One of Liberian’s remarks started an interesting process in my mind. I was only talking about the fact that disallowing wars, murders and rapes would significantly decrease the amount of pain and suffering in the world. (Neither he nor I think that somehow preventing such atrocities would diminish our free will. So please don’t bring this up.)
He said, that there would be other causes for pain and suffering. I wonder if this is really correct. Let’s try to put together a “perfect” world, where the “free will” of humans is intact, but some natural laws would prevent such acts as murders, rapes and generally violent acts. What else can be problematic, which cannot be solved by omnipotence?
First, the “perfect” world could not contain carnivores. If only plants and herbivores would exist, there would be a lot less pain and suffering. Plants do not feel pain when herbivores eat them. Having carnivores immediately introduces pain and suffering. That is no big deal, there are vegetarian humans, and they function just fine. So carnivores are “out”.
The next problem is the microbes which are responsible for diseases. Most microbes are not harmful to ther hosts, they are very beneficial. We could not survive without the symbiotic relationship with millions of microbes in out digestive system. Actually, only a very small percentage (about 2%) of microbes is harmful, and essentially they are the unsuccessful ones - especially if they kill their host. A mutually beneficial relationship is better than a parasitic one. Therefore harmful microbes are also “out”.
What else can be problematic? Weather? No big deal: a uniformly comfortable weather is a piece of cake. Availability of food? No problem for an omnipotent being. Overcrowding and its result: scarcity of food can be easily remedied, by assuring that only a proper amount of births can occur. Most of the worlds problems occur due to scarcity of something, food and other resources.
There is one stumbling block, which is the result of individuality: different desires. As long as different individuals exist with individual desires, there will be conflicts, if no other time then during the selection of a mate. Imagine the Garden of Eden with two males and one female, or one male and two females. Assuming monogamy, it is unavoidable that someone will be “left out”, his or her biological needs will be left unfulfilled. But even with lack of monogamy, someone may be “undesirable” to a prospective partner, and thus unfulfilled desires may happen - which may not result in actual “pain”, but definitely in “discomfort”.
So my final conclusion: even without a desire to kill (although even herbivores sometimes engage in in lethal fights when selecting mates) and abundance of natural resources, as long as there is individuality, there will be conflicts and thus some kind of “suffering”. Therefore a “perfect” world, without any pain and/or suffering cannot exist as long as there are individuals with possibly conflicting desires.
Isn’t that interesting?
(Edited to add: By the way: mate selection is just an example; there could be other conflicts of interest)
Still, thank you for your (name removed by moderator)ut.
