Serious about attachments, that is, the ways there are established in our being in the world a complex network of caring. 'God" as a concept among many, gets its meaning embedded in a body of enculturated thoughts, values, feelings, and so forth. It meaning, in other words, rises out of difference (remember Derrida's Différance), and each different "thing" is, if you will, an embodiment of caring, as in, i actually care about whether my typing is correct and that my point is well made even as i write with no intent to care explicitly at all. It is always already there, this caring. This is, on deeper analysis of what the eastern mystics were talking about, what attachment really is about. It is, as i read in some Zen book some time ago, attachment that occurs from moment to moment, and the idea, so this goes, is to put your focus "in between" these. I take this quite literally, as it was intended. If we are time (rather than "in" time) as some insist we are, then the effort should be to literally lose one's self. The god concept falls away along with everything else; along with time. Then things get very interesting.Felix:
Serious about being playful? So all the philosophy I ever really needed was in Al Green's song lyrics?
But is it "being" or "becoming" in the world that we must get over? - seems more like the latter.
If there is a God, why is there evil?
- Hereandnow
- Posts: 2839
- Joined: July 11th, 2012, 9:16 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: the moon and the stars
Re: If there is a God, why is there evil?
-
- Moderator
- Posts: 6105
- Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm
Re: If there is a God, why is there evil?
Yes, but love doesn't reduce to happiness. That is the narrow meaning of love i.e need love. Love is hugely bigger than than what brings happiness in its train. Love includes not only love of nearest and dearest family, love includes more than love of human mammals or other mammals. Love can include love of inanimate things, rocks, as we like to say; geologists can express love of what it not self. Philosophers might be complete misanthropists and love an idea.Hereandnow wrote:Or maybe it is just a faulty assumption that gives everyone so much trouble. forget about god as a human-like agent that judges, knows, understands, interacts, and so forth. Why does this carry so much weight? I mean, it is this personhood that gets us to thinking there is "someone" who would do this, or wouldn't do that. Just take that occamist razor and cut this groundless piece of excess out. Can this be done and still have a god left? Lessee:
If you remove the omniscience, omnipotence, and omnibenevolence; the rational will that acts, thinks, judges, interacts, cares, loves and so forth...what is left? Love and happiness. Or, just happiness, for love really reduces to this. The (serious) Hindus and Buddhists have been saying for a long time: you and I are essentially joyful entities if we would just get over our (to use Heidegger's term) Being in the world. (And if you are familiar with Heidegger, I put this out there for an entertaining juxtaposition. Human dasein IS our attachments.)
Religionists can also be misanthropists but love the transcendent God. An individual can embrace two or more of those loves.
Any of those loves can bring dissonance and discontentment, which is a big element in how the love is fired from the parent seeking to care for the child, to the physicist seeking material truths. Even sexual desire vanishes unless it includes the perennial quest to become the same being as the lover.
I used to like the Eastern fatalism and was intrigued by Maharishi Mahesh Yogi's philosophy and transcendental meditation but now that I am older I prefer the western active attitude towards how to live.
- Hereandnow
- Posts: 2839
- Joined: July 11th, 2012, 9:16 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: the moon and the stars
Re: If there is a God, why is there evil?
