What would we be (or do) without pain and suffering?

I keep forgetting that man was formed fully developed from dirt and that women were made from one of his ribs.

 

I can't agree. Those wayward types brought up by "wonderful parents", clearly weren't. They are the evidence that something was amiss, regardless of how the outside world saw them (the parents). And those kids-made-good born into "awful" circumstances, must have absorbed something beneficial from parents ... something invisible to the outside world - again.

99% of our kids is from us, 1% from the world. They live exclusively with us for the first years of life ... and that's when all this is laid down. Before the age of reason.

 

Disclosure will be very hard for both the theists and atheists to accept. For the God turned out to be ETs, and homo sapiens did not arise by chance. I wonder which group will suffer the most disapointment?

I want to see the Pope trying to baptize these advanced beings. They might get mad and turn the Pope into a jackass. Or change his appearance where his face is on his arse and his arse on his face.

I would imaging though, that the theists will see the good ETs as angels and the bad ones as the evil fallen angels, who long ago bred with humans and their offspring were the giants of renown. So the theists might be able to deal with the gods a bit better?

 

What definition have I 'invented'?

 

What would we be (or do) without pain and suffering?

As virtually everything in life that teaches us involves negative lessons learned....we would be weak and ignorant.

 

So are we superior to God or does God suffer too? Is God incapable of art or language, or does he have a predator?

 

Any God that willingly created cancer or malaria or yellow fever or the plague or typhoid or any number of diseases is a sociopathic monster. We have pain receptors because they help us survive. Ever meet someone that cannot feel pain? They usually have missing fingers or toes. As for suffering, there is physical suffering that an elk endures while being eaten alive by wolves and then there is emotional suffering like that of death or loss of a loved one. God could have created a world without either, he did mythically in Eden but then it was spoiled was it not? Eden is a metaphor to describe the cruel nature of life and the role we all play in making others suffer. Most laws prohibit us from hurting each other physically. We have yet to progress to making emotional suffering illegal. Socialism tries very hard to rid us of some of this emotional suffering. Capitalism thrives on it, that is at the very core of our entire economic system. I win, you lose.

 

Lets see no illness, birth defects, natural disasters, hate, war, crime, genocide, holy wars, inequality etc. well who needs then many advances of our civilization but who says some wouldn't be there art, various recreations, interests and work one does because they want to do the work and pleasure who cares if we have modern technology or advances in science since most would be useless. And if god was there walking around and angels and no demons no one would deny the being existed.

 

I think for some you are correct. But collectively, its far more complicated than that. Example: emotional severity. The level to which things make us feel good or bad is genetic, according to mainstream psychology, and these levels vary widely from one person to the next. A child with mild to moderate emotional severity is more capable of surviving, in psychological health terms, a neglectful, abusive or chaotic upbringing, whereas a highly emotional child is much more susceptible to permanant psychological damage, especially from intolerant or impatient parents who strictly forbid and punish the emotional outburts that children use to learn to control the effects that emotions have on their actions. Mildly emotional children will commonly develope emotionally and psychologically 'normal' even in these strict circumstances while highly emotional children typically will develope a permanant dissorder such as Porderline Personality Dissorder or Complex Post Traumatic Stress Dissorder (which is notably different from just PTSD).

In short, highly emotional children (roughly a third, with a small majority of that being girls iirc) are far more dependent on their parents for 'healthy' psychological/emotional developement than the other 2/3 of children who will develope psychologically/emotionally 'normal' regardless of their upbringing (excepting for extreme circumstances like prolongued sexual abuse, prolongued isolated captivity, etc).

Parenting is important, but its not as important for some as it is for others.

 

I thought eden was a metaphor for humans embracing their free will and independence... and the suffering and toil that go along with it, ostencibly AGAINST God's wishes I should add...

Theres other more apropriate threads to discuss the moral/ethical merits of socialism vs communism. Ill just say I strongly disagree with your assessment.

 

No hate, war or crime would require God to force us all to be good... is that what you would prefer?

 

Good question. I suspect God suffers similarly to a parent, like when He must scold the child from getting too close to the burner on the stove or when the child doesnt learn until it burns itself. But that is speculation.

Nature is God's art, he spoke to people in The Bible, and if God has something that could be considered a 'predator', its probably us, though that would be with a very loose interpretation of the concept...

 

Im not certain I understand where you're going here. Could you expand that?

 

Realistically, yes, since under your circumstances I wouldn't know anything else save what the world would be like which would be perfect so why not? Its better than all the bad things in the world and would be paradise.

 

But that assumes that either heaven will be awful or people can commit acts of hate, war and crime in heaven. Sounds like heaven would be just as pain and suffering-ridden as the physical world.

 

Where we differ, is in our understanding of the genesis of these 'emotional quotients'. I regard these starting points as themselves, a product of parenting.

I feel (personally) that attempting to diminish the impact of parenting on the entirety (including how we respond to stressors) of the child, is problematic. There is nothing to be gained by the child in doing so, but much to be gained by the parent.

 

Or perhaps only those who are unwilling to cause others suffering may enter heaven.

 

But that would mean that God could have created a world with free will, but without anyone who was willing to cause suffering for others. We could have world with free will and without hate, war or crime. If it could exist in the afterlife, it could have existed in the first place.

 

Both parent and child would be well served by more parents understanding the varying mixes of structure and expression that different children, even in the same families, require for healthy developement. Some children need more structure, others need more expression. The 'I was raised this way and turned out fine' method of parenting is ignoring the dynamic that we are all naturally individuals with different genetic presets that are not necessarily hereditary. Some trial-and-error, patience and tolerance is required if a parent wants to maximize the chances of the child developing in a (psychologically) healthy manner. I dont see this as dimishing the role of the parent at all. It seems to me this only further emphasizes the role of the parent, but changes that role from relying on hereditary similarity and parenting according to some code of tradition, to requiring the parent to learn who their child actually is as an individual and how this individual needs to be nurtured. Parents often try to create copies of themselves in their children, and this is too often damaging to the child.

 

Not necessarily. We have all caused suffering on some level. Perhaps part of our purpose here is to learn to choose to not cause suffering. Perhaps heaven is what we humans build for ourselves after we choose that path.

 

You used the term "evolved creativity"!

Are you denying that termites evolved to create their mounds that are optimized for their survival?

If environmental conditions changed do you deny that termites would evolve some other creative solution for their survival?

You coined the term and now you are disparaging it!

Perhaps you need to rethink what you are trying to convey because this is not working out for you.

 

Art is the result of leisure!

An elephant has been taught how to use a paintbrush and it comes up with art so obviously the talent of art is inherent in other mammals.

Art is nothing more than a form of communication.

 

Everyone is born an atheist!

 

In which case an omnipotent deity would be weak and ignorant since it would be incapable of suffering from any pain that it could not immediately remedy.

 

Well...judging by the documentation, this actually IS the case. It also seems to be rather hypocritical in that it tells us to only do as it says and never as it does.