The reason for human suffering

[Hokomai]

Are justice and evil objective absolutes? Or are they subjective and relative, depending upon the conscious perception of reality, and variable depending on what is perceived? You speak as if the concepts of justice and evil are absolutes. If they are, then where do we look for their definitive definitions?

You have me there. I do indeed thing that justice and evil are socially-determined and non-objective. However, in the same way that a body of law builds up, so too do common opinions on things like justice and evil. Enlightenment values are, I think, aligned with the instincts we evolved to live together more-or-less successfully. I would also argue that the assertion that other attitudes are ‘objective’, because they purport to be so, is wrong. Catholic ideas are not objective, and neither do they derived from ‘natural law’ (because there are no such laws). They result from attempts to resolve complex problems with limited knowledge, and to preserve social orders, That knowledge is not surpassed, and the social orders which gave rise to the Church’s world-view have gone.

 

[fred_conty]

There are many such stories of hardship, suffering, and hopelessness. By that I don’t intend to minimize what anyone may have been thru. But out of these many individual experiences, there are those that are winners, the hopefull, and then those that are lossers, the miserable.

What makes the difference? The hope of Jesus.

Holding to the promises of Jesus makes the difference.

But sometimes those promises are misunderstood or not accepted.

He made a promise to us about this life, the cross.
He made a promise to us about the next life, perfect bliss ever after.
Those who accept the cross receive the bliss.

All the rest is hopeless flimflam.

Just a thought.

 

[Dan_Grelinger]

You have me there. I do indeed thing that justice and evil are socially-determined and non-objective. However, in the same way that a body of law builds up, so too do common opinions on things like justice and evil. Enlightenment values are, I think, aligned with the instincts we evolved to live together more-or-less successfully. I would also argue that the assertion that other attitudes are ‘objective’, because they purport to be so, is wrong. Catholic ideas are not objective, and neither do they derived from ‘natural law’ (because there are no such laws). They result from attempts to resolve complex problems with limited knowledge, and to preserve social orders, That knowledge is not surpassed, and the social orders which gave rise to the Church’s world-view have gone.

Hokomai, you disappoint me. I am beginning to see rationalizations and defensiveness in your posts. However, you did lead off with ‘you have me there.’ I would like to give you the opportunity to do better.

If justice and evil are ‘socially-determined and non-objective’, then how can you use your subjective view of justice and evil to conclude that an objective God does not exist? Surely you must see that subjective things cannot prove what is objective reality. If my subjective view of the definition of justice and evil compel me to conclude that God exists, then what value is either of our conclusions? This has been your only offer of evidence, and when looked at truly objectively, it appears worthless.

The rest of your post seems to be a ‘well the Catholic Church’s position is no better than mine.’ Perhaps, but may we focus on your views, to the extent that you can defend them?

With the utmost respect for your inner desire to be objective in your search for what is true,

Dan

 

[Hokomai]

Hokomai, you disappoint me. I am beginning to see rationalizations and defensiveness in your posts. However, you did lead off with ‘you have me there.’ I would like to give you the opportunity to do better.

If justice and evil are ‘socially-determined and non-objective’, then how can you use your subjective view of justice and evil to conclude that an objective God does not exist? Surely you must see that subjective things cannot prove what is objective reality. If my subjective view of the definition of justice and evil compel me to conclude that God exists, then what value is either of our conclusions? This has been your only offer of evidence, and when looked at truly objectively, it appears worthless.

The rest of your post seems to be a ‘well the Catholic Church’s position is no better than mine.’ Perhaps, but may we focus on your views, to the extent that you can defend them?

With the utmost respect for your inner desire to be objective in your search for what is true,

Dan

Sorry to disappoint. It’s you, Dan, who has the thing about ‘objective’. I prefer to use the broad scientific method. You hypothesize the existence of a God; we look at this against the known facts; if enough facts fit, we may develop a theory. the theory will never be better than the last set of facts it was applied to. I do not have an alternative ‘believed’ reality to contrast with yours. I have only observation and thought. The issue of suffering provides a major factual challenge to the god hypothesis, and also to the theory that he is ‘all-loving’.

 

[Sonny1954]

What a terrible combination of conditions to afflict your son. I hope that he is able to get the complex therapy he needs, makes some progress, and finds happiness as he is able. I am not a believer, and so of course expect nothing to result from prayer by way of divine response, but I can see how some Christian beliefs may help. The idea of each person being important, and deserving of respect is one that will lead to your son getting better care from those who try to help him. and the idea that happiness does not necessary result from success ‘in the eyes of the world’ is also important. We unbelievers don’t have much of a community, either, and I hope yours has been true to their faith and supported you. I wish you every good thing, you and your son, and I am moved and honored that you have shared this personal story with us as a result of my comments.

Thank you, Hokomai for your kind words and sympathy. My beloved boy (well he’s 17, chronologically) has a heart of gold. But his almost complete lack of impulse control can make him loud and even violent at times; holes punched in the walls; home visits by the police, things like that. Things I NEVER thought I’d be involved in. So when I see God, I do have some questions for him. Whereas Christianity really doesn’t have any answers for my son’s personal situation (other than Adam and Eve), Hinduism says that he’s exactly where he’s supposed to be in his cycle of death and re-birth to bring him to his eventual, inevitable salvation, or moksha. Though I’m not a Hindu and don’t really believe in re-incarnation, their general idea that he is where he is supposed to be to work out his eventual, inevitable salvation is comforting. Again, thank you for your kind words.

 

[Dan_Grelinger]

Sorry to disappoint. It’s you, Dan, who has the thing about ‘objective’. I prefer to use the broad scientific method. You hypothesize the existence of a God; we look at this against the known facts; if enough facts fit, we may develop a theory. the theory will never be better than the last set of facts it was applied to. I do not have an alternative ‘believed’ reality to contrast with yours. I have only observation and thought. The issue of suffering provides a major factual challenge to the god hypothesis, and also to the theory that he is ‘all-loving’.

When you say that I have a thing about ‘objective’, what does that mean about you? Do you believe there is nothing objective?

And then, what use is the broad scientific method if there is nothing objective?

If there is nothing objective, then how can there be facts? If nothing is objective, then there are only opinions and beliefs.

And to repeat myself, if your concept of suffering and justice is not objective, but only your subjective opinion and believe, i.e. no basis in fact or reality, then it is useless in determieng what is real. Or so it would seem to a rational objective person?

 

[Dan_Grelinger]

Thank you, Hokomai for your kind words and sympathy. My beloved boy (well he’s 17, chronologically) has a heart of gold. But his almost complete lack of impulse control can make him loud and even violent at times; holes punched in the walls; home visits by the police, things like that. Things I NEVER thought I’d be involved in. So when I see God, I do have some questions for him. Whereas Christianity really doesn’t have any answers for my son’s personal situation (other than Adam and Eve), Hinduism says that he’s exactly where he’s supposed to be in his cycle of death and re-birth to bring him to his eventual, inevitable salvation, or moksha. Though I’m not a Hindu and don’t really believe in re-incarnation, their general idea that he is where he is supposed to be to work out his eventual, inevitable salvation is comforting. Again, thank you for your kind words.

I believe that Christianity would suggest that your son is where he is supposed to be in order to work out ALL of our eventual, hopeful, salvations. And I believe that gives even greater meaning to your son’s suffering.