Natural evil VS the innocent - Genetic defect in child

Discuss philosophical questions regarding theism (and atheism), and discuss religion as it relates to philosophy. This includes any philosophical discussions that happen to be about god, gods, or a 'higher power' or the belief of them. This also generally includes philosophical topics about organized or ritualistic mysticism or about organized, common or ritualistic beliefs in the existence of supernatural phenomenon.
User avatar
Whitedragon
Posts: 960
Joined: November 14th, 2012, 12:12 pm

Natural evil VS the innocent - Genetic defect in child

Post by Whitedragon » August 1st, 2020, 5:54 am

I have a friend whose grandchild has a genetic defect, this touches on the theodicy question, although she has a specific inquiry I have been working on. The boy, who is about six, is because of this defect unable to speak. He also had his colon removed at an early age, and it was replaced with a synthetic one, first externally, then internally and now external again. He suffers much pain because of this and her question to me is, if he has no notion of good and evil, why should he suffer it? :?:

I realize that this question opens up debate for scientific answers too, which is why I’m done with this thread, I’ll post a similar topic in the science thread, from a different perspective. I will also later create a space where contributors in the forum can discuss their personal experiences in the philosopher’s lounge.
We are a frozen spirit; our thoughts a cloud of droplets; different oceans and ages brood inside – where spirit sublimates. To some our words, an acid rain, to some it is too pure, to some infectious, to some a cure.

evolution
Posts: 438
Joined: April 19th, 2020, 6:20 am

Re: Natural evil VS the innocent - Genetic defect in child

Post by evolution » August 1st, 2020, 9:58 pm

Whitedragon wrote:
August 1st, 2020, 5:54 am
I have a friend whose grandchild has a genetic defect, this touches on the theodicy question, although she has a specific inquiry I have been working on. The boy, who is about six, is because of this defect unable to speak. He also had his colon removed at an early age, and it was replaced with a synthetic one, first externally, then internally and now external again. He suffers much pain because of this and her question to me is, if he has no notion of good and evil, why should he suffer it? :?:
Why do you mean by, why 'should' he 'suffer' 'it'?

What is the 'it', exactly?
How is he 'suffering', exactly?
What is the 'should' in relation to, exactly?

And, if some one is 'suffering' from the pain of the physical organs, then why they should suffer in this way is because the enduring pain felt from the nerve endings within the body 'just hurts'.

But I will await your clarifying answers before I attempt to answer your specific question.
Whitedragon wrote:
August 1st, 2020, 5:54 am
I realize that this question opens up debate for scientific answers too, which is why I’m done with this thread, I’ll post a similar topic in the science thread, from a different perspective. I will also later create a space where contributors in the forum can discuss their personal experiences in the philosopher’s lounge.

User avatar
Whitedragon
Posts: 960
Joined: November 14th, 2012, 12:12 pm

Re: Natural evil VS the innocent - Genetic defect in child

Post by Whitedragon » August 2nd, 2020, 2:56 am

Hi, I mean, if he has no good or evil notions, why should he suffer the evil that causes pain and suffering.
We are a frozen spirit; our thoughts a cloud of droplets; different oceans and ages brood inside – where spirit sublimates. To some our words, an acid rain, to some it is too pure, to some infectious, to some a cure.

User avatar
Whitedragon
Posts: 960
Joined: November 14th, 2012, 12:12 pm

Re: Natural evil VS the innocent - Genetic defect in child

Post by Whitedragon » August 2nd, 2020, 3:08 am

I also have already explored the other part of your answer about pain receptors, and I although I came to the same conclusion in my private essay, it's a scientific answer and not one that brings consoling to the questioner. I will start a scientific blog later on the question. Thanks
We are a frozen spirit; our thoughts a cloud of droplets; different oceans and ages brood inside – where spirit sublimates. To some our words, an acid rain, to some it is too pure, to some infectious, to some a cure.

