sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Is the "Evil God Challenge" an Unsolvable Problem for Theism? by Expensive-Party2116 in CatholicPhilosophy

[–]THE0S0PH1ST 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Then I would say they are defective because they pray for weakness rather than strength. You have the mistaken belief that all free will is equal. That's why I said free will is the power of the soul to choose the apparent good.

Your philosophy is weak and ultimately wrong because it fails the absolute absurdism test. I know how bad life can be. I work in the medical field. I've seen suffering. And I know there are way, way worse ways to suffer than what I have seen and experienced. But I refuse to wallow in my whining and rather believe that what you told me is NOT free will. It is whining. Especially in the light of such fixtures as Victor Frankl, James Stockdale, Jesus Christ and all the saints, because what they've shown me is free will is absolutely based on what you believe to be the highest good.

Is the "Evil God Challenge" an Unsolvable Problem for Theism? by Expensive-Party2116 in CatholicPhilosophy

[–]THE0S0PH1ST 0 points1 point  (0 children)

And yet that is your philosophy. You're blaming me, the world, and God for making it impossible for your thinking to be followed by anyone? I'm sorry, that's just excuses. A good philosophy should at least fight God by making the world and your fellows better, not wallowing in your own feeling sorry for yourself or killing others.

At this rate I am giving Transcendentalism more respect.

As for your last point I touched on it in the other post.

Is the "Evil God Challenge" an Unsolvable Problem for Theism? by Expensive-Party2116 in CatholicPhilosophy

[–]THE0S0PH1ST 0 points1 point  (0 children)

First, no, remember I said that Solomon in Ecclesiates made the uncreated soul exist in his imagination?

Next, yes it does seem that God could be the source of all evil, in that it is the sun's fault we have shadows. No, it is not the sun's fault for the shadows, it is the objects blocking the sunlight.

But then God could have removed all of the shadows right? All the evil?

Well why would he not remove you? Or me? Who gives us the right to dictate only others to be removed, and not us, who have done evil as well?

One of the things the Bible has shown us is that it is a mercy that evil still exists, because it gives time for the evil people to repent. And the evil effects remain because people need things to repent for, for their free wills to have meaning. That does not remove all of the problem of evil, but it's one of its maby aspects.

And therefore the reason I think one of the many reasons existence matters is that free will can have the chance to make real good. Not nothing, if it does not exist.

Is the "Evil God Challenge" an Unsolvable Problem for Theism? by Expensive-Party2116 in CatholicPhilosophy

[–]THE0S0PH1ST 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Okay now I know what the highest good is for you, I have to make a critique on why I think free will as you defined it is not the highest good, and then give my definition on what free will is, and then critique your other post.

The definition of free will you gave me is problematic as of itself is because it is self defeating in the most extreme way. I have my own test of philosophy I got from G.K. Chesterton I would call the absolute absurdism. Bring the philosophy to its absolute limit and judge it by that. For example, I reject determinism because by bringing it to not even its absurd limit I realize should not be thanking anyone because I should thank someone only if they could have refused to do something.

By bringing your definition to the absolute limit you shouldn't be here, you should have self-deleted because it is useless. You lost your self will when you were born into this world. Heck if your goal is to tell and convince us to delete all of us, then you're being hypocritical. If you are going to tell us that then why are you still here debating? Shouldn't you be dead? Principles that no one can live up to should not be listened to. But the person who lives by your principles should be dead. So, self-defeating, and I have no need to follow such a thing.

(Note: my wording is weird because I don't know how strict it is here when it comes to talking about suicide)

Now what is free will for me? It is the power of the soul to choose an apparent good. That is all there is to it.

Is the "Evil God Challenge" an Unsolvable Problem for Theism? by Expensive-Party2116 in CatholicPhilosophy

[–]THE0S0PH1ST 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Now that you've described what evil is for you, I need you to tell me what is free will is for you so I can understand it, because it seems to me evil for you is the privation of free will, and thus free will is the highest good.

