Sour grapes... said the fox

[Serious]

Looking at those threads dealing with pain, there are invariably a few people who will consider pain and suffering a positive thing. Their argument is: “without pain how could we value our health?” In other words: “it is better to be sick and recover, than to be healthy all the time”, or “it is better to go hungry and have your fill, then never be hungry at all”. Relativism at its finest. They say that they do not appreciate good for its own value, they appreciate it as a contrast to the bad.

Usually they scorn the “utopia” of no pain, no misery, no hunger, no sickness… I wonder how honest - to themselves - these people are? Do they seek pain, just so the cessation of pain would be appreciated more? Do they grab a hammer and smack their own thumb, just because it feels “so good”, when they stop it? I sincerely doubt it.

What they try to do, is rationalize the existence of pain and suffering. Since the utopia seems to be out of reach, they pretend that it would not be good anyhow. And they also assert that having all the human monsters, criminals, murderers, rapists is preferable then getting rid of them. If there would be a medical option to change those criminals to decent fellows, these people would protest, because they think that the criminals’ “free will” is somehow “valuable”.

“Sour grapes”… said the fox. Should have said: “hypocrisy”.

 

[tonyrey]

Looking at those threads dealing with pain, there are invariably a few people who will consider pain and suffering a positive thing. Their argument is: “without pain how could we value our health?” In other words: “it is better to be sick and recover, than to be healthy all the time”, or “it is better to go hungry and have your fill, then never be hungry at all”. Relativism at its finest. They say that they do not appreciate good for its own value, they appreciate it as a contrast to the bad.

Usually they scorn the “utopia” of no pain, no misery, no hunger, no sickness… I wonder how honest - to themselves - these people are? Do they seek pain, just so the cessation of pain would be appreciated more? Do they grab a hammer and smack their own thumb, just because it feels “so good”, when they stop it? I sincerely doubt it.

What they try to do, is rationalize the existence of pain and suffering. Since the utopia seems to be out of reach, they pretend that it would not be good anyhow. And they also assert that having all the human monsters, criminals, murderers, rapists is preferable then getting rid of them. If there would be a medical option to change those criminals to decent fellows, these people would protest, because they think that the criminals’ “free will” is somehow “valuable”.

“Sour grapes”… said the fox. Should have said: “hypocrisy”.

You wouldn’t be alive now if you couldn’t experience pain…

 

[King_Lazy]

Sure, we’d all like to get rid of pain. Nobody is saying you should stop taking your prescription morphine.

But pain is inevitable and it has value. We try and say things that make it easier to accept, and while ultimately it would be preferable if there were no pain, there it is and always will be, though we strive to ease it. Thankfully, it’s not pointless.

Utopia is unattainable. Doesn’t mean we mustn’t try to eliminate the evils in our world. But we can’t set our hopes on ever fully achieving the goal, as such hopes are illusory.

 

[Serious]

Sure, we’d all like to get rid of pain. Nobody is saying you should stop taking your prescription morphine.

But pain is inevitable and it has value. We try and say things that make it easier to accept, and while ultimately it would be preferable if there were no pain, there it is and always will be, though we strive to ease it. Thankfully, it’s not pointless.

Utopia is unattainable. Doesn’t mean we mustn’t try to eliminate the evils in our world. But we can’t set our hopes on ever fully achieving the goal, as such hopes are illusory.

This is not what those people say. They say that there is no light without dark, and if we could eliminate the dark, it would also eliminate the light. This is, of course, absurd. The existence of “good” is not logically dependent on the “bad”. It is true, that we would not appreciate the good as much as we do, if there was no bad - but who cares? If “good” does not stand on its own right, if it is only valid if there is something to compare to… then what “good” is it?

Many years ago I have seen people arguing vigorously that “bad people” should never be cured of their evil behavior, even if it were possible to brainwash them, and eliminate their “bad” part. I could never comprehend that people would defend the “evil behavior” of “evil people”. That simply makes no sense from my point of view.

 

[LJH_80]

This is not what those people say. They say that there is no light without dark, and if we could eliminate the dark, it would also eliminate the light. This is, of course, absurd. The existence of “good” is not logically dependent on the “bad”. It is true, that we would not appreciate the good as much as we do, if there was no bad - but who cares? If “good” does not stand on its own right, if it is only valid if there is something to compare to… then what “good” is it?