You put a lot on the table. I take a great deal off the table. That is what we do when we want to ge to something more primordial: we pull away from the particulars to what is common in them. Take reason. I am reasonable about many things, but then, what is it to reasonable at all? Philosophers ask this kind of question. I said that love reduces to happiness. Love may be ABOUT him or her or you cat or your children, but let's put these on hold, these particularities, and ask if the experience of one is not the same as another. Without getting too wordy on the matter, i think, firstly, the word "love" is made ambiguous through usage. My love of haagen dazs is not what is at issue; nor is my love of philosophy. These and others like them are too complicated and vitiated by, well, visceral indulgences, ambition, egotism, and various and sundry desires and appetites that have little (though not nothing at all) to do with love. When I talk of love, I mean walking down the street and everything is just wonderful. Wittgenstein once said a depressed person lives in a depressed world. I get his meaning, for when you are truly down your entire horizon of possibilities lose their original delight. It fills being in the world and one thing is not separated from another as all are equally dreadful. Love is this kind of saturation. All things are unified by this singularity. True love, innocent and free of complication, is like this. And when one is in love, and one sits down to do his or her work, it might be hard to concentrate, because one is simply overwhelmingly happy. I find the essential emotional states in question to be emotionally indistinguishable, though being in love does have it s'significant other". And here, by my lights, is where we begin to understand all those grand Christian ideas most palpably, putting aside all interpretative references. (Ever read any Husserl? He is a bit too much, granted: he's think and heavy reading, but his epoche, the phenomenological reduction, is a worthy concept that sheds light on a good deal of mystical writings, from kabbalah through to nirvana.Belinda:
Yes, but love doesn't reduce to happiness. That is the narrow meaning of love i.e need love. Love is hugely bigger than than what brings happiness in its train. Love includes not only love of nearest and dearest family, love includes more than love of human mammals or other mammals. Love can include love of inanimate things, rocks, as we like to say; geologists can express love of what it not self. Philosophers might be complete misanthropists and love an idea.
Religionists can also be misanthropists but love the transcendent God. An individual can embrace two or more of those loves.
Any of those loves can bring dissonance and discontentment, which is a big element in how the love is fired from the parent seeking to care for the child, to the physicist seeking material truths. Even sexual desire vanishes unless it includes the perennial quest to become the same being as the lover.
I used to like the Eastern fatalism and was intrigued by Maharishi Mahesh Yogi's philosophy and transcendental meditation but now that I am older I prefer the western active attitude towards how to live.
I said I wouldn't be wordy. Sorry.
-- Updated May 2nd, 2017, 7:24 am to add the following --
btw, the word 'love' belongs in single inverted commas, not double. Others as well-- gasp!
-
- Moderator
- Posts: 6105
- Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm
Re: If there is a God, why is there evil?
I don't think need-love usage of 'love' describes anything worth discussing. I expect we all agree that people say 'love' and mean sexual arousal or contentment when they can add romantic beliefs and good conscience to the bare sexual desire--- or even without the good conscience! God knows there is plenty of expressive literature about both plain sex, and about romantic love; philosophy is not concerned with expressing feelings.
Human nature is sexual nature, true. Human nature is much besides sexual contentment, notions of romantic love, and sexual desire.
Why human nature is relevant to talk about God, about love and about evil, is because God is supposed to have created human nature, a theory which the OP apparently endorses. If we are going to have something that is capable of contending with evil that has to be something other than romantic love.
- Hereandnow
- Posts: 2839
- Joined: July 11th, 2012, 9:16 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: the moon and the stars
Re: If there is a God, why is there evil?
Well Belinda, I did say you put things on the table and i take them off. I look at love phenomenologically, as a phenomenon,a given, shown to us as it is rather than in a network of presuppositions, as are most wont to do. Alas, empirical science rules the current Zeitgeist and i am guessing that you bring sex and "human nature" into the understanding love because you have an acquired scientific perspective. I want to go, if you will, beneath, this body of thinking observe love as it presents itself or appears. Try to understand human reason as such, and don't think about its evolutionary genesis or anthropological contexts, and you get something like Kant. You see it as it is, as a structure of experience. Look at love like this. And you're right call this romantic love, but i think wrong to think it doesn't solve anything, unless your looking for an "answer" which is a big mistake. What we are really looking for is what eastern enlightenment thinking has been telling us about for a long time: a way out. Enlightenment is liberation and liberation is the kind of thing Wordsworth, Emerson, Thoreau and the mystics of the ages were on about.Belinda:
HereandNow, I know that most people use the word 'love' and the word 'happiness' to describe fulfilled sexual contentment and I have nothing against this usage. I have nothing against any lexical item which escapes exact definition. I suggested elsewhere that 'caring' is better word for our purpose of contending with evil than 'love', for the reasons which Wittgenstein made clear.
I don't think need-love usage of 'love' describes anything worth discussing. I expect we all agree that people say 'love' and mean sexual arousal or contentment when they can add romantic beliefs and good conscience to the bare sexual desire--- or even without the good conscience! God knows there is plenty of expressive literature about both plain sex, and about romantic love; philosophy is not concerned with expressing feelings.