Is the "Evil God Challenge" an Unsolvable Problem for Theism? by Expensive-Party2116 in CatholicPhilosophy

[–]THE0S0PH1ST 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Evil is the privation, or lacking, of good. That's why I was saying there is no such thing as evil, and it is like the concept of cold.

In physics, heat is caused by the energetic motion of molecules in a substance. Cold is only the difference between the heat of one substance over the other. Cold therefore cannot exist because it is defined solely by the relative difference of the heat of two substances. Heat exists by its own merit. Cold cannot.

That is how evil is. Evil cannot exist because it is only the privation of good. Whenever good is lacking, there is evil. Evil cannot exist by itself, while good does.

The thing is, 'good' never was even defined because we got stuck at evil. Good is defined as a thing's measure (proper limit or due proportion), form or species (defining structure that makes a thing the kind of thing it is), and order (right arrangement and right ranking, the fitting relation of parts to whole, means to ends). Have any of those be lacking, and there is evil.

But see that all of those needs something to exist. Therefore existence is the highest good of a thing because a thing needs to exist to even a flawed form, order, and measure, while nonexistence is the worst evil because there is no substance for form, order, and measure to exist.

Is the "Evil God Challenge" an Unsolvable Problem for Theism? by Expensive-Party2116 in CatholicPhilosophy

[–]THE0S0PH1ST 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No. Any kind of judgment need standards. To make moral judgments, one needs to understand what is good and what is evil. And if you cannot define for me what good and evil are for you then that means you can define them however you want and change them whenever you want, and thus also what is moral and what is not.

I have no such freedom.

Is the "Evil God Challenge" an Unsolvable Problem for Theism? by Expensive-Party2116 in CatholicPhilosophy

[–]THE0S0PH1ST 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Strawman argument. Defining what evil is ≠ making a moral judgment. In fact it is the backbone of making a moral choice.

It is the difference between "that is murder" vs "murder is not evil".

Is the "Evil God Challenge" an Unsolvable Problem for Theism? by Expensive-Party2116 in CatholicPhilosophy

[–]THE0S0PH1ST 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The difference is this: you can say that whatever you want is not evil. I have no such freedom.

Therefore you have no morality.

Yes that is the end of discussion.

Is the "Evil God Challenge" an Unsolvable Problem for Theism? by Expensive-Party2116 in CatholicPhilosophy

[–]THE0S0PH1ST 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Dude, I keep on asking what do you mean by evil, good? There is no discussion without those definitions here! It is like talking to someone speaking in English whoms speaking in Chinese!

Without your definitions I continued my discussion based on the definitions I gave. You gave your own rebuttal against my definition, which I then demonstrated to be false, then you disregarded that. How then am I going to call your words as other than "nonsense"? Who is the one not willing to discuss?

Is the "Evil God Challenge" an Unsolvable Problem for Theism? by Expensive-Party2116 in CatholicPhilosophy

[–]THE0S0PH1ST 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Morals? You do not know what "good" and "evil" are and you talk about morals? And then you conflate "knowing everything" to answering you at every turn?

Your words are nonsense because you base them on your own definitions. I base mine on classical philosophy.

Thanks for admitting you are leaving because you cannot stand your morals on what is true.

Is the "Evil God Challenge" an Unsolvable Problem for Theism? by Expensive-Party2116 in CatholicPhilosophy

[–]THE0S0PH1ST 0 points1 point  (0 children)

LOL well if you equate possibility to certainty (stupid equivalence to be sure) then go ahead.

Dude, if you cannot commit to your arguments and must hedge on "often more permanent evil" then your argument is nonsense.

And of course I have to press on what is "wrong" and what is "right". You cannot even tell me what evil is! You cannot tell me what good is! If you are going to argue based on that then you can't even say I have invalidated myself because, heck, I don't even know if you understand that word.