User avatar
Papus79
Posts: 858
Joined: February 19th, 2017, 6:59 pm

Re: Natural evil VS the innocent - Genetic defect in child

Post by Papus79 » August 2nd, 2020, 8:28 am

This is an issue that's close to me because I grew up, on one hand, with PDD-NOS (autistic spectrum condition) and on the other - even without that - I go to have outlier personality, outlier interests, and I got to find out that the great game-theorhetical ape god Conformity rules the world with YHVH-like wrath and fury where practical conformity, like making sense, working well with others, abiding by laws, isn't even close to enough - shibboleth social conformity is demanded and any variance, at all, from local norms without an excuse is a problem.

I think for me getting my cosmology or theory of what we're actually in, what's happening, etc., has been really important - because there are a lot of theories and models that will drive you crazy, especially theistic ones, if your life has you backed against a wall or stuck inexorably in a particularly challenging place with only death as a respite.

The good news - consciousness is probably older than this universe, of incalculable value, and that may provide some deep/intuitive anchors for secular humanism to have some kind of weight and heft against nature red in tooth and nail, psychopathic arms races, and all of those beautiful things I world has from Darwinian game theory and natural selection.

The bad news - we're clearly not in a theistic universe, and to some sense the even more discouraging news - we're not in a reductive materialist one either. It seems like we're dealing with a massive generator function, call it a hub for all local consciousness (local could be this universe, many, or all, but from this vantage point it's unknowable), it seems to be generating all of this from the substance of its own mind stuff at least if we're going to look at this from the subjective side, from the objective side - ie. from the outside of that system and whether that system is based in an ultimate 'physical' reality we'll probably never know.

Adrian Nielson recently had a short video lecture on his Waking Cosmos channel called ' Artificial Intelligence and Consciousness' where be poured over the philosophy of Andrés Gómez Emilsson and the details of what it could mean for AI, a mind that's not biologically bounded which could add on to itself and perhaps diverge infinitely, would look like. The output of that sounded frighteningly similar to what people describe in NDE's - ie. contact with a form of consciousness that's both vast and non-human. That doesn't directly suggest that we're somehow running around on an ancestor simulation, considering just how many universes could spring into being with an infinite scope of possibility something like that could happen by all kinds of means, and then - much like the Isaac Asimov memorial panel Neil DeGrasse Tyson posted where the question was asked 'how likely is that we're living in a simulation?' you also have the question 'What are the odds that we're living in a natural or artifically-created Artilect?' - the scope of human experience seems to suggest that it's pretty high.

This is where the story gets a bit dark though - something else is in control and, unlike YHVH, good luck praying to it. One of the colder aspects of this is when a few NDE'ers, particularly thinking of a guy who I believe was in the airforce, had a near-miss with another plain while landing, and had a mystical experience several nights later, while he was in that near collision state and in extreme fight-or-flight, watching everything happen in slow motion, the usual sense he had of the way the world operates folded back somewhat and what he saw then was perfect mathematics and that 'nothing was out of place' and that 'everything is exactly as it's supposed to be'. I spent quite a while really hoping that his experience of that idea was just adrenaline or brain chemical based hallucination, if it is a hallucination it's a persistent one that a lot of people have experienced (wonder what Oliver Sacks would say on this one). I've had my own experience of being out with friends, seeing a very socially chaotic environment, struggling to make sense of it when I went home, something within me gave way and I saw not only perfect memory of the entire night but every angular trajectory saved and when I zoomed out it seemed like all of my observations were stored on something that looked like a mandala.



To get past all of that philosophy and get back to the personal level - ie. a child whose six, can't speak, has an artificial colon, and has to make sense of what to do with their life - at ground level they have their own consciousness, that's only something death can take away or transmute, and while their here the one thing they have to work with as a goal is working with their own mind, their own learning, figuring out what they can get good at, and pursuing it. All other roads, especially victimhood, seem to lead to a bottomless well of misery. Unfortunately there's no complaint box, there's no number to call, and even the supposed 'reset' button of checking out early is doubtful.

