that for me saying "good" for humans is a relative thing). I think those definitions are either too vague to be helpful (i.e., does a forest fire promote/enhance life or take it away, since forest growth improves after certain forest fires) or too narrow to be true (i.e., pulling a tooth might hurt/injure/discomfort a person and is therefore evil).
Compassionist wrote: Sat Jan 02, 2021 3:49 pmI can be 100% certain about my experiences but I can't be certain about whether the experiences are happening in a simulation where I appear to be a sentient biological being with a point of view behind my eyes and between my ears with the ability to control my arms and legs within limits. It is entirely possible that we are in a Matrix-like simulation where we live in pods but experience a simulated world. We have no way to prove or disprove the Simulation Hypothesis....
True. So we can be certain that something is having an experience, that certain terms are being used for certain concepts, and pure mathematics. That leaves a whole lot of certainty, and on the more important issues.
I didn't say that we don't have any will. I said that we don't have free will. What we have is a constrained will. For example, I want to fly like a bird but I can't because I lack the genes birds have. I also want to grow severed limbs the way axolotls do but I can't because I lack the genes they have. I also want to teleport but I can't because all living things lack the genes for teleportation. I want to be able to breathe under water the way fish do but I can't because I lack their genes. I want to be an autotroph so I don't have to eat other living things but I can't because I lack the genes of an autotroph. My point is that no living thing has free will. All living things are affected by genes, environments, nutrients and experiences. We are all constrained by these variables. I am not arguing in favour of hard determinism. I am pointing out that there are limitations on what living things can do. These limitations come from our genes, environments, nutrients and experiences. That's why someone who has never learned English (or any other language) doesn't instantly become fluent in it without any exposure to it. In Mark chapter 16 of the Bible it says:
15 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.

16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;

18 They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.

19 So then after the Lord had spoken unto them, he was received up into heaven, and sat on the right hand of God.

20 And they went forth, and preached every where, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word with signs following. Amen.
However, I have yet to see a Christian be able to speak another language without having to learn it. Also, they can't really do the healing or the drinking deadly thing either. Many Christians have died by trying to handle snakes.

Omniculpability = one has complete responsibility for everything in existence. When one is omniscient and omnipotent one is omniculpable. I have never met any omniscient and omnipotent being so I am not convinced that such a being exists.

Are you a vegan? If not, why not? I agree that pulling a tooth may hurt the patient but it may be necessary if the tooth is not repairable. Greater good is done to the patient by the dentist as pulling the tooth is a last resort. Dentists try their best to not have to pull the tooth.

Yes, we can be certain about some things but there are other things which are not possible to be certain about. I have already given examples of those.

User avatar
The Tanager
Prodigy
Posts: 3207
Joined: Wed May 06, 2015 11:08 am
Has thanked: 12 times
Been thanked: 47 times

Re: What ruins life

Post #35

Post by The Tanager »

Compassionist wrote: Sat Jan 02, 2021 7:35 pmI am not arguing in favour of hard determinism. I am pointing out that there are limitations on what living things can do. These limitations come from our genes, environments, nutrients and experiences.
I agree. I'm sorry for misunderstanding you.
Compassionist wrote: Sat Jan 02, 2021 7:35 pmOmniculpability = one has complete responsibility for everything in existence. When one is omniscient and omnipotent one is omniculpable. I have never met any omniscient and omnipotent being so I am not convinced that such a being exists.
Here is a scenario: God creates a being with free will. God says don't abuse your child, but God still gave the person the ability to abuse the child. The person abuses the child. Are you saying that God is the only one responsible for the child abuse; that the person is not responsible at all? Or is the person responsible for the specific act and God responsible for the person having that ability and chance for the act?
Compassionist wrote: Sat Jan 02, 2021 7:35 pmAre you a vegan? If not, why not?
I am not. I do not think it immoral to eat a non-human lifeform, even though they would rather not be eaten.
Compassionist wrote: Sat Jan 02, 2021 7:35 pmI agree that pulling a tooth may hurt the patient but it may be necessary if the tooth is not repairable. Greater good is done to the patient by the dentist as pulling the tooth is a last resort. Dentists try their best to not have to pull the tooth.
My point was that this seems to go against the definition of evil (since suffering is caused) or show the definition to be too vague (since some suffering is enhancing, while other suffering is destroying).