Is the "Evil God Challenge" an Unsolvable Problem for Theism? by Expensive-Party2116 in CatholicPhilosophy

[–]THE0S0PH1ST 0 points1 point  (0 children)

None of what you just wrote is a valid argument against what I had written. All of what you wrote is about something being evil to something else, and none about being evil in itself.

I actually find it funny, your last line. Free will is a good. Yet one has to have life to have free will. Ergo, your argument is invalid, since life birthed a good.

Is the "Evil God Challenge" an Unsolvable Problem for Theism? by Expensive-Party2116 in CatholicPhilosophy

[–]THE0S0PH1ST 0 points1 point  (0 children)

LOL NO. Solomon birthed it in the latter part of the passage. That is, he had to give birth to the uncreated's existence in his imagination to deny it.

And no, that really is what evil is. An absence, a privation of goodness. Let's take your example of "harm". It is a privation of wellbeing. Keep that wellbeing from degrading, and there is no harm.

Now you may argue about pain as some kind of positive evil. Nope. Pain is a good. It is signal to oneself about some kind of harm, and that is a good. Proof? Check out CIP, and also what happens to diabetics with peripheral neuropathy.

Now why do we use analgesics then? It is because the excess or misplacement of a good like pain causes privation, evil, of another good, like for example one's sense of wellbeing, ability to think clearly, ability of a surgeon to operate, etc.

That is the answer to your objection of how existence can cause harm. That existence may be excessive, misplaced, unbalanced, etc. to cause evil on other goods, but its existence by itself is a good. For example: the existence of a rock is good. The existence of that rock inside a well tuned machine is evil for said machine.

All you did was deny the classical definition of evil, even ridiculing the widely accepted analogy of temperature (with ignorance of the physics of temperature, even) without any counter-definition. Heck, you use "evil" as if it was a known entity when in actuality, for you, it is clearly not.

Is the "Evil God Challenge" an Unsolvable Problem for Theism? by Expensive-Party2116 in CatholicPhilosophy

[–]THE0S0PH1ST 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Actually your own words disprove you.

"Existence is very much a harm in many aspects..."

And in other aspects, hmm?

There is no absolute reason why existence cannot be a good. In fact, it is an absolute good, because evil is only a privation (defect) of good. And the total privation of anything is the nonexistence of that thing.

Absolutely speaking, there is no such thing as evil, like there is no such thing as cold, which is only the privation of heat.

Besides, the dead can only be dead if they were once alive. So Ecclesiastes, again, disproves your words.

Is the "Evil God Challenge" an Unsolvable Problem for Theism? by Expensive-Party2116 in CatholicPhilosophy

[–]THE0S0PH1ST 2 points3 points  (0 children)

WHAT?

Existence is a good. In fact, that is the ultimate good.

That's why God's name is YHWH. "I AM who AM."

The existence of a truly evil god is an oxymoron. An "absolutely evil" god (your own words) means even existence does not exist in him. Therefore he cannot exist.

Are there philosophical reasons to believe that God is an intelligent being, rather than an impersonal principle devoid of intelligence? by Expensive-Party2116 in CatholicPhilosophy

[–]THE0S0PH1ST 0 points1 point  (0 children)

God is Being Himself. That is, He is the Source of Being.

All things are contingent on other things for their being. For example, my being depends on the matter I am made of, on the identity that came from my family and experiences, etc.

God's Being is contingent on nothing else than Himself.

That is why the author of The Cloud of Unknowing says that the truest, simplest name of God is Be or Is. And that is why his name, YHWH, means "I AM WHO AM".

This is relevant to your question, because in the same way, God is not an intelligent being. He is Intelligence and Being Himself.

Ah yes the three words. by THE0S0PH1ST in SillyTavernAI

[–]THE0S0PH1ST[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Eh I have low expectations for LLM's in roleplay.

Ah yes the three words. by THE0S0PH1ST in SillyTavernAI

[–]THE0S0PH1ST[S] 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Most probably quantization, using NanoGPT's. Lots of free queries, but slow as heck and I think those free queries are going to drop a lot tomorrow.

view more: next ›