Another piece of advice I'd give to anyone whose got a life-long struggle that they're not getting away from - live in your integrity as best you can. It's the only way you can at least have yourself as a friend, your internal/subjective environment as a stable one, and it's your best hope of other people not gas-lighting, using, and abusing you by pulling you into their own machinations.
People aren't fundamentally good or fundamentally bad, we're fundamentally trying to survive. It's the environment and culture which tells us what that's going to be.

User avatar
Whitedragon
Posts: 960
Joined: November 14th, 2012, 12:12 pm

Re: Natural evil VS the innocent - Genetic defect in child

Post by Whitedragon » August 2nd, 2020, 9:08 am

Thank you,
Although, I may have neglected to say, it's not just the fact that he can't speak, it's also his cognitive capabilities, he does not have the ability to fathom the notion of character building. My concern is more about what to say to the family. Since they're Christian, I don't think telling them there's no God is going to help the situation.

The best I have thought of saying so far is that maybe one interacts with God before coming into the world, like a test you don't understand. Perhaps his reward is to be shielded from the concept of good and evil. I also asked the grandma what she would give to be free of thought corruption. This kind of helped her.

I also explained through a scenario of a physical gate the following. If you're outside a house, blocked by a high gate and walls and inside the yard is one of your loved ones in mortal danger, which you can't help in the end, it's easier to accept than an illness and having to deal with natural evil. If you can touch and feel the cause that brings you hurt, like this gate, it's less likely to cause a faith crises. The lesson here is to realise that religious and philosophical explanations are just as real as this gate. Unfortunately it's hard to understand and face the abstract, which is why I speak of something physical, like this gate, claiming the spiritual realities are far darker and tragic, which cause, in this case, natural evil. This also seemed to have an impact on my friend.

However my explanations still have a few holes in them, which she and I both realise. My hope is to have a good discussion here with the contributors for more fresh ideas.
We are a frozen spirit; our thoughts a cloud of droplets; different oceans and ages brood inside – where spirit sublimates. To some our words, an acid rain, to some it is too pure, to some infectious, to some a cure.

User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 3458
Joined: August 23rd, 2016, 3:00 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell and WVO Quine
Location: NYC Man

Re: Natural evil VS the innocent - Genetic defect in child

Post by Terrapin Station » August 4th, 2020, 8:52 am

Whitedragon wrote:
August 2nd, 2020, 2:56 am
Hi, I mean, if he has no good or evil notions, why should he suffer the evil that causes pain and suffering.
I'm still lost after this explanation. The evil that causes pain and suffering?

Also, "good and evil notions" are part of the way that human brains work. Human brains work so that naturally we feel that some things are morally permissible and some things morally impermissible--even if we don't call it that (when we're toddlers, for example--their brains are still working that way, they just don't use these terms).

User avatar
Sculptor1
Posts: 2144
Joined: May 16th, 2019, 5:35 am

Re: Natural evil VS the innocent - Genetic defect in child

Post by Sculptor1 » August 4th, 2020, 9:26 am

Whitedragon wrote:
August 1st, 2020, 5:54 am
I have a friend whose grandchild has a genetic defect, this touches on the theodicy question, although she has a specific inquiry I have been working on. The boy, who is about six, is because of this defect unable to speak. He also had his colon removed at an early age, and it was replaced with a synthetic one, first externally, then internally and now external again. He suffers much pain because of this and her question to me is, if he has no notion of good and evil, why should he suffer it? :?:

I realize that this question opens up debate for scientific answers too, which is why I’m done with this thread, I’ll post a similar topic in the science thread, from a different perspective. I will also later create a space where contributors in the forum can discuss their personal experiences in the philosopher’s lounge.
There is no theodicy question. There never was. A single example like this completely invalidates it.
Oh so obviously the child could just as easily not been born, or been born with no defect. Either of these outcomes would be for the best in the best of all possible worlds.

I'm puzzled as to what sort of defect could lead to speachlessness and a defective colon. I presume that it is the lower colon and not the whole thing.
Your story seems at odds with medical practice. The normal procedure for a failed colon is a colostomy. This provides the patient with a bag built onto the side of the abominal wall which collects fasces.
I can only assmume that the child is being used as some sort of guinea pig by introducing an internal system which might appear more normal but would inevitably lead to the parents having more work to do dealing with nappies, since the remival of a colon would mean never having a **** in the normal way. A colostomy can be a temporary measure, where the colon can be hooked up again after the loss of some length, but replacing it with something artificial sounds idiotic. Are you sure you have your facts right?

