From: johnny moral (johnnymoral@hotmail.com)
Date: Tue Aug 10 2004 - 00:08:56 BST
Hi dmb and Mark,
"This is why the POE is the knock-out punch for theists who insist that
their god is all-knowing, all-powerful, and all-good."
But it would be worse for God to suspend the law of gravity just because
there are some people in the way of the rock. It is a very high quality
underlying pattern that gravity is never suspended. It is a better value
than people being spared because God won't let anyone die. That sort of
world would have no value at all, imo. Far better to have a world where
things make sense and expectations can be made. Value comes from
expectations being fulfilled, and the highest values come from the strongest
expectations being fulfilled, including being killed when hit by a rock. It
is good when that happens. That's why some people say "Thank God for 9-11"
- which I won't say because it understandably offends people who miss their
very real soulmates and friends who were killed that day. But theologically
speaking, I'd rather have that happen than have God suspend the laws of
Reason and Nature.
Johnny
>From: "Mark Steven Heyman" <markheyman@infoproconsulting.com>
>Reply-To: moq_discuss@moq.org
>To: moq_discuss@moq.org
>Subject: Re: MD MOQ and The Problem Of Evil
>Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 14:56:40 -0700
>
>Hi Mark and David-M, and all
>
>On 7 Aug 2004 at 17:05, David Morey wrote:
>
>The key thing we need to get it here is the relationship
>of DQ to SQ and how SQ is independent of DQ
>much if the time. The rock rolls down the hill,
>DQ has withdrawn and does not intervene, this is
>the value/choice DQ has taken for there to be any SQ
>whatsoever. Think: how does SQ emerge from DQ?
>SQ is the same again, repetition, DQ has left the building!
>
>msh says:
>David, I'm not saying you're wrong here, as regards the MOQ. But
>notice how what you've written above is an EXACT parallel to what is
>said by SOM religionists when they try to answer the POE. God gets
>the ball rolling, then withdraws, leaving man and free will to commit
>or refrain from evil. God does not intervene, because he wants man
>to make choices and suffer (or enjoy) the consequences.
>
>But this response to the POE is insufficient. It accounts only for
>the suffering caused by man, not for the misery caused by the falling
>boulder. God knows the boulder will cause innocent suffering, but he
>refuses to stop it; therefore, he is not benevolent. If he's
>benevolent, but can't stop it, or doesn't know it will cause innocent
>suffering, then he is either not omnipotent or not omniscient. This
>is why the POE is the knock-out punch for theists who insist that
>their god is all-knowing, all-powerful, and all-good.
>
>Now, the MOQ may provide some wiggle room, and this is what interests
>me. But there does seem to be this rather large inconsistency: If
>everything derives from Quality, then immorality (suffering due to
>accident or natural calamity, evil) derives from Quality. If
>immorality is separate from Quality, then reality consists of more
>than Quality.
>
>This is why I find the idea of the dark side of Tao, as pointed out
>by Mark Maxwell, to be kind of intriguing.
>
>Anyway, I dunno.
>
>Any and all help here will be appreciated.
>
>Thanks,
>Mark Steven Heyman (msh)
>
>"Thought is only a flash between two long nights, but this flash is
>everything." -- Henri Poincare'
>
>
>EARLIER:
> > Hi Mark M, and all.
> >
> > On 7 Aug 2004 at 8:11, Valuemetaphysics@aol.com wrote:
> > The problem of evil dissolves in the MOQ because evil becomes a
> > lower evolutionary pattern dominating a higher evolutionary
>pattern.
> > We may even avoid the term evil and say that there is an absence of
> > the Good?
> >
> > msh says:
> > I agree that, in the MOQ, the POE isn't a problem, since evil, as
> > commonly understood, doesn't exist. In fact, this is one of the
> > reasons I am attracted to the MOQ.
> >
> > But, notice, the word "evil" doesn't appear in my formulation of
>the
> > problem. "Suffering" takes its place. So, how about if instead of
> > "suffering" we use the phrase "immoral activity." When a boulder
> > breaks away from a hillside and crushes a child playing in the yard
> > below, we have an example of a lower pattern destroying a higher
> > pattern, which means an immoral action, according to the MOQ.
> >
> > So, now, the argument goes something like this:
> >
> > (P1) DQ is reality
> > (P2) DQ is maximum morality
> > (P3) Everything derives from DQ
> > (P4) Immoral actions occur
> >
> > It seems that we have to deny at least one of these premises. No?
> > If so, which?
> >
> >
> > Mark M:
> > However!
> > Apparently, Japanese zero pilots may be said to have been Tao dive
> > bombers. This may sound ridiculous - a dark side to the Tao! But
>the
> > Tao has no evolutionary aspect. Therefore, it is possible to
>observe
> > the Way at a lower evolutionary level - for the zero dive bomber,
> > this is Human conflict driven by biological and social patterns -
> > and to observe the Way at high evolutionary levels.
> >
> > msh says:
> > This is interesting. Do you believe, as Phaedrus in ZMM discovers,
> > that Quality and the Tao are one and the same? I think I do. But
> > does my version of the POE, above, suggest that there is an immoral
> > side to Quality/Tao? What you call the dark side?
> >
> > Thanks, Mark, for your thoughts.
> >
> > As usual, any and all comments will be appreciated.
> >
> > Best,
> > Mark Steven Heyman (msh)
>
>
>
>MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
>Mail Archives:
>Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
>Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
>MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
>
>To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
>http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
>
_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE!
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Aug 10 2004 - 00:10:27 BST