Is God Evil? Can we overthrow him?

[Beorn]

It is wrong from a factual perspective - but maybe "incorrect" is a better word.

Is it wrong to be incorrect?

 

[En Gallop]

If "it" feels nothing then it's experience of creation will not be joyous. Surely the Force has an ultimate purpose to realize, even if it uses evil means to achieve those ends. A life with no joy and no purpose to me is no life at all.



This isn't based on political power structures; this is a question of which force of will has the power to control its own fate.



Yes, he could also also be called an it (notive how I used the term "it" earlier).

Why would its experience of creation have to be "joyous"? Is that a necessity?

If the universe has a purpose, it's probably to create lots and lots of dust for some reason lol.

I don't think a god can be "alive". To be alive means to "exist", and a creator god can hardly exist, can it?

This isn't based on political power structures; this is a question of which force of will has the power to control its own fate.

I don't really understand what this even means haha.




BTW has anyone read the His Dark Materials books? They're one of my favourite series, and are basically about overthrowing God.

 

[En Gallop]

Is it wrong to be incorrect?

Well I don't see any advantage to it.

 

[Beorn]

Well I don't see any advantage to it.

So it's right to have an advantage?

 

[greenfairy]

Humans created God, and s/he is both good and evil; and so since we created It we can destroy It.

And this trollish quote makes me lol:
God was my copilot but we crashed in the mountains and I had to eat him.

 

[RaptorWizard]

Why would its experience of creation have to be "joyous"? Is that a necessity?

Because otherwise we would be lifeless robots.

If the universe has a purpose, it's probably to create lots and lots of dust for some reason lol.

That's the universe we observe, but there could be more out there, maybe above us somewhere, or beyond us.

I don't think a god can be "alive". To be alive means to "exist", and a creator god can hardly exist, can it?

The mind is alive if it experiences something I think. I think, therefore I am.

This isn't based on political power structures; this is a question of which force of will has the power to control its own fate.

I don't really understand what this even means haha.

Do you have free will?

 

[En Gallop]

So it's right to have an advantage?

Either
A. You are not intelligent enough to distinguish between using Right/Wrong differently in ethical contexts, to how you use it in mathematics (for eg).

Or
B. You are trolling me for your own strange pleasure.

 

[En Gallop]

Because otherwise we would be lifeless robots.



That's the universe we observe, but there could be more out there, maybe above us somewhere, or beyond us.



The mind is alive if it experiences something I think. I think, therefore I am.

This isn't based on political power structures; this is a question of which force of will has the power to control its own fate.



Do you have free will?

Why would we be lifeless robots, just because God is (actually it wouldn't be, but for the sake of argument... haha)?

Yes, there could be even more dust than we know of.

I think we have a very limited amount of free will, but even that isn't really free will.


The mind is alive if it experiences something I think

I'm not sure we can be absolutely certain about that lol.

 

[gromit]

What does it even mean to overthrow God?

 

[Beorn]

Either
A. You are not intelligent enough to distinguish between using Right/Wrong differently in ethical contexts, to how you use it in mathematics (for eg).

Or
B. You are trolling me for your own strange pleasure.

Why should I or anyone care if either of those are the case?

 

[En Gallop]

Why should I or anyone care if either of those are the case?

I take it it's the second one then.

You really should develop the ability to think rationally. It would stop you saying stupid things that make no sense.

 

[Beorn]

I take it it's the second one then.

You really should develop the ability to think rationally. It would stop you saying stupid things that make no sense.

On what grounds do you tell me what I should and shouldn't do?
I know it can't be on the grounds that what I'm doing is wrong.

 

[WALMART]

I've tried thinking of something worth saying, but largely, God is irrelevant. I steamrolled his wickedness around eighteenth month of existence.

 

[Infinite Bubble]

I also think God should love everybody, but that doesn't mean he needs to give them the same rewards.

What kind of rewards are we talking of?

It helps us to see the difference, and the bad can also refine us, so you may have a point there.

There wouldn't even be a difference without bad. Good would simply be "normality".

Personally, I find the whole idea of morality - in the sense of "This is TRULY Right, or TRULY Wrong" - to be totally unfathomable. I just don't understand why most people can't SEE that.

Exactly. Most people can't see it because they only think in terms of 0 or 1. To include decimals is to overly complicate matters.

Morality is basically a list of behaviours a certain society/group has found agreeable/disagreeable over time. Nothing more. If more people would understand that, and not stick to the other interpretation, we might actually be able to make ethics make sense.

I'd say that it is an innate instinct that is shaped around their society or group. Morality creates order in the group, which aids survival. Other animals also have a basic level of morality.

 

[En Gallop]

On what grounds do you tell me what I should and shouldn't do?
I know it can't be on the grounds that what I'm doing is wrong.

On the grounds that what you are doing is stupid. People shouldn't do stupid things and expect to get away with it.

If we're looking at it from an ethical standard, then no, of course it isn't inherently wrong to do stupid things like trolling. BUT most people don't like being bugged by nonsense. I don't do it. So, you shouldn't bug me. That's an ethical argument. But surely the fact it's dumb and achieves nothing should be argument enough for you to stop, making ethics irrelevant?

 

[Nicodemus]

Please enlighten me as to what you see as the distinction.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_cleansing vs. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floor_cleaning

 

[RaptorWizard]

What kind of rewards are we talking of?

That's a good question. I don't know! Maybe the reward could be an immanent event, a good feeling, self-development, or even a better world to come.

There wouldn't even be a difference without bad. Good would simply be "normality".

True, the duality makes for more diversity.

 

[Beorn]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_cleansing vs. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floor_cleaning

You're so coy. The latter is still just a euphemism for what you actually desire.

On the grounds that what you are doing is stupid. People shouldn't do stupid things and expect to get away with it.

If we're looking at it from an ethical standard, then no, of course it isn't inherently wrong to do stupid things like trolling.

Stop right here. The rest of your arguments are pointless. You're not trying to get me to conform to what is right, but rather to your own personal preference. So your arguments that follow are just an effort to coerce me into behaving the way you want. It is purely an exercise of self-promoting power.

 

[prplchknz]

what is that? it's like a cross between an eraser and an ice cream sandwhich

 

[En Gallop]

Stop right here. The rest of your arguments are pointless. You're not trying to get me to conform to what is right, but rather to your own personal preference. So your arguments that follow are just an effort to coerce me into behaving the way you want. It is purely an exercise of self-promoting power.

Okay, do what you want. I've had enough of this site anyway.