Is the boy's lack of speech indicative of a mental problem or is it a physical defect with the voice box?

Aside from all that. Evil does not exist, nether does goodness. Things happen we do and do not like, and people do things we do and do not like. We might call them good or evil, but these are not forces of nature, just reflections and judgements.
It will make your life a lot easier once you get that figured out.

User avatar
LuckyR
Moderator
Posts: 4216
Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am

Re: Natural evil VS the innocent - Genetic defect in child

Post by LuckyR » August 5th, 2020, 2:03 am

The first error is searching for "reasons" for things like pain and suffering.
"As usual... it depends."

User avatar
Whitedragon
Posts: 960
Joined: November 14th, 2012, 12:12 pm

Re: Natural evil VS the innocent - Genetic defect in child

Post by Whitedragon » August 5th, 2020, 3:24 am

Terrapin Station wrote:
August 4th, 2020, 8:52 am
Whitedragon wrote:
August 2nd, 2020, 2:56 am
Hi, I mean, if he has no good or evil notions, why should he suffer the evil that causes pain and suffering.
I'm still lost after this explanation. The evil that causes pain and suffering?

Also, "good and evil notions" are part of the way that human brains work. Human brains work so that naturally we feel that some things are morally permissible and some things morally impermissible--even if we don't call it that (when we're toddlers, for example--their brains are still working that way, they just don't use these terms).
I understand where you're coming from, however dealing with religion the philosopher is often placed within these boundaries when looking for an answer. It is of course easier to find answers when we're not working within such restrictions, however if we do not contend with the nature of the question, the questioner may simply reject it.

I can agree that toddlers are much less biased to these considerations, but those same considerations are what have been directing people to avoid negative behaviour for a long time.
We are a frozen spirit; our thoughts a cloud of droplets; different oceans and ages brood inside – where spirit sublimates. To some our words, an acid rain, to some it is too pure, to some infectious, to some a cure.

User avatar
Whitedragon
Posts: 960
Joined: November 14th, 2012, 12:12 pm

Re: Natural evil VS the innocent - Genetic defect in child

Post by Whitedragon » August 5th, 2020, 3:32 am

Hi, Sculptor 1,

I have my story's facts right, it's a rare genetic defect, I'm seeing my friend this Thursday again and I can obtain the name of the disease if it truly that important.

Hi, LuckyR

I agree, especially with so many restriction to the question. It's not like the Bible doesn't give reasons, it's simply that none of them consoles the questioner ... more restrictions.
We are a frozen spirit; our thoughts a cloud of droplets; different oceans and ages brood inside – where spirit sublimates. To some our words, an acid rain, to some it is too pure, to some infectious, to some a cure.

User avatar
Whitedragon
Posts: 960
Joined: November 14th, 2012, 12:12 pm

Re: Natural evil VS the innocent - Genetic defect in child

Post by Whitedragon » August 5th, 2020, 4:15 am

Hi all,
I've been thinking on the matter and replies thus far. I'm sure it's good to have at least some helpful answer to a question such as this that can speak to a loved one or friend in need. If we were going through a similar situation, I'm sure things like, "it can't be done," or "it shouldn't be asked" will not be what we want to hear.

I'm therefore calling on the compassion and creativity of those that participate. Regardless of our convictions, let's try and work to a helpful answer, like I say, we never know when we might need it one day.

I too have many logical and scientific arguments, but it makes people in such a situation angry or at best sigh.
We are a frozen spirit; our thoughts a cloud of droplets; different oceans and ages brood inside – where spirit sublimates. To some our words, an acid rain, to some it is too pure, to some infectious, to some a cure.

