How many puppy births undoes a puppy murder?Your example is not comparable as the black marble does not have an inverse relationship to the white marbles. — Down The Rabbit Hole
Still doesn't work for me. If a single puppy is burned in a house fire, telling me you have an infinite amount of water doesn't make up for it. The amount of water you have is irrelevant; your water does no good unless it puts out the fire before the puppy is harmed.The finite evil (fire) in the world will always be put out by the eternal good (water) in the afterlife. — Down The Rabbit Hole
what do you consider infinite good ? — Hello Human
If there are people in Hell for an eternity wouldn’t that be infinite evil ? — Hello Human
What about the infinite evil of putting people in hell? — khaled
And besides, if God was omnibenevolent, there wouldn’t be any negative numbers at all. — khaled
I take it you agree with the principle that good can more than make up for the bad — Down The Rabbit Hole
How many puppy births undoes a puppy murder? — InPitzotl
I'm not sure this is sinking in, so let's spell this out for you. You are presuming to address The Problem of Evil; that phrase, "The Problem of Evil", appears in the topic of this thread. My charge against your presumed answer to The Problem of Evil is that it is an irrelevancy with respect to The Problem of Evil.Again, not comparable, as I am talking about individuals experiencing good that outweighs their bad, and not individuals experiencing good that outweighs other's bad. — Down The Rabbit Hole
The answer doesn't matter. To demonstrate its irrelevance, I'll happily grant it's made up for. In fact, I'll lower the bar tremendously more... I'll grant for the sake of argument that all you need is another puppy to be born, and you made up for it. This grants us a simple numbering scheme summation very similar to your OP; e.g., you're doing this:If that puppy that burned in a house received an eternity of bliss would this make up for it? — Down The Rabbit Hole
...and I'm granting this:-10 + infinite good = infinite good — Down The Rabbit Hole
Again, you're asking the wrong question. "If your answer is no" demonstrates a misunderstanding of the problem; e.g., I'm granting it is indeed made up for, and you still have the problem. But, yes, it's a problem because "making up" for the negative term doesn't erase it.If your answer is no, is this because the suffering it experienced burning it the house would still have happened, it cannot be erased? — Down The Rabbit Hole
Good points, but makes a stronger case for AN arguments — schopenhauer1
you are operating on a finite amount of evil. Why?
Also, why an infinite amount of good?
Lastly, why is evil a problem? Why not the problem with good?
There is no dark without light, nor light without dark. The contrast is what creates the assignment of value. — Book273
It is a common argument that an all-loving all-powerful god is not compatible with the evils we find in the world e.g. people ravaged by disease, people beaten and tortured. — Down The Rabbit Hole
good in the afterlife to any finite evil. — Down The Rabbit Hole
Yes.So you're saying that (1) even though the evil would be made up for with the infinite good of the afterlife, the evil still existed (2) which is incompatible with an all-powerful all-loving god? — Down The Rabbit Hole
Who says 2 follows from 1?I don't think 2 follows from 1. — Down The Rabbit Hole
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? — Epicurus
The incompatibility is based on the notion that an omnibenevolent being would not allow the harm — InPitzotl
This sounds like excusing away the problem of evil, not dealing with it.I think it's perfectly benevolent to allow harm that for all practical purposes will not have existed. — Down The Rabbit Hole
I don't quite see the difference in saying the evil will not have existed "for all practical purposes" and conceding that the being is merely "for all practical purposes" omnibenevolent (aka, isn't omnibenevolent). — InPitzotl
You accept that good can make up for the bad? — Down The Rabbit Hole
Yes but what bothers me is why this particular arrangement?
I understand your point: finite evil but infinite good. :sweat:
Why not, No evil but finite good? :grin: — TheMadFool
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.