Many years ago I have seen people arguing vigorously that “bad people” should never be cured of their evil behavior, even if it were possible to brainwash them, and eliminate their “bad” part. I could never comprehend that people would defend the “evil behavior” of “evil people”. That simply makes no sense from my point of view.

Serious, I’m disagreeing with you on this one.
I have never met a happy person without problems. I’ve never met a person without problems, period. Take somebody starving un sub-Saharan Africa, they have problems and misery, right. Now take the average U.S. citizen, they have things that the African child would love to have, and they still have stuff to gripe about. Even the elite of the super-rich or powerful will all have their own dificulties.
More to the point, people like problems. As much as I loathe Scientology, I am going to steal some of their lingo here. If you give a person too few problems, they will become neurotic and will create problems, either by imagining them or getting themselves into problematic situations.
Where the confusion lies is in what problems make people happy. Having problems forced upon a person usually causes that person unhappiness, essentially because the problem owns them. However problems that a person chooses to undertake, and which they thereby have ownership of, can challenge a person and help them become happy.

I like to work. I feel most alive when I have 3 problems at once, all of which are going to make a difference for people, and I can see the fruits of my labors paying off for the last problems I solved.
If there were no unhappiness, there would be nothing for me to do. There would be no reason for me to even exist.

 

[robwar]

Looking at those threads dealing with pain, there are invariably a few people who will consider pain and suffering a positive thing. Their argument is: “without pain how could we value our health?” In other words: “it is better to be sick and recover, than to be healthy all the time”, or “it is better to go hungry and have your fill, then never be hungry at all”. Relativism at its finest. They say that they do not appreciate good for its own value, they appreciate it as a contrast to the bad.

What they try to do, is rationalize the existence of pain and suffering. Since the utopia seems to be out of reach, they pretend that it would not be good anyhow. And they also assert that having all the human monsters, criminals, murderers, rapists is preferable then getting rid of them. If there would be a medical option to change those criminals to decent fellows, these people would protest, because they think that the criminals’ “free will” is somehow “valuable”.

“Sour grapes”… said the fox. Should have said: “hypocrisy”.

Your examples are very vague and too general. Yes no one like pain and suffering or even try to justify evil behavior. you should have given a quote or example of what you are specifically talking about. Pain and suffering, the reason for and its causes is a very broad topic with many different angles. Some of our best growth in life comes from our struggles and how we over come them with God’s help. There is something called redemptive suffering we go through where we learn maturity and compassion and become more Christ like. That isn’t hitting our thumb with a hammer in order to get pain because we like it and think suffering and pain is better. Joseph from Genesis is a good example to think about.
all the pain and rejection he went through to realize at the end that what was meant for evil God used for good. Our salvation comes from Christ’s suffering and pain. Think about it.

 

[Garyjohn2]

Pain and suffering have value other than being able to appreciate happiness and life. I’ve never heard anyone that said the ONLY value that “bad” has is being able to appreciate “good”…though that is one real take-away from a bad experience. There are many others!

 

[Ben_F]

Sure, we’d all like to get rid of pain. Nobody is saying you should stop taking your prescription morphine.

But pain is inevitable and it has value. We try and say things that make it easier to accept, and while ultimately it would be preferable if there were no pain, there it is and always will be, though we strive to ease it. Thankfully, it’s not pointless.

Utopia is unattainable. Doesn’t mean we mustn’t try to eliminate the evils in our world. But we can’t set our hopes on ever fully achieving the goal, as such hopes are illusory.

Utopia is attainable, with the Grace of God. God bless:thumbsup:

 

[Serious]

Serious, I’m disagreeing with you on this one.

Disagreeement is good, but I doubt that we actually disagree here.

I have never met a happy person without problems. I’ve never met a person without problems, period. Take somebody starving un sub-Saharan Africa, they have problems and misery, right. Now take the average U.S. citizen, they have things that the African child would love to have, and they still have stuff to gripe about. Even the elite of the super-rich or powerful will all have their own dificulties.

Yes, real or imagined difficulties. Not that problems are somehow bad. Just like you described, I love to have and solve inticate problems, (computer programming is major fun). When I was still active and working, I had a ball when I was able to solve a beautiful problem.