User avatar
h_k_s
Posts: 1154
Joined: November 25th, 2018, 12:09 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Aristotle
Location: Rocky Mountains

Re: Natural evil VS the innocent - Genetic defect in child

Post by h_k_s » Yesterday, 1:44 am

Whitedragon wrote:
August 1st, 2020, 5:54 am
I have a friend whose grandchild has a genetic defect, this touches on the theodicy question, although she has a specific inquiry I have been working on. The boy, who is about six, is because of this defect unable to speak. He also had his colon removed at an early age, and it was replaced with a synthetic one, first externally, then internally and now external again. He suffers much pain because of this and her question to me is, if he has no notion of good and evil, why should he suffer it? :?:

I realize that this question opens up debate for scientific answers too, which is why I’m done with this thread, I’ll post a similar topic in the science thread, from a different perspective. I will also later create a space where contributors in the forum can discuss their personal experiences in the philosopher’s lounge.
Children of a lesser god.

Leibniz tried to address this issue by postulating that God did the best job that he could for us with the materials He had available.

Yours then is more of a question of mercy killing, euthanasia.

Would the child be better off dead?

Would the child want to die?

Should you wait until the child is older, say 25, or 30, or 50, before offering it/him/her the choice to die now?

User avatar
Whitedragon
Posts: 960
Joined: November 14th, 2012, 12:12 pm

Re: Natural evil VS the innocent - Genetic defect in child

Post by Whitedragon » Yesterday, 2:18 am

h_k_s wrote:
Yesterday, 1:44 am
Whitedragon wrote:
August 1st, 2020, 5:54 am
I have a friend whose grandchild has a genetic defect, this touches on the theodicy question, although she has a specific inquiry I have been working on. The boy, who is about six, is because of this defect unable to speak. He also had his colon removed at an early age, and it was replaced with a synthetic one, first externally, then internally and now external again. He suffers much pain because of this and her question to me is, if he has no notion of good and evil, why should he suffer it? :?:

I realize that this question opens up debate for scientific answers too, which is why I’m done with this thread, I’ll post a similar topic in the science thread, from a different perspective. I will also later create a space where contributors in the forum can discuss their personal experiences in the philosopher’s lounge.
Children of a lesser god.

Leibniz tried to address this issue by postulating that God did the best job that he could for us with the materials He had available.

Yours then is more of a question of mercy killing, euthanasia.

Would the child be better off dead?

Would the child want to die?

Should you wait until the child is older, say 25, or 30, or 50, before offering it/him/her the choice to die now?
Even the grand mother in her state said she prayed for the child not to outlive the parents, it is a heart wrenching situation.

I don't think God was compromised in materials, but rather our ability to choose. There can be many questions as to why we so often choose wrong, as it doesn't stop in Genesis, but is prevalent throughout the narrative of the Bible. It could make for a good topic discussion, why do we keep doing the wrong thing, instead of placing all the blame on God.
We are a frozen spirit; our thoughts a cloud of droplets; different oceans and ages brood inside – where spirit sublimates. To some our words, an acid rain, to some it is too pure, to some infectious, to some a cure.

User avatar
Papus79
Posts: 858
Joined: February 19th, 2017, 6:59 pm

Re: Natural evil VS the innocent - Genetic defect in child

Post by Papus79 » Yesterday, 7:51 am

One side bar I might add - it's cases like these where not being a reductive materialist about consciousness seems like it's the more terrifying option. For keeping sanity most people wouldn't even want to try imagining what it would be like to be that child, from interior experience, growing up and not just dealing with the experience of it but all of the human psychopathy and predation that he's going to run into. Everyone regardless of their stance does have to read all of the implications loaded into this scenario, and scenarios like it, back onto the attributes of what kind of we're in. Reductive materialism you have a kind of buffer - ie. that this is happening because there's no sentience to do otherwise outside of neurons. The other way to read it - living in a broader system of sentience that would indeed allow for such things. The theistic side is probably the scariest but the panentheist, animist, Daoist, etc. read of it's not too far behind in that regard.
People aren't fundamentally good or fundamentally bad, we're fundamentally trying to survive. It's the environment and culture which tells us what that's going to be.

Post Reply