User avatar
2ndRateMind
Site Supporter
Posts: 1450
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2017 4:25 am
Location: Pilgrim on another way
Has thanked: 53 times
Been thanked: 49 times

Re:

Post #36

Post by 2ndRateMind »

Divine Insight wrote: Wed Mar 04, 2020 9:45 pm
otseng wrote:
2ndRateMind wrote: Life would be great if there was no suffering, but also incredibly boring.
Wouldn't it then follow that an eternal life in heaven would also be incredibly boring?

If not, then why not? Will there be suffering in heaven?
Oh, I expect God will find us something meaningful to do with our time.

Best wishes, 2RM
Non omnes qui errant pereunt
Not all who wander are lost

Compassionist
Sage
Posts: 634
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 5:56 pm
Has thanked: 345 times
Been thanked: 40 times

Re: What ruins life

Post #37

Post by Compassionist »

The Tanager wrote: Sat Jan 02, 2021 8:31 pm
Compassionist wrote: Sat Jan 02, 2021 7:35 pmI am not arguing in favour of hard determinism. I am pointing out that there are limitations on what living things can do. These limitations come from our genes, environments, nutrients and experiences.
I agree. I'm sorry for misunderstanding you.
Compassionist wrote: Sat Jan 02, 2021 7:35 pmOmniculpability = one has complete responsibility for everything in existence. When one is omniscient and omnipotent one is omniculpable. I have never met any omniscient and omnipotent being so I am not convinced that such a being exists.
Here is a scenario: God creates a being with free will. God says don't abuse your child, but God still gave the person the ability to abuse the child. The person abuses the child. Are you saying that God is the only one responsible for the child abuse; that the person is not responsible at all? Or is the person responsible for the specific act and God responsible for the person having that ability and chance for the act?
Compassionist wrote: Sat Jan 02, 2021 7:35 pmAre you a vegan? If not, why not?
I am not. I do not think it immoral to eat a non-human lifeform, even though they would rather not be eaten.
Compassionist wrote: Sat Jan 02, 2021 7:35 pmI agree that pulling a tooth may hurt the patient but it may be necessary if the tooth is not repairable. Greater good is done to the patient by the dentist as pulling the tooth is a last resort. Dentists try their best to not have to pull the tooth.
My point was that this seems to go against the definition of evil (since suffering is caused) or show the definition to be too vague (since some suffering is enhancing, while other suffering is destroying).
No apology is needed. In your scenario, both the created being and God have shared responsibility. God has a duty of care to protect the victim of abuse. If he does not protect the victim from abuse then he is failing to carry out His/Her/Its duty.

Your consumption of sentient biological organisms causes them suffering and death. To me that is unethical. Please tell me the basis for your view that it is not immoral to eat a non-human lifeform, even though they would rather not be eaten.

I agree that the definition is imperfect but then we are not perfect and the world is not perfect either. We evolved in a world which is not sentient and can't care about ethics. That's why there is so much chaos, suffering, unfairness and deaths.