If there were no unhappiness, there would be nothing for me to do. There would be no reason for me to even exist.

I doubt this. A creative person can always find something meaningful to do. Reading, or writing, enjoying art, or creating new art, playing or creating new games (never underestimate the power of games!). Or simply, quietly listening to the chirping of the bird during the evening hours.

There is smply no need for diseases, accidents, disasters or human monsters for making life meaningful, or wonderful.

 

[Serious]

Your examples are very vague and too general.

Sorry, misunderstanding. I did not give examples, I was quoting opinions - and those opinions were vague. Please do not shoot the messanger.

There is something called redemptive suffering…

I reject that concept.

all the pain and rejection he went through to realize at the end that what was meant for evil God used for good. Our salvation comes from Christ’s suffering and pain. Think about it.

I would prefer “heaven on Earth” and no “salvation”. And I vigorously reject the idea that “God uses evil for good”. It is a dogma that “one cannot do evil, just so that some good will come out of it”. Using other words: “the end does not justify the means”.

 

[Serious]

Pain and suffering have value other than being able to appreciate happiness and life. I’ve never heard anyone that said the ONLY value that “bad” has is being able to appreciate “good”…though that is one real take-away from a bad experience. There are many others!

Tell me about them.

 

[Serious]

Utopia is attainable, with the Grace of God. God bless

There you go. Now let’s ask God to help.

 

[LJH_80]

I doubt this. A creative person can always find something meaningful to do. Reading, or writing, enjoying art, or creating new art, playing or creating new games (never underestimate the power of games!). Or simply, quietly listening to the chirping of the bird during the evening hours.

There is smply no need for diseases, accidents, disasters or human monsters for making life meaningful, or wonderful.

I don’t underestimate the power of games… but games themselves are self-chosen problems. Whether cooperative or competetive, they are problems with constraints imposed upon them.
Reading, likewise, involves problems. Have you ever read a book where no problems existed for the characters? I have trouble imagining enjoying such a book.

In fact, I could picture Adam and Eve eating the apple simply out of boredom. It never states how long they were in Eden… Listening to the birds sing is enjoyable for a time, but I can only do it for so long; I was not built to be a passive observer long-term. And even bird song is an attempt for the birds to solve the problems of finding mates.

You can argue we needn’t have things as severe as we do, and that’s fine, and you might be right. I’ve never created a universe before, trying to balance free will and purpose with hope and limited suffering. I’m not sure I could do a better job.

Let me ask you this: Let’s assume God visits these forums, reads your thread, slaps his head “Oh ME, he’s right! I’ve been making a Medamn mess of this whole thing!” He then comes to you and says “Serious, I am giving you my special God wand… you are God… make things better.”
What would you change?

 

[Garyjohn2]

Tell me about them.

I’d love to! Ok, let us see if I can drum up some different ways that pain and suffering can be good.
**
“Ying/Yang” **
This is the one you’ve brought up already and disagree with…but I still think it has some value. It’s the “without suffering there is no happiness” type of thing. I don’t agree with this philosophy word for word either, but it does have some merits. For example, some people may struggle with anxiety, and suffer because of it. When they persevere through such an ordeal and overcome it, the peace they feel later in life when they meditate or relax is appreciated much more…because they’ve seen the other extreme. Their suffering has brought an increased appreciation, and a deeper capacity for joy. This is a great example, because I’ve gone through it and can tell you first hand! This perspective alone doesn’t make all suffering “worth it” but it does give suffering some value. Taking this value in combination with the other values to come may show suffering’s true worth.

Compassion
Compassion is something the whole world could use a bit more of. It’s root words, broken down, are (Com: together or with) and (Passion: suffering). From a personal perspective, having suffered through an ordeal puts one in a much better position to empathize and understand the plight of a fellow human being. It also puts one in a better position to help that other person. Think of a rape victim that sets up a center to help other rape victims, or a rags-to-riches entrepreneur that founds a school to help other low income families. Without their suffering, they might not have the drive, know-how, or emotional capacity to truly give their fellow humans what they need the most. This is also true on a smaller scale. Because I suffered bullying when I was a child, I will be in a better place to help my future children, or a nephew, when they are bullied and having a hard time.

