A theodicy

Steve3007 · Post by **Steve3007** » February 23rd, 2017, 12:04 pm

Ozymandias:

Fair point, but that just gives us the question "does the Deity have the power to control logic?" As in, is logic something within or without the Deity? I, for one, agree with you on that, that logic is something which a Deity must adhere to, but in an objective sense it's hard to discount that matter. One might claim that an absolutely omnipotent Deity can, and has, decided what "logic" even is. So, my theodicy still addresses the concept of an absolutely omnipotent Deity, or one with control over the laws of logic and biology.

Yes, it does indeed give us that question. It's a question that's been discussed to unbelievably great lengths (seriously at some points) elsewhere on this website. A pleasantly futile exercise. I think it was discussed in the guise of the pleasantly pointless question: "Can God create a stone that is so heavy that he/she cannot lift it?" If he/she can change the rules of logic then, yes. But, since the only way that we can even discuss the God concept is by using language, which itself relies on basic rules of logic, then ... I can't remember how that argument ends. But you get the idea.

Personally, I'm not religious so I can just treat all these sorts of discussions as interesting, but ultimately pointless, diversions. But if I were religious then I think I might agree with Dark Matter when he/she says:

In short, theodicy is for the faithless. Reason is the servant of man, not the master.

As I understand it, part of the point of faith is that it has nothing to do with reasoned argument. If you have to make an evidence and logic based argument for your position then, by definition, it isn't faith. Of course if you don't have to do that, but want to do it anyway, just for fun, then fine. Plenty of religious people do. C S Lewis and the like.

Dark Matter · Post by **Dark Matter** » February 23rd, 2017, 12:48 pm

Faith means trust. Is trust unreasoned belief?

-- Updated February 23rd, 2017, 1:07 pm to add the following --

Theodicy is a vain attempt to find reason for certainty. Such certainty is an illusion and closes the door to possible alternatives.

Ozymandias · Post by **Ozymandias** » February 23rd, 2017, 1:09 pm

I'll say what I said before- faith is like the training wheels of belief. When you invoke reason you have no need for it. Sure, answering seemingly pointless questions like omnipotence paradox and PoE may not give me a true understanding of God, but it's much better than just assuming that there is a god simply because someone said to "have faith".

Dark Matter, could you restate your definition of faith? I'm not sureness how the word "cleave" makes an the sense in their, forgive me if I'm missing something clear.

Steve, you kind of hit the nail on the head- "the point of faith is that it has nothing to do with reasoned argument". We rely on reason in every other aspec of our lives. I don't "have faith" that i will pass a test or succeed in a challenge, I study and prepare; I use reason and interest. Religion is best when reason is a main pillar of it, not faith. Faith is like giving up on understanding.

Allow me to put it in a metaphor. Dark Matter, let's say I want to understand you better. I will ask you questions to get a better sense of your nature, but if you do not answer those questions, I can only use my reason and intellect to get a good guess of who you are. I won't just use faith and say "I have faith that he/she is... a farmer who likes... jazz! And... enjoys long walks on the beach. I make my best logical guesses as to your nature based on what I do know. It works the same way with God. When I don't get answers to prayer for a better understanding of him, I must use my reason and intellect to deduce his nature, and the nature of the universe so that I can make the best of my existence. We have the ability to use reason for a reason, no pun intended. It's not so that we can thrown it in the trash and just have faith, it's so that we can use it to paint an accurate picture of the universe.

Steve3007 · Post by **Steve3007** » February 23rd, 2017, 1:16 pm

Dark matter:

What is the certainty that you think theodicy is trying to find a reason for? Before entering this topic I'd never heard of theodicy and had to Google it. It is, I'm told, the attempt to answer the question of why a good God permits evil. What is the certainty that is being sought there?

Dark Matter · Post by **Dark Matter** » February 23rd, 2017, 5:31 pm

Ozymandias wrote:I'll say what I said before- faith is like the training wheels of belief. When you invoke reason you have no need for it. Sure, answering seemingly pointless questions like omnipotence paradox and PoE may not give me a true understanding of God, but it's much better than just assuming that there is a god simply because someone said to "have faith".

Dark Matter, could you restate your definition of faith? I'm not sureness how the word "cleave" makes an the sense in their, forgive me if I'm missing something clear.

Steve, you kind of hit the nail on the head- "the point of faith is that it has nothing to do with reasoned argument". We rely on reason in every other aspec of our lives. I don't "have faith" that i will pass a test or succeed in a challenge, I study and prepare; I use reason and interest. Religion is best when reason is a main pillar of it, not faith. Faith is like giving up on understanding.

