Would God assign you to do evil? Do you think God has prepared thorns for you?Why not? — Heister Eggcart
If he orders you to do evil, would he be God? Would God be God if he were evil? Isn't Goodness part of what makes God God?I don't know, do you know the mind of God? — Heister Eggcart
Because God is deserving of worshipping. God is deserving that you angle your whole life towards Him. If He were evil, instead of good, would he be as deserving? What makes God deserving of worship? Is it his might and power? Or is it his love and goodness?Why can't God be evil? Who defines God? — Heister Eggcart
Because God is deserving of worshipping. God is deserving that you angle your whole life towards Him. If He were evil, instead of good, would he be as deserving? What makes God deserving of worship? Is it his might and power? Or is it his love and goodness? — Agustino
If this isn't God, would God be worth worshipping?Who says all this is God? — Heister Eggcart
If this isn't God, would God be worth worshipping? — Agustino
God cannot be evil by definition. That's simply part of what we mean by God. If God were evil, then that would be no different than there being no God at all. Literarily it would be indistinguishable from the scenario where there is no God, but there is an all-powerful and cruel evil demon as in Descartes' dreams. Power itself isn't sufficient to count as what we mean by God.Why worship at all? And I still am not sure how you've come to know precisely what God is and is not. — Heister Eggcart
God cannot be evil by definition. — Agustino
I'm saying that I simply wouldn't consider that whatever to be God if He is not Good. If God, whatever God is appeared in front of me, and God wasn't good, then I wouldn't consider Him God.Ah, so you define God, not God, whatever God is. — Heister Eggcart
Because I am drawn to Goodness. Goodness is the end in-itself, that for which we do all things. Reason is directed towards goodness - we do things because we think them to be good. Even the criminal does things because he thinks them to be good. He's not a criminal in-so-far as he does things which he thinks good (he's actually a saint in-so-far as he does that), he's a criminal only in-so-far as he's mistaken about what actually is good - it's a mistake of judgement, not one of reason in other words. Because reason functions in this manner all by itself, we only have being in-so-far as we seek goodness; and we lack being in-so-far as we're mistaken in our judgements. But it's important to note that we can't ever be fully mistaken so long as we're still rational. So long as we're rational, we'll pursue the good - whatever we identify the good to be. So in-so-far as we do that, we always have some being. It's all about clarifying judgement, and therefore realising what the good most fully is. If someone thinks the good is killing people, then he's making a mistake in judgement, and he will reap the rewards of what he has seeded - suffering and pain - failing to find his fulfilment.So God can be nothing else but the Good? Why call Good God, then? — Heister Eggcart
Because I am drawn to Goodness. — Agustino
Because I am drawn to Goodness. — Agustino
Goodness is the end in-itself, that for which we do all things. — Agustino
Reason is directed towards goodness - we do things because we think them to be good. — Agustino
Even the criminal does things because he thinks them to be good. He's not a criminal in-so-far as he does things which he thinks good (he's actually a saint in-so-far as he does that), he's a criminal only in-so-far as he's mistaken about what actually is good - it's a mistake of judgement, not one of reason in other words. — Agustino
Because reason functions in this manner all by itself, we only have being in-so-far as we seek goodness; and we lack being in-so-far as we're mistaken in our judgements. — Agustino
But it's important to note that we can't ever be fully mistaken so long as we're still rational. — Agustino
So long as we're rational, we'll pursue the good - whatever we identify the good to be. — Agustino
If someone thinks the good is killing people, then he's making a mistake in judgement, and he will reap the rewards of what he has seeded - suffering and pain. — Agustino
Because God is Good — Agustino
God has Being.
I'm not going to let you continue to get away with that. — Baden
Yeah too bad that my argument wasn't even about that. It was about the direction of rationality itself, which is always aimed at the good. Even if goodness isn't using the word fuck a lot, that has nothing to do with the argument I was actually making there. I am directed towards goodness even when I do bad, because I do the said action thinking it is good. It's a mistake in judgement that makes the difference, as I said.Yes, because goodness is telling people they worship at the altar of pussy and using the word "fuck" a lot. No one is falling for your bullshit, Agustino. — Baden
How about you or BC or Hanover actually even start addressing any of my arguments?All you've done in this discussion is distract from a potentially sensible debate with Question and I'm not going to let you continue to get away with that. — Baden
Yes, because goodness is telling people they worship at the altar of pussy and using the word "fuck" a lot. No one is falling for your bullshit, Agustino. All you've done in this discussion is distract from a potentially sensible debate with Question and I'm not going to let you continue to get away with that. — Baden
Suppose you're terribly wrong here and that the need for sex and the satisfaction of that need is a more mature response than a person who has successfully repressed that need. Suppose your premise is utter nonsense, that elimination of or simply lacking sexual urge is unrelated entirely to virtue, morality, maturity or any superior power? That does seem to be your underlying unsupportable premise.
It strikes me that those who go without are either (1) misled religiously, (2) asexually constructed, or (3) socially incapable. Advocating chastity therefore arises because you either (1) wish to convert others to your religion, (2) are incapable of understanding sexuality due to your own asexuality, or (3) are trying to justify your own social limitations. — Hanover
Please understand that I have nothing against people who indulge in pleasures and such matters. However, I hold people who can master their desires and wants in higher regard to those who do not... — Question
neuroticism or other psychobabble — Question
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.