User avatar
The Tanager
Prodigy
Posts: 3207
Joined: Wed May 06, 2015 11:08 am
Has thanked: 12 times
Been thanked: 47 times

Re: What ruins life

Post #38

Post by The Tanager »

Compassionist wrote: Sun Jan 03, 2021 7:06 amIn your scenario, both the created being and God have shared responsibility. God has a duty of care to protect the victim of abuse. If he does not protect the victim from abuse then he is failing to carry out His/Her/Its duty.
But in order to carry out God's "duty of care," God would have to override a being's free will. Logically, one can't have both.
Compassionist wrote: Sun Jan 03, 2021 7:06 amYour consumption of sentient biological organisms causes them suffering and death. To me that is unethical. Please tell me the basis for your view that it is not immoral to eat a non-human lifeform, even though they would rather not be eaten.
I do not think causing suffering and death is necessarily an evil in and of itself. I allow my kids to suffer (to some extent) in order to grow their character because I think character is more important than comfort. Veganism also causes organisms suffering and death, too. Are you saying starving to death is the only moral action?
Compassionist wrote: Sun Jan 03, 2021 7:06 amI agree that the definition is imperfect but then we are not perfect and the world is not perfect either. We evolved in a world which is not sentient and can't care about ethics. That's why there is so much chaos, suffering, unfairness and deaths.
But the fact that people believe in good and evil and desire what they think is good shows that we do care about ethics. I also think it points to a God who cares about good and evil.

Compassionist
Sage
Posts: 634
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 5:56 pm
Has thanked: 345 times
Been thanked: 40 times

Re: What ruins life

Post #39

Post by Compassionist »

The Tanager wrote: Sun Jan 03, 2021 8:26 am
Compassionist wrote: Sun Jan 03, 2021 7:06 amIn your scenario, both the created being and God have shared responsibility. God has a duty of care to protect the victim of abuse. If he does not protect the victim from abuse then he is failing to carry out His/Her/Its duty.
But in order to carry out God's "duty of care," God would have to override a being's free will. Logically, one can't have both.
Compassionist wrote: Sun Jan 03, 2021 7:06 amYour consumption of sentient biological organisms causes them suffering and death. To me that is unethical. Please tell me the basis for your view that it is not immoral to eat a non-human lifeform, even though they would rather not be eaten.
I do not think causing suffering and death is necessarily an evil in and of itself. I allow my kids to suffer (to some extent) in order to grow their character because I think character is more important than comfort. Veganism also causes organisms suffering and death, too. Are you saying starving to death is the only moral action?
Compassionist wrote: Sun Jan 03, 2021 7:06 amI agree that the definition is imperfect but then we are not perfect and the world is not perfect either. We evolved in a world which is not sentient and can't care about ethics. That's why there is so much chaos, suffering, unfairness and deaths.
But the fact that people believe in good and evil and desire what they think is good shows that we do care about ethics. I also think it points to a God who cares about good and evil.
That's incorrect. God could put a force field around the victim which would prevent the evil parent from being able to harm the victim. Veganism causes much less suffering than omnivores. As I said before, I want to be an autotroph so I won't be consuming any plants but I lack the genes. If God created herbivores, carnivores and omnivores then God is evil.

Just because we and other social animals care about ethics it does not make God real and good. I am still convinced that God is evil (imaginary or real).

User avatar
The Tanager
Prodigy
Posts: 3207
Joined: Wed May 06, 2015 11:08 am
Has thanked: 12 times
Been thanked: 47 times

Re: What ruins life

Post #40

Post by The Tanager »

Compassionist wrote: Sun Jan 03, 2021 10:11 amThat's incorrect. God could put a force field around the victim which would prevent the evil parent from being able to harm the victim.
Technically the will may be free, but it's made completely ineffective.
Compassionist wrote: Sun Jan 03, 2021 10:11 amVeganism causes much less suffering than omnivores. As I said before, I want to be an autotroph so I won't be consuming any plants but I lack the genes.
Under your definition, veganism is less evil, but still evil. The "moral" thing to do (using that principle) is to let yourself starve to death.
Compassionist wrote: Sun Jan 03, 2021 10:11 amIf God created herbivores, carnivores and omnivores then God is evil.
Using your definition of evil, yes.
Compassionist wrote: Sun Jan 03, 2021 10:11 amJust because we and other social animals care about ethics it does not make God real and good.
I didn't argue the opposite.

Post Reply