Allow me to put it in a metaphor. Dark Matter, let's say I want to understand you better. I will ask you questions to get a better sense of your nature, but if you do not answer those questions, I can only use my reason and intellect to get a good guess of who you are. I won't just use faith and say "I have faith that he/she is... a farmer who likes... jazz! And... enjoys long walks on the beach. I make my best logical guesses as to your nature based on what I do know. It works the same way with God. When I don't get answers to prayer for a better understanding of him, I must use my reason and intellect to deduce his nature, and the nature of the universe so that I can make the best of my existence. We have the ability to use reason for a reason, no pun intended. It's not so that we can thrown it in the trash and just have faith, it's so that we can use it to paint an accurate picture of the universe.

The highlighted is the point I'm making: it's guessing. Reason did not evolve in order to ascertain "an accurate picture of the universe," but to ensure survival. Finding comfort in guess because it appears certain to the intellect is silly.

As Lily Tomlin said, "I refuse to be intimidated by reality anymore. What is reality? Nothing but a collective hunch." Or, as Evelyn Underhill wrote: "There is no trustworthy standard by which we can separate the “real” from the “unreal” aspects of phenomena. Such standards as exist are conventional: and correspond to convenience, not to truth. It is no argument to say that most men see the world in much the same way, and that this “way” is the true standard of reality: though for practical purposes we have agreed that sanity consists in sharing the hallucinations of our neighbours. Those who are honest with themselves know that this “sharing” is at best incomplete."

Etymology has to do with the origin of words. This is a link to the etymology of the word "faith." Faith is not belief: belief is limited to "mental acceptance of something as true," whereas faith is cleaving to a power of goodness appealing to our higher and real self, not to our lower and apparent self, the intellect.

Ozymandias · Post by **Ozymandias** » February 23rd, 2017, 10:16 pm

Dark Matter wrote:
Ozymandias wrote:I'll say what I said before- faith is like the training wheels of belief. When you invoke reason you have no need for it. Sure, answering seemingly pointless questions like omnipotence paradox and PoE may not give me a true understanding of God, but it's much better than just assuming that there is a god simply because someone said to "have faith".

Dark Matter, could you restate your definition of faith? I'm not sureness how the word "cleave" makes an the sense in their, forgive me if I'm missing something clear.

Steve, you kind of hit the nail on the head- "the point of faith is that it has nothing to do with reasoned argument". We rely on reason in every other aspec of our lives. I don't "have faith" that i will pass a test or succeed in a challenge, I study and prepare; I use reason and interest. Religion is best when reason is a main pillar of it, not faith. Faith is like giving up on understanding.

Allow me to put it in a metaphor. Dark Matter, let's say I want to understand you better. I will ask you questions to get a better sense of your nature, but if you do not answer those questions, I can only use my reason and intellect to get a good guess of who you are. I won't just use faith and say "I have faith that he/she is... a farmer who likes... jazz! And... enjoys long walks on the beach. I make my best logical guesses as to your nature based on what I do know. It works the same way with God. When I don't get answers to prayer for a better understanding of him, I must use my reason and intellect to deduce his nature, and the nature of the universe so that I can make the best of my existence. We have the ability to use reason for a reason, no pun intended. It's not so that we can thrown it in the trash and just have faith, it's so that we can use it to paint an accurate picture of the universe.
The highlighted is the point I'm making: it's guessing. Reason did not evolve in order to ascertain "an accurate picture of the universe," but to ensure survival. Finding comfort in guess because it appears certain to the intellect is silly.

As Lily Tomlin said, "I refuse to be intimidated by reality anymore. What is reality? Nothing but a collective hunch." Or, as Evelyn Underhill wrote: "There is no trustworthy standard by which we can separate the “real” from the “unreal” aspects of phenomena. Such standards as exist are conventional: and correspond to convenience, not to truth. It is no argument to say that most men see the world in much the same way, and that this “way” is the true standard of reality: though for practical purposes we have agreed that sanity consists in sharing the hallucinations of our neighbours. Those who are honest with themselves know that this “sharing” is at best incomplete."

Etymology has to do with the origin of words. This is a link to the etymology of the word "faith." Faith is not belief: belief is limited to "mental acceptance of something as true," whereas faith is cleaving to a power of goodness appealing to our higher and real self, not to our lower and apparent self, the intellect.

I apologize for my poor word choice- I shouldn't have called reason a "logical guess", because it is not that. It's more of a logical deduction/ induction. I'm less concerned with how reason evolved, and more concerned with how I can use it to appropriately react to the world I have been placed in. After all, I don't use my hands to build and use stone tools, even though that's what they were evolved for, I use them to type on a keyboard, write on paper, gesticulate to and interact with other humans, and manipulate the modern tools and appliances I have. I use the tools I have for the world I live in. It's the same for reason. Reason allows me to discern what an animal cannot. My worldview is that it is valuable for me to gain a proper understanding of the universe; that is why I'm on this website spending hours discussing ideas with everybody. If I wanted to use my reason for survival, it would be quite easy and would not require any ideological thinking. But I use my reason for a better purpose than that. So I apologize again for my bad word choice, and given my substitute (reason is a logical deduction or induction), consider my point again.