Human nature is sexual nature, true. Human nature is much besides sexual contentment, notions of romantic love, and sexual desire.
Why human nature is relevant to talk about God, about love and about evil, is because God is supposed to have created human nature, a theory which the OP apparently endorses. If we are going to have something that is capable of contending with evil that has to be something other than romantic love.
- Felix
- Posts: 3117
- Joined: February 9th, 2009, 5:45 am
Re: If there is a God, why is there evil?
-
- Posts: 3364
- Joined: April 19th, 2009, 11:45 pm
Re: If there is a God, why is there evil?
How would you define evil? Is life in the jungle evil for example? All these forms of organic life are killing and eating each other. Is this evil? What in your opinion is the defining characteristic of evil? If objective evil exists, what is it?RuleOnu wrote:It seems, reading through some comments, some have an oblique idea regarding the existence of a "god". There are several well established rationales for a "gods" existence, ranging from objective morality to fine tuning arguments. All of which, I'm sure have been debated ad infinitum on this site.
The question here is, "If there is a "god", why is there evil?", which presumes that the "god" in question is one which is "omnibenevolent", therefore capable of regulating evil in favor of good. The question is broad since the questioner does not specify what he means by evil. Does the questioner consider tripping over an uneven piece of sidewalk evil, compared to torturing a child for self gratification? And, to what extent does this benevolent "god" have an obligation to mitigate any degree of evil by which any individual considers what acts actually constitute evil?
In order to answer the question one must make numerous assumptions and presumptions. The question proposes "if" there is a "god", if there isn't a "god", the question is mute and either evil exists or evil does not exist. Or, there is a "god" and, again, evil exists or it does not.
If there is no "god" and evil exists then evil exists as a product of individual interpretation and nothing can be done to mitigate evil except according ones own actions. If there is a "god", and one who is omnibenevolent and evil exists then one must rationally conclude that there must be some moral imperative or justification that this omnibenevolent "god" allows evil to exist.
-
I'm new here so I'll wait and see if there are any responses to my first comment here before proceeding. Thank you.
- LuckyR
- Moderator
- Posts: 7984
- Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am
Re: If there is a God, why is there evil?
Only the most simplistic would call life in the jungle, evil. Jungle life is normal, Modern Civilization with respect for those not of your own tribe is the anomaly, not the norm.Nick_A wrote:How would you define evil? Is life in the jungle evil for example? All these forms of organic life are killing and eating each other. Is this evil? What in your opinion is the defining characteristic of evil? If objective evil exists, what is it?RuleOnu wrote:It seems, reading through some comments, some have an oblique idea regarding the existence of a "god". There are several well established rationales for a "gods" existence, ranging from objective morality to fine tuning arguments. All of which, I'm sure have been debated ad infinitum on this site.
The question here is, "If there is a "god", why is there evil?", which presumes that the "god" in question is one which is "omnibenevolent", therefore capable of regulating evil in favor of good. The question is broad since the questioner does not specify what he means by evil. Does the questioner consider tripping over an uneven piece of sidewalk evil, compared to torturing a child for self gratification? And, to what extent does this benevolent "god" have an obligation to mitigate any degree of evil by which any individual considers what acts actually constitute evil?
In order to answer the question one must make numerous assumptions and presumptions. The question proposes "if" there is a "god", if there isn't a "god", the question is mute and either evil exists or evil does not exist. Or, there is a "god" and, again, evil exists or it does not.
If there is no "god" and evil exists then evil exists as a product of individual interpretation and nothing can be done to mitigate evil except according ones own actions. If there is a "god", and one who is omnibenevolent and evil exists then one must rationally conclude that there must be some moral imperative or justification that this omnibenevolent "god" allows evil to exist.
-
I'm new here so I'll wait and see if there are any responses to my first comment here before proceeding. Thank you.
-
- Posts: 3364
- Joined: April 19th, 2009, 11:45 pm
Re: If there is a God, why is there evil?
