Age wrote: ↑Thu Sep 12, 2019 7:56 am
Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Wed Sep 11, 2019 4:21 am
Age wrote: ↑Tue Sep 10, 2019 4:03 pm
The two questions combined are NOT a contradiction at all. Also, where was a claim about God to be evil? What a thing does is not necessarily what it is.
If a good God can do evil, then it also has evil qualities, i.e. the propensity to do evil acts.
If you say so. Is that an absolute irrefutable True fact, to you?
It is not a fact.
It is via reason, i.e. a God [imperative definition] cannot be real.
To you, what is the imperative definition for the word 'God'?
Are you aware that, to "others", 'It is via reason i.e. a God [imperative definition] cannot NOT be real? That is; God HAS TO be real.
So, whose 'imperative definition' is actually true, right, and correct, 'theirs' or 'yours'?
What is the imperative definition for the word 'Santa' to a child?
To a child, Santa cannot NOT-be-real, because he did deliver gifts to him/her on Christmas eve after flying all the way from the North via a flying reindeer sleigh.
But such a claim of Santa being real [child's reason] cannot be fully justified at all.
It is the same for the imperative definition of God to a theist, i.e. God is the omnipotent absolute perfect creator of the universe and for most will enable salvation and eternal life in heaven/paradise. A belief in God soothed their terrible pains arising from an existential crisis/ Such reasoning induce the theist to insist God is really real.
But like Santa, such a belief cannot be justified philosophically at all.
To me, it would be better if human beings actually clarified what it is that they think or believe that they are suffering from, BEFORE they think or believe that they are actually suffering. For example; I have heard human beings say that they are "suffering" because they do not have as much as "another". Some (a lot) of people can say that they are "suffering", but really all they are doing is 'whinging/complaining'
DNA wise ALL humans are programmed with the primal algorithm of pain or pleasure connected to every aspects of the brain, function and physical self, to facilitate survival.
Anything that is good for the human triggers desire and attachment thus pleasure to reinforce it As such, if the good things desired is not obtained or lost, sufferings [pain] is triggered to ensure the person pursue those that are desired, if achieved pleasure is triggered.
This program is crude without fine tunings, thus desired for things and the associated pleasure can turned around to be detrimental. Example, carbohydrates and fats are good for the body thus trigger desire and the more of it the greater the desire which is good thing when there is scarcity as in the past, but at present if without fine tuning we get a case of obesity and early deaths when caught in the desire cycle.
Some may be 'whinging/complaining' but the pain circuit [accompanied sufferings] is definitely triggered to some degrees which could be a good cause or the wrong reasons.
Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Wed Sep 11, 2019 4:21 amRe the concept of 'suffering' it is not that human beings are important to the scheme of things.
The concept of 'suffering' is critical for survival, i.e. recognizing 'suffering' by humans will enable humans to avoid them, thus prevent potential death if the suffering continue.
You can 'try' and make complex what is essentially very simple and basic, but really there is no need to.
Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Wed Sep 11, 2019 4:21 amIf a person is suffering, how can you expect the person to ignore it?
It all depends on what they are actually "suffering" IS, and from?
Millions upon millions of human beings in this day and age when this is written think and believe that they are suffering, but what the actual Truth IS has to be seen and discussed first.
Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Wed Sep 11, 2019 4:21 amAll humans has evolved with mirror neurons to empathize with others that are suffering, do you want those who empathize to stop doing so and let people suffer?
Yes, explore, research and discuss first.
Note Buddhism made 'suffering' [dukkha] a central focus.
It identify the root causes of sufferings and proposes preventive steps to manage [not eliminate] such sufferings.
As I say, let us LOOK AT what the actual Truth IS first. For example; let us LOOK AT what 'your' imperative definition of what 'God' IS first, then we can move onto LOOKING AT and SEEING if human beings are actually and really "suffering", or if the "suffering" is just a disillusioned perception?
If people are REALLY suffering, then I do not want those who empathize to stop doing so and let people suffer. But I also do not want those who empathize to stop doing so and let some people suffer, ever or at all. But sadly the people who empathize do stop doing so and do let "others" suffer. This is what I would like to SHOW how to stop.
I have discussed the 'imperative definition of God' above.
Re 'sufferings' Buddhism has a thorough system to deal with it effectively.
Buddhism's 4NT-8FP is a Life Problem Solving Technique.
viewtopic.php?f=11&t=25193&p=377268&hil ... sm#p377268
The above teaches one how to fish [how to resolve one's own sufferings] instead of solely relying on others.