Also, you still keep using the word "cleave" and I have no clue what you mean by it. To cleave is to cut or split something. "...faith is cleaving to a power of goodness..." I do not know what you mean by that. Do you mean cling?

Dark Matter · Post by **Dark Matter** » February 23rd, 2017, 10:43 pm

"Cleave" has another meaning.

Lark_Truth · Post by **Lark_Truth** » February 23rd, 2017, 11:17 pm

Ozymandias wrote:Religion is best when reason is a main pillar of it, not faith. Faith is like giving up on understanding.

Reason would be an important of any religion, but I would think that faith would be the foundation of religion and is the core reason why anyone follows a religion. (Going through the motions is not what I consider "following" a religion.) I would also think that faith is not giving up on understanding. Faith is not to have perfect knowledge of everything religious, but to have hope for things which are not seen, which are true. (Alma 32:21 of the Book of Mormon).

-- Updated February 23rd, 2017, 11:51 pm to add the following --

The full scripture of Alma 32:21 reads:

And now as I have said concerning faith - faith is not to have a perfect knowledge of things; therefore if ye have faith ye hope for things which are not seen, which are true.

Dark Matter · Post by **Dark Matter** » February 24th, 2017, 2:03 am

Lark_Truth wrote:
Ozymandias wrote:Religion is best when reason is a main pillar of it, not faith. Faith is like giving up on understanding.
Reason would be an important of any religion, but I would think that faith would be the foundation of religion and is the core reason why anyone follows a religion. (Going through the motions is not what I consider "following" a religion.) I would also think that faith is not giving up on understanding. Faith is not to have perfect knowledge of everything religious, but to have hope for things which are not seen, which are true. (Alma 32:21 of the Book of Mormon).

-- Updated February 23rd, 2017, 11:51 pm to add the following --

The full scripture of Alma 32:21 reads:
And now as I have said concerning faith - faith is not to have a perfect knowledge of things; therefore if ye have faith ye hope for things which are not seen, which are true.

Bingo!

Steve3007 · Post by **Steve3007** » February 24th, 2017, 8:52 am

Cleave is a funny word. It's an auto-antonym - it has two meanings which are the opposite of each other.

Ozymandias · Post by **Ozymandias** » February 24th, 2017, 5:25 pm

We're way off topic. If any of you three want to talk about faith we should start a new thread. And apparently you are all right about cleave, it is quite odd for it to have the definition DM used, but I retract my point, you used it rightly

. Anyway, I'd like to start a thread about faith if that's what we're going to talk about.

Dark Matter · Post by **Dark Matter** » February 25th, 2017, 3:26 pm

This is on the subject of theodicy.

Someone who thinks the "problem of evil" is a problem clearly hasn't given much thought to what what the notion of a good and infinite God entails.

-- Updated February 26th, 2017, 2:19 pm to add the following --

Consider: if God is infinite and good, where is there room for "evil" except in the shadow of his acting nature?

Post by **LuckyR** » February 26th, 2017, 2:40 pm

Ozymandias wrote:
Steve3007 wrote:Ozymandias:

(Nested quote removed.)

This Deity may (in most religious people's view) be able to make the laws of Biology and Physics however it chooses, but I think most people agree that it can't make those laws self-contradictory. They have to be logically consistent. There couldn't, for example, simultaneously be a law of gravity and not be a law of gravity. Once the laws have been created they can't be selectively applied.

This requirement for logical consistency is what makes the laws inevitably lead to some suffering. The same universal physical laws which hold us safely on the ground (gravity) and stop us from falling through the ground (electromagnetism) also kill us when we fall.
Fair point, but that just gives us the question "does the Deity have the power to control logic?" As in, is logic something within or without the Deity? I, for one, agree with you on that, that logic is something which a Deity must adhere to, but in an objective sense it's hard to discount that matter. One might claim that an absolutely omnipotent Deity can, and has, decided what "logic" even is. So, my theodicy still addresses the concept of an absolutely omnipotent Deity, or one with control over the laws of logic and biology.

I see your original point but you are overlooking a much more likely explanation of the seeming contradiction you describe.

First let's stipulate that there is a god. Otherwise your entire argument evaporates instantly. A very logical and simple explanation, yet not what you are after.

Second though you are correct that common theistic dogma is that gods are omnipotent, omniscient etc, what evidence is there of this? Well, god said so. That "proof" is inadequate in every other human endeavor and I would submit that it is insufficient here as well. It is statistically much more likely that if gods exist that while they are much smarter, knowledgeable and powerful than we are (by definition), that they are in fact not infinitely so.

Thus if we postulate that gods exist and they are from our human perspective indistinguishable from infinitely powerful, yet from another, more circumspect perspective are in fact NOT infinitely knowledgeable and powerful, that state of affairs would square quite nicely with both what we observe and what we assume is a god's attitude about evil.