The Greatest Good Is Not Heaven

I have been thinking about this most of the day, and I have come to the conclusion that heaven (i.e. eternal felicity in the presence of God) is not the greatest good that is attainable for men.
Lets examine why. This would consist of good and evil. Evil is any event that causes pain and suffering to mankind; this pain and suffering is not limited to purely physical pain and suffering, but also spiritual via breaking eternal laws (i.e. commandments) resulting in sin. Good is any situation that brings about happiness and pleasure; good is the result of any positive situation that respects eternal laws and avoids pain / suffering. Having said that, it is important to note that within the limits of good and evil, there exist levels of both. As Pike, J.L Mackie and others have stated, there exist 1st degree evils–1st degree goods, and 2nd degree evils–2dgree goods. Now, if God is absolutely perfect and immutable (i.e. omnipotent, omniscient, and omni benevolent), then God has reached a level of Good absolutely impossible to imagine. If that is true, then since God is wholly-good he would want us to achieve a good equal to him.
However, heaven is not nearly equal to him. In heaven we are merely (according to mainstream Christianity) angels in his presence. Thus, we are inferior. This seems inconstant with God’s characteristics.
So, what is the greater good?
I propose the following
1. If God is wholly good, then God desires that his children obtain the greatest good.
2. The greatest good must be such that God himself possesses it.
3. God possesses a state of perfection.
4. Therefore, God must desire that men obtain a state of perfection.
Thus, we see that a state of happiness with God cannot be a state of absolute good. I would like to point out that if God were to not allow his creations the ability of obtaining this ’state of perfection,’ then god is not wholly good. This is because by withholding such a good, then god is not wholly good, for he is not allowing men to achieve the best possible good.

By Preventing Evil, God Prevents Free Will

Evil is any condition, moral or natural, which consist of situations of pain and suffering that are experience by agents. This world is obviously filled with instances of evil, and many people view evil as incompatible with the existence of an omni benevolent God. Form that view pessimistic statements and thoughts are formed like: “why doesn’t God just stop evil,” “There is obviously too much evil in the world so God cannot exist,” “If God existed he would at least stop murderers,” or the best of all, “God cannot exist because evil exist.” I think that many of these pessimistic saying have some valid truth to those ignoring the goods that are counterparts to every evil event that occurs. It should be understood, whether you believe in God or not, that evil is the outcome of free actions of men. Lets take the idea of free will and attempt to see why the prevention of evil would cause the freedom of men to also be prevented.
If God is omnipotent, omniscient and wholly good, then all things that God actualizes or creates must have good intentions, purpose, and be of moral value.
If God is to create a world containing free and able beings, then God must have a morally significant reason for creating such beings.
God has created free and able beings
Thus, the existence of free will must be morally significant.
What is this morally significant reason that God has to allow the existence of free and able agents? Perhaps, God has created free agents to bring about good and wholesome events (moral good). Furthermore, perhaps the moral good that agents bring about is of more value than moral good brought about by force (determined acts). If the previous is true, then the free will that we all possess is of great value, but it is important to point out that along with the freedom to choose we also have the ability to commit moral evils. This is demonstrated by the following example:
Agent X is free and able to choose between options Y and Z.
Y brings about the events Y1 and Y2 that cause evil to agents X1 and X2.
Z brings about events that cause moral good to agents X1 and X2.
Agent x decides to commit Y, however as described above x1 and x2 in some future occurrence are indirectly effected by Y. X never intended to cause evil to X1 or X2, but it occurred because of indirect chain of events.
This example demonstrates that every event that is brought into existence by a decision or initiated action by any free agent there is a possibility of that event to cause moral evil or moral good depending upon the indirect and associated causal chains that are brought about.
This example becomes useful for our investigation into why evil is required in order to have free agents.
Lets imagine again agent X in a world that every time X chooses to initiate option Y he is stopped and brought to chose only Z or not chose anything. What would be the outcome on a world scale? Lets imagine that every time an agent attempts to choose an evil situation or a decision that will eventually result in harming a corresponding agent, he is stopped or unable to even think of initiating such a decision. If this were to occur in any world that God has crated then the agent therein would not be truly free because the agent’s choice to will Y or Z would be limited to Z. And by willing Z the possible aftermath such as “greater goods” that are brought about by repairing effects caused by evils, would be non-existent. Thus God would have created a world where all acts are determined, greater goods limited, the understanding of evil lost, and the ability to improve because of the desire to find secondary goods would be eliminated. Thus, God would have actually inhibited growth, and other goods.
Thus, we see that to remain as a truly good God, along with the existence of free agents, god must allow evil to occur to bring about the various morally ameliorating qualities that evils cause.