Corrective
Sometimes suffering is simply for our own good, whether we realize it and want to admit it or not. We learn through bad experiences as well as good! The simplest example is when a child reaches for a hot pan and gets burned, or a child fights with their sibling and gets punished. Punishment (inducing suffering) can correct bad or foolish behavior! It can also apply to more nuanced and adult habits and behavior. For example, I can be kind of lazy sometimes…even though I keep busy. I’m working full time, taking night classes, have a baby on the way…but I also have a myriad of hobbies that I love. Right now there just aren’t enough time for all of them, and my class work is coming due. I’ve barely started on it. I’m losing sleep thinking about it. I’m stressed and suffering! Once I get through this (and I’m sure I will) I’m going to do my best to break my bad habit of procrastinating. I’m going to try to prioritize my tasks better, and not take on more than I can chew. I’d rather not suffer this stress, but if I didn’t I would continue with my old ways or prioritizing hobbies and fun over work…and that wouldn’t make me a very good parent. Better to suffer and have my behavior corrected before my misguided priorities affect someone else negatively…or causes me more stress down the line.

Justice
This kind of goes with corrective suffering, but is different enough to list separately in my opinion. Justice is a universal concept that is written in all of us. If I break the law, I must pay. Sometimes having to “pay time” like jail time serves to correct the behavior of the offender, or make the street safer by taking them out of society. But making the offender suffer in some way also serves a sense of justice. Think of someone who was physically or sexually assaulted. They’ll want the perpetrator to be found and punished…not necessarily so the perpetrator can correct their behavior, but to make them pay for what they did out of a sense of justice. This makes things “right” in the victims view, and gives peace of mind for themselves and their loved ones. In a way, making offenders suffer (even lightly) give peace of mind to our society, assuring us our values are rightly ordered. Also, making offenders “suffer” jail time can make our society safer.

"What does not kill him, makes him stronger."
Nietzsche is not the best source of knowledge in my book, but this quote of his will resonate with us as long as there are people on earth for it to resonate with. It is a powerful phrase!

 Several, if not all, of the categories I've mentioned could fit under this phrase...but I don't think I'm smart enough to list ALL the conceivable ways that suffering can be beneficial.  However, any type of value in suffering that I have missed I believe can fit under this last section.  

 I believe that it is human nature (and nature's nature) to survive, evolve, improve, develop, adapt, and thrive.  There is a ebb and flow to developments of all types, but becoming stagnant goes against the nature of nature itself.  We humans are unique in nature for several reasons, but we are often considered most human when we adapt, learn, create, and improve our lot or that of our fellow human.  All improvement requires suffering on some level.  The arm that swings the hammer must become fatigued to build a house.  The mind must be frustrated and challenged to obtain higher learning.  Sometimes both the body and mind must wither with age before enough time has passed for a person to secure the deeper meanings of life and fully explore their area of interest.

(continued next post…didn’t think this would be so long!)

 

[Garyjohn2]

(continued)

While I hold true that all improvement requires suffering on some level, but I also believe that all suffering provides improvement on some level, whether its immediately apparent or not. All suffering can lead to lessons learned, a greater capacity for compassion, or a deeper understanding of the preciousness of life…if we allow it to. The idea is to let the suffering mold and strengthen us…but sometimes suffering can be so great it crushes us. However, (and here comes some religious “mumbo jumbo”) the resurrection of Christ and this Easter season gives us hope that even complete soul-crushing life-devastating suffering is not the end…even if its to the point of death. Now there may be a areas where we disagree on what human “improvement” is, or what the ultimate goal of life or the afterlife is.
Still, I think suffering can have many kinds of values, and usually has more than one. I hope that sharing thoughts on what those values might be gives something to think about!

 

[Aeden]

For a lot of people, it isn’t that they see pain as good, they just know that it is part of God’s plan somewhere down the line. I for one say a morning offering every day (though I sometimes forget to do so in the mornings, ) and then, I simply go with the flow, knowing that God will put it to some use further down the line.

 

[ASimon]

Honestly, of all the responses you get to the Problem of Evil - or “Why Bad Things Happen To Good People,” the stock answer that we wouldn’t know or appreciate happiness and ease if life wasn’t occasionally unpleasant, is one of the more compelling answers I hear. In principle, that is.