But if evil isn't necessarily suffering, what is it?LuckyR wrote:Only the most simplistic would call life in the jungle, evil. Jungle life is normal, Modern Civilization with respect for those not of your own tribe is the anomaly, not the norm.Nick_A wrote: (Nested quote removed.)
How would you define evil? Is life in the jungle evil for example? All these forms of organic life are killing and eating each other. Is this evil? What in your opinion is the defining characteristic of evil? If objective evil exists, what is it?
-
- Moderator
- Posts: 6105
- Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm
Re: If there is a God, why is there evil?
It isn't an entity. 'Evil' is an adjective which has become thingified.But if evil isn't necessarily suffering, what is it?
-
- Posts: 3364
- Joined: April 19th, 2009, 11:45 pm
Re: If there is a God, why is there evil?
So what defines this adjective. What is its chief characteristic that defines it?Belindi wrote:Nick_A wrote:
It isn't an entity. 'Evil' is an adjective which has become thingified.But if evil isn't necessarily suffering, what is it?
-
- Moderator
- Posts: 6105
- Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm
Re: If there is a God, why is there evil?
That depends upon the social context in which the adjective is used.Nick_A wrote:So what defines this adjective. What is its chief characteristic that defines it?Belindi wrote:Nick_A wrote:
(Nested quote removed.)
It isn't an entity. 'Evil' is an adjective which has become thingified.
As has already been remarked, some people tend to use the word 'evil' in the context of devils and other supernatural things.
The word is one of those that cannot be defined except in a pro tem way to facilitate some discussion.
I'd opine that certain acts and intentions are evil and expect you from near enough the same cultural background would agree , more or less.
-
- Posts: 3364
- Joined: April 19th, 2009, 11:45 pm
Re: If there is a God, why is there evil?
Belindi wrote:That depends upon the social context in which the adjective is used.Nick_A wrote: (Nested quote removed.)
So what defines this adjective. What is its chief characteristic that defines it?
As has already been remarked, some people tend to use the word 'evil' in the context of devils and other supernatural things.
The word is one of those that cannot be defined except in a pro tem way to facilitate some discussion.
I'd opine that certain acts and intentions are evil and expect you from near enough the same cultural background would agree , more or less.
This takes place while the earth was still in potential; before plants, animals, and human societies. The Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil refers to a universal quality of objective evil. Can you think of anything it can refer to having nothing to do with subjective societal considerations?Genesis 2: 8 Now the Lord God had planted a garden in the east, in Eden; and there he put the man he had formed. 9 The Lord God made all kinds of trees grow out of the ground—trees that were pleasing to the eye and good for food. In the middle of the garden were the tree of life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.
- Rayliikanen
- Posts: 136
- Joined: May 22nd, 2013, 10:31 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Socrates
- Location: British Columbia
- Contact:
Re: If there is a God, why is there evil?
-
- Moderator
- Posts: 6105
- Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm
Re: If there is a God, why is there evil?
That is not how I interpret the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. I interpret this tree as forbidden because it gave man moral choice. Of all the animals man is the one which we know has choices, which as we see extend even into the abstractions of moral philosophy. The power of moral choice is a mixed blessing. It brings with it huge responsibilities.Genesis 2: 8 Now the Lord God had planted a garden in the east, in Eden; and there he put the man he had formed. 9 The Lord God made all kinds of trees grow out of the ground—trees that were pleasing to the eye and good for food. In the middle of the garden were the tree of life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.
This takes place while the earth was still in potential; before plants, animals, and human societies. The Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil refers to a universal quality of objective evil. Can you think of anything it can refer to having nothing to do with subjective societal considerations?
This tree is prior to animal entities. It's not so much an entity as an axiom. The Garden is an allegorical state in which nothing is relative or temporal.
In The Garden , man had no responsibilities until he disobeyed. This disobedience is not a forerunner of a warning against a
sin; it's part of the allegory which shows the contrast between the imaginary Garden where all is God-assured , and man's life where inevitably he has to cope with uncertainty. The allegory of the Garden is not about sin it's larger than that it's about the basic fact of relativity and temporality.
If one is seeking the rules and regulations of the brutal old tribal god you need to look in Leviticus, not Genesis.
2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month
Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023
Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023