The Pessimistic View of Evil

I have been preparing to write an in-depth philosophical work dealing with the problem of evil. Therefore, I have been thinking a great deal about evil, God, and life. I have noticed that the traditional view of the problem of evil is quite pessimistic. Hume, Mackie, and other proponents of the problem of evil always fall back on the claim that there is “too much evil,” “there is more evil than the is good,” or “the quantity of evil experienced is greater the overall good.” I feel that all these responses are, in lack if better words, hasty, and unable to provide a reason for why the problem of evil should be accepted as a problem. I came to this conclusion while walking in perhaps one of the poorest locations imaginable here in Bolivia. Around me were a humble people that have been inflicted by all types of evils such as: pain, sickness, loss of life, hate, governmental oppression, discrimination, hunger, envies, and the lack of resources for basic necessities. However, amongst all those malevolent cases, those people are perhaps the most happy, joyful, accepting, humble, willing, charitable, and loving that I have ever seen or met in my entire life. I then began to make an association or form a dichotomy per se. You see, the evil that these beautiful people have experienced has in some form or another contributed to the obvious good / moral qualities that they possess, and from that I realized that a theodicy that claims that evil is necessary to bring about the greater good is objectively true. My experience also seems to be 100% in agreement with Plantinga’s view of free will; that God cannot bring about moral good without bringing about the existence of moral evil, and that if that is true he cannot logically actualize such a world without the antecedents.

I think that by agreeing with the previous stamennts of the said philosophers we would have to be denying the objective evidence of the ameliorating effects of evil on men.

To conclude it seems that an omniscient an all-loving God knows that the existence of evil proves no impediment for those who overcome it.

Why Natural Evils Part 2

Here is an argument that provides a reason why God would possibly allow the existiance of natural evils.
1. Agent (A) exists in a world governed by natural laws (N), which are necessary for the existence of A.
2. N bring about situations of natural evil (NE)
3. A utilizes free will to discover the only possible solution to overcome or prevent NE.
4. By overcoming or preventingNE, agent learns concept Z.
5. Concept Z has morally significant qualities.
6. Thus, it is necessary that NE exists for Z to be obtained by A.

This seems to be the most tight. However, I would love any possible objections…
Thank you
John

Why Natural Evils Are Necessary

My previous post was more or less a conglomerate of thoughts. I have picked out what my mind sees as the best.

1. Natural evil causes event X.
2. Agent utilizes free will to discover a solution to ovecome or prevent X.
3. By solving X, agent learns concept Z
4. Concept Z has morally significant qualities.
5. Thus X is necessary to the obtainment of Z by Agent.

Explication,
1. Natural evil is any situation in which natural laws cause natural phenomena, which bring about situations of pain and suffering on agents. These situations or “causes” range from a common cold to the complete destruction of a city by a hurricane.
2. Agents are any being that is physically created and able to freely choose a particular coarse of action according to his desires. Common events that are considered evil in the life of said “free agents,” are caused by an agent’s interactions with natural laws. These events that are actualized in the life of agents are also overcome by the ability agents have to think logically and freely decide to formulate thought in order to overcome any evil event caused by natural laws.
3. This premise attempts to show a relation between a situation seen as a natural evil, and the solution provided by a free agent as he attempts to diminish the effects of event X.
Solutions created by agents, many times, provide for the development of certain concepts such as: physical sciences, understanding of natural laws, communication, patients, love, and charity –all of which are beneficial to the happiness of men.
4. Many of the solutions fro natural evils that mankind have developed over the span of his existence, has directly influenced his understanding of the world, ethics, and logical thought.
5. Event X then becomes a necessary cause in the acquiring of morally beneficial qualities and knowledge of the world.

The Benefit of Natrural Evil

I recently posted an argument addressing points from the Freewill Defense by: Alvin Plantinga. I disagreed with his argument that natural evil is caused by the free will of non-human / non-physical beings. The principle claim made by Plantinga is that because of Freewill actions, evil exist, and that God cannot actualize a world without ‘freewill.’ I think that Plantinga has a point about the fact that God cannot actualize a world without the existence of evils, for the reason that it would not be logically possible. I assert that Plantinga’s claim can be associated with the existence of Natural Evil, but not in the way in which he stipulates.

I propose that Natural Evil is necessary and valuable in providing agents to use free will, and not only to be free and exercise such, but, more importantly, to also be involved in improving their sole, mind, and understanding. The improvement of agents would consist of obtaining morally ameliorating values (charity, love, understanding, wisdom, mercy, compassion, rational thought, logic, cooperative relationships, and spiritual understanding and growth) via evil and good experiences. These “values,” of which we shall call them, would logically be of great value to any omni benevolent being; thus, because God is such a being, then God must seek that these values be experienced by his creatures.