In practice, it’s actually rather horrifying, and a sad commentary on the God in question. That we wouldn’t fully appreciate living in a relatively affluent, healthy society, if the occasional earthquake didn’t wipe out some poor Haitian city, or a tsunami didn’t wash away a Japanese town and nearly precipitate a nuclear incident, or if a 4-year old girl didn’t wind up with terminal cancer. If God’s point is to remind us just how wonderful life is (when it’s actually wonderful), it seems he’s going way overboard to make that point.

Additionally, as problematic as it seems to be to have a life where nothing bad ever happened, it’s strange that few people see a similar problem with an eternally blissful afterlife.

 

[grannymh]

Looking at those threads dealing with pain, there are invariably a few people who will consider pain and suffering a positive thing. Their argument is: “without pain how could we value our health?” In other words: “it is better to be sick and recover, than to be healthy all the time”, or “it is better to go hungry and have your fill, then never be hungry at all”. Relativism at its finest. They say that they do not appreciate good for its own value, they appreciate it as a contrast to the bad.

Usually they scorn the “utopia” of no pain, no misery, no hunger, no sickness… I wonder how honest - to themselves - these people are? Do they seek pain, just so the cessation of pain would be appreciated more? Do they grab a hammer and smack their own thumb, just because it feels “so good”, when they stop it? I sincerely doubt it.

What they try to do, is rationalize the existence of pain and suffering. Since the utopia seems to be out of reach, they pretend that it would not be good anyhow. And they also assert that having all the human monsters, criminals, murderers, rapists is preferable then getting rid of them. If there would be a medical option to change those criminals to decent fellows, these people would protest, because they think that the criminals’ “free will” is somehow “valuable”.

“Sour grapes”… said the fox. Should have said: “hypocrisy”.

Sour “hypocrisy” … Should have said there is a difference in perspectives between human living on this earth and eternal life with our Creator. One can mix apples and oranges in a fruit bowl; but one cannot substitute creature views for those of the Creator.

 

[Serious]

I don’t underestimate the power of games… but games themselves are self-chosen problems. Whether cooperative or competetive, they are problems with constraints imposed upon them.
Reading, likewise, involves problems. Have you ever read a book where no problems existed for the characters? I have trouble imagining enjoying such a book.

In fact, I could picture Adam and Eve eating the apple simply out of boredom. It never states how long they were in Eden… Listening to the birds sing is enjoyable for a time, but I can only do it for so long; I was not built to be a passive observer long-term. And even bird song is an attempt for the birds to solve the problems of finding mates.

You can argue we needn’t have things as severe as we do, and that’s fine, and you might be right. I’ve never created a universe before, trying to balance free will and purpose with hope and limited suffering. I’m not sure I could do a better job.

Let me ask you this: Let’s assume God visits these forums, reads your thread, slaps his head “Oh ME, he’s right! I’ve been making a Medamn mess of this whole thing!” He then comes to you and says “Serious, I am giving you my special God wand… you are God… make things better.”
What would you change?

Oh, my friend… that is a great challenge. Let me give a short synopsys of my thoughts.

