Theodicy (Introduction)

by David Turell , Wednesday, November 04, 2020, 18:32 (1481 days ago) @ dhw

DAVID: Still no answer to the issue that similar logical thinking does not tell us His reasons for His choices of action.

dhw: Nobody knows if he exists, let alone his purpose or reasons, his way of thinking, and whether he designed every life form or allowed evolution free rein. That is why we have different theories. And it remains absurd to dismiss a theory just because it has him thinking like us even though you believe he may think like us.

Same subterfuge. His thinking like us must be logical, but it does not tell us His reasoning to reach His purposes. I'm arguing category of logical thought is all we can conclude about God's thinking. You describe a God with desires like ours, and I view that as illogical, since He is a personage like no other person. You describe His desires, I look for His purposes.

DAVID: your objection is to God, the designer.

dhw: My objection is to your belief that your God directly designed every life form and every food supply in the history of the planet as part of his goal to directly design H. sapiens and his food supply.

Same old saw. I believe the complexities of living biochemistry demands design, the same design that keeps you agnostic.

DAVID: We really don't know if He is interested in us. Evidence shows He tried to protect us from mistakes and bad bugs.

dhw: We don’t “KNOW” anything! We only theorize! History does not show any such thing. History shows bad bugs. It also shows that organisms have developed defences against some of them and not against others.

I am discussing my theory about how God works

dhw: Yet again: I also see him as highly purposeful and proceeding to produce what he wants to produce. We needn’t go over the illogicalities of your theory, as dealt with under “error corrections”, and experimenting is one theory to explain all the non-human forms which you are unable to explain, while looking for something that will interest him is a purpose that fully explains the whole of evolution and theodicy.

DAVID: Totally humanizing. God may produce us and not show interest. We are his goal, not finding an interesting show.

dhw: How do you know? Humans would be the most interesting part of the "show"! Why do you think the question of purpose ends with the production of humans? Didn't your purposeful God have a purpose in producing humans?

But for His sole interest is obviously humanizing. It appears He meant we should arrive with our big brains and dominate the Earth learning how to handle the job. That is all history tells us.

dhw: How well the body works has nothing to do with the problem of theodicy! This concerns the origin of evil.

DAVID: Evil, as we define it, is here. God allowed it, perhaps for reasons we do not yet understand.[/b]

dhw: That is the problem we are supposed to be dealing with on this thread, which you started. I have offered you two “reasons”, each of which fits in logically with the history of life as we know it. All you have done so far is tell us how good and clever your God is, because the body generally works well.

What God did well or bad must be part of the discussion. Theodicy is a human invention which notes what problems we are faced with, bad bugs, evil, biological mistakes, etc., and wonder why God allowed them. It implies God should be be beneficent. That can only be our hope, because He is not talking. What He did do was create us and we can enjoy living. But there is another point you ignore: God allowed it, perhaps for reasons we do not yet understand.[/i]. It is like the "bad appendix" which shouldn't be part of our body. That level of human judgement stinks! Our judgement at this level is questionable. My obvious point is our human judgement of God, based on His possible benevolence may be quite skewed.

dhw: The only relevant remark here is to the issue of God’s benevolence. That is the subject we are supposed to be discussing. So back we go: why can’t my interest theory be true, and if you can’t even begin to explain the evil your God appears to have deliberately or accidentally created, why did you raise the subject in the first place?

Because the issue needs to be dealt with. As for 'interest' that is a human desire, and God is not human, and His desires never should be analyzed from a human point of view.