Natural evils are defined as: any situation that causes an unsatisfied instinctive desire or natural need, or a situation that causes pain and suffering to an agent(s) via natural phenomena. Natural phenomena consist of any natural occurrence that influences the existence of sentient beings. It is important to note that all natural occurrences are brought about due to the existence of natural laws that cause/influence the events of physical worlds. Thus, natural evils are the result of natural laws being enacted in a physical world. Humans are also participants in a physical world, and due to that, humans are subjugated to physical laws and other natural occurrences.

Natural evils and the physical laws behind them bring about situations that cause humans to learn and create ways to overcome or avoid such situations. For example, let us suppose for a moment that there is a group of humans that had just been created by God and placed on a physical world. We know that this world, from what objective knowledge we have, must be physically composed to support such physical creatures. Lets go further to say that the creation of this group of humans is like unto the creation of humans on our world. Thus, they have been placed in a world with randomly occurring natural phenomena. These humans are also free and able to choose and act according to their desires. After some time these humans begin to desire state X ; thus, they proceed to formulate ideas to achieve desired state X. These acts of formulation bring about situations of logical thought and cooperative relationships in order to realize and secure the attainment of X. Now, lets imagine that there were no natural evils that caused a desire to achieve state X. There would be no formulation of ideas in order to achieve state X. Some skeptics would argue that if God were truly omnipotent then he could create a world that is still physical and provides the same learning opportunity without inflicting evil on humans. I would agree that a thought like that seems beneficial, however, it could not be implemented without obliterating the ability to utilize free will; unless God were to create illusions or manipulate the mind into believing that there are natural evils in order to bring about such. However, we know that if God were to create illusions or manipulate our minds into believing that evils exist, we would not truly be free, and God would also be causing deceptions; which would lead one to question the omni benevolence of God.

To better explain my theory, let me revise all that we have previously covered in the following proof.
1. If situations occur that are adverse (cause pain and suffering) to the happiness of free agents, then free agents will logically find, or attempt to find, a solution to the situation. (Premise)
2. A physical world that is governed by natural laws provides situations that are adverse to the happiness of free agents –i.e. natural evil. (Premise)
3. By overcoming natural adverse situations (Natural evil) men learn and grow.
4. Thus, natural evil provides opportunities for agents to learn and growth (experience, knowledge, spiritual growth etc…) 1-4

Consider the simplified version:
1. Natural evil causes event X
2. Agent utilizes free will to learn and discover a solution to X
3. By solving X agent learns concept Z
4. Thus X is necessary to the obtainment of Z by Agent.

The previous argument demonstrates that when a natural event produces evil or some form of adverse situation, an agent has the opportunity to utilize his free will to overcome such a situation. The fact that the agent is free is of great importance. If the agent were not truly free we would run into the problem of if the agent could choose to learn and overcome any evil event. It seems that the very existence of true free will is dependant upon the occurrences of natural events that seem to provided added situations for the exercise of free will. The important result of using free will in a natural world is that agents are able to learn. Most of this learning is the result of experience with a certain stimuli, but many would say that experience dose not provide us with the ability to learn rationalistic things such as: numbers, logic, etc… That is true we don’t physically experience numbers, however, such thought is caused and obtained by our interaction with the natural world. Thing such as distances have been measured to improve human life, navigation techniques using geometry to guide the ship, time measurements, weights, speeds, and other equations that have improved the life of agents and are at many times because of our need to overcome a situation produced by natural phenomena.

This idea could be expounded upon in the form of a theodicy.

If God is truly omni benevolent then God desires the progress of his creations. God knows that agents that are free and act for themselves are of greater value than agents that do not. Thus, God has established a world, which maximizes the possibilities of progress and growth for his creations. These possibilities provide opportunities of growth that are caused by situations of suffering, for it is necessary that humans improve by: gaining wisdom, knowledge, exhibit virtue, love, have relationships, faith, courage, and charity. By gaining such qualities, humans are able to fulfill the purpose for which God has created them. Once they have done so, they are prepared to exist in a world (heaven) that God has created that requires such qualities. Many would attempt to rebuttal by saying that God, since he is all-powerful, must be able to create creatures that have such qualities, and that could exist with him without ever suffering. This would eliminate the ability for agents to have an understanding of good. If God were to create a world in which agents lived that was free from all vice, pain and suffering then God could not have actualized the possibility for those agents to understand virtue, joy, and happiness. Especially if we are to conclude that the existence of good is only due the existence of evil. To understand both spiritually and mentally the immoral and diabolical we must understand the moral and angelic. God could not logically teach us good unless the antecedent existed. Furthermore, God cannot actualize a world that could teach agents good without evil.

Thus, in conclusion, we find that the existence of natural evil is necessary for the growth and improvement of men.

-John