1. If it is true that God is fully self-sufficient and also a purposeful being, then (if I were God) I would not do anything. Obvious - if there is no need to do something, why do anything? Some people say that God wanted to share his “love”. If that is case, then God had an incentive - needed to share his love - therefore he was not totally self-sufficient.
2. If we accept that God had some “urge” to share his love, then he did a poor job at it. The simple solution would be to create eveyone in heaven, where those created ones could have experienced God’s love, up close and directly. No BS of “free will”. The created ones would live in God’s love and caring. Again, the believers say that nothing can be greater than that. They would play the harp and sing hozhanna all day long, until God would have had his fill - which is probably never. (How ridiculously anthropomorphic this whole concept is).
3. If this is not “cool” enough for God, and would “need” something else, then (in his place) I would discard the whole biological solution. Intelligence could be built upon a crystalline infrastructure. No pain or suffering there, if something “breaks”, it can be replaced, or it can grow back. No metabolism needed, the Sun would give enough energy to support all those beings.
4. The next solution is biological, but it would be a Gaia-type system of full symbiosis of all the inhabitants. No parasites, no predators. There could be food for the animals, grown by the plants. Obviously no meat-eaters, only grazers. There would be a “built-in expiration date” for the animal population to prevent the problems of overcrowding (and provide nutrients for the plants). Some of the animals could develop a higher nervous system, and become sentient on their own, but their sentience would be only part of the greater Gaia sentience.
5. Then, the let’s look at the solution we have today. It could be improved upon, very easily. There are some excellent features “out there”, but they are not propagated across the spectrum. Look at the regeneration of the planaria. You can cut it into parts, and each part will regenerate. Other animals have less spectacular, still powerful regeneration power. The lightning bug can turn chemical energy into light with 95% efficiency. No matter where we look, there are solutions which would benefit other species. But, of course there is no such propagation. A designer (if there would be one) certainly would pick and choose the best solutions and incorporate them into his later creations. (I roll on floor laughing when I see those threads about the “design” arguments and the praises for how “intelligent” that creator must be.)
6. Finally, let’s touch upon the “free will”, or more precisely the “freedom of action” we “enjoy”. Our “will” or “wish” or “desire” (whicever we choose to call it, is almost unlimited (only limited by our imagination). Our ability to carry them out, however, is seriously limited. In some respects there is not enough “freedom” to carry out our wishes (our freedom to do good is not enough), in other respects our freedom should be curtailed (our freedom to do “bad” is far too much). There is no such thing as unlimited freedom of action.

But it is useful to look at the problem from the designer’s point of view.

A purposeful and good designer has an idea just what he wants his creation to do, and how should the creation perform that task. A good designer allows no absolutely no freedom to his creation. Every bit performs whatever it was desinged to perform. No unforeseen problem can occur.

A less capable or lazy designer still does not allow full freedom. he allows freedom within the parameters of the desired limits. For example, the designer of an intelligent transportation system would allow for fluctuations - especially if he is not omniscient. He would allow the vehicles to choose their speed, but only within certain limits. Hw would never allow the vehicles to veer off the road.

Finally, the incompetent and lazy designer. He would not “bother” to create the proper limits for his creation. Instead he would issus some commands and hope that the creation will follow those commands. And to add insult to injury, he would not even punish the the deviation from the desired parameters when the creation can actually learn from them… he would only punish them when there is no learning possible from it, when there is no second chance for the creation to improve.

And that is the picture the believers try to present to us, and insist that it is rational.

 

[Serious]

While I hold true that all improvement requires suffering on some level, but I also believe that all suffering provides improvement on some level, whether its immediately apparent or not. All suffering can lead to lessons learned, a greater capacity for compassion, or a deeper understanding of the preciousness of life…if we allow it to. The idea is to let the suffering mold and strengthen us…but sometimes suffering can be so great it crushes us.

Thank you for your answer. I do not disagree at all when you say that the suffering can lead (and you were smart not to say: “will logically lead under all circumstances”) to the betterment of some people. We persevere and learn, we can become more compassionate, more helpful… etc. All these I agree with. However, the question is not if these good and worthy results are there or not. The question is: “were the applied methods optimal?”. Did the methods deliver the desired result with minimum interference?

Let me also quote something that you said, and I agree with that very, very strongly: “This perspective alone doesn’t make all suffering “worth it” but it does give suffering some value.” You put your finger onto the proper spot: “it does not make the suffering “worth” it”. And that is the pivotal point.

One of the other defenses against the “problem of evil” is precisely what you said: “the bad is logically necessary for bringing forth the good…” BUT there is a second part to it: “the bad cannot be excessive”. An example to show what I mean: “someone is bitten by a poisonous snake, and the doctor has two options: 1) give the proper antidote, and 2) perform an amputation. I hope that we can agree that the amputation (while it also saves the person’s life) cannot be justified. Yes, it did the job, but it was excessive.”

However, (and here comes some religious “mumbo jumbo”) the resurrection of Christ and this Easter season gives us hope that even complete soul-crushing life-devastating suffering is not the end…even if its to the point of death. Now there may be a areas where we disagree on what human “improvement” is, or what the ultimate goal of life or the afterlife is.

The problem is two-fold. One is that we cannot know that, and it is only the subject of belief. That is acceptable. I don’t share it, but that is my “problem”. What cannot be accepted is that the suffering is not logically necessary for that good. A great (even the greatest) good cannot retroactively justify the “bad”.