Jamie_L

emotional:

Dawkin's says the universe is not GOOD or EVIL because these are moral terms. They can only apply to a moral agent: something that is conscious and can form concepts of morality. The universe is not a moral agent. It does not make judgements. It doesn't make decisions or even take actions in the traditional sense. It is just a bunch of matter and energy interacting.

Now, humans can make a judgement about whether or not the universe, as it exists, would be considered EVIL if some moral agency was involved. So, yes, if some consciousness were knowingly taking actions to cause pain and suffering among other moral agents, then it would be EVIL.

Saying the universe is indifferent, isn't even quite right, because a term like "indifference" implies some level of awareness and conscious thought. Using the term to describe the universe is a bit of anthropomorphizing. It's convenient for description and analogy, but the universe is not really indifferent. It is mindless. It is indifferent in the sense that a rock is indifferent. Would you say rocks are good or evil?

Jamie

Stephen T-B

Is the sea evil when a current sweeps you out from the beach and you drown? Is it evil when a wave capsizes your boat? Is it eviil when its waves erode the cliff your house is on and bring it crashing on to the rocks?
Is the sea indifferent to our fate?
I don't think so.
It does what it does, regardless of how that affects us.
It does what it HAS to do - what it can only do - regardless of how that affects us.
That isn't indifference. It's how things are.

Starboy

Radorth, put a sock in it. Emotional has been going round and round. I am not sure it matters what his rational side thinks about reality, he will still obsess about death. There is nothing I or anyone else on this board can do to help emotional. I wish him the best of luck in finding a way out of his compulsion. I am not sure that his posting on this board is helping him in any way and I find it painful to watch because it reminds me of another obsessive/compulsive person that I know.

Starboy

emotional

*sigh* You're right, you're so right. I've been looking for a religion which would be THE ABSOLUTE TRUTH (tm) for so long, and I've never been happy in any religion, and that's why I never managed to stay in a particular religion or worldview at any stage of my life. Looking for stability, I find myself unstable.

"The only way to happiness is to give up much of your control" - I hear shades of Buddhism here - "to attain enlightenment, give up much of your desires".

The Materialist Catechism (a thread on this forum) is a typical illustration of how I choose my religion to be: a fixed set of questions with definite answers. The idea that a question could be left open, without a conclusive answer, sends a chill down me.

Dogmatism and simplistic thinking are killing me.

Radorth

You seem a very sincere and thoughtful person, emotional. (Often as I've been fooled here before, I'm glad I can say that) When you begin to accept life is full of complex ironies and dilemmas, it actually becomes simpler, and a bit funny. Note that comedians never run out of things to satirize, and so often look young for their age and live a long time. (Twain, Hope, Burns, Chase, etc)

Personally I think Jesus is the prime example of giving up the most control of all, and gaining the most control of all by doing so. You become sure of the truth by admitting you have no idea waht it is. You find the real God by admitting you don't know anything about him. OK yes, you need a Zen course to get it, but brick walls work to and you have experience with those already. I think you're gonna be OK and the Force is with us- preventing most of us from fooling ourselves by leading us to as many brick walls as it takes. I'm thankful for every one of mine.

Things could be worse. You could be filthy rich and pay people to tear them down and tell you what a great person you are.

Rad