Philosophy Discussion Forums | A Humans-Only Club for Open-Minded Discussion & Debate

[Libertarian2100]

Why did this world of innate violence have to be created by a god ? I think in such a world like our own, if there indeed was no god, would yield a better answer to your question. Either way, biological evolution seems like a good place to start in order to answer this question. Maybe things are just the way they are with no ulterior motive ? I guess what I'm getting at is it seems hard to answer your question, unless one accepts a god created everything because postulating god makes adds so much more baggage to the question. It's like appealing to a mystery to solve a mystery.

[Fdesilva]

So heaven lies in the impersonal and hell in the personal?

A hurricane can be hell. While a cool water on a warm day can be heavenly.

I remember a time standing on a tropic beach sunset when it suddenly occurred to me that things are only beautiful at a distance - that the Sun is not ball of light in the sky making beautiful reflections on the water but a monstrously huge zone of concentrated nuclear energy in space. I would drown quickly in the cold waters and the clouds exist in the freezing cold with low oxygen far above the safety of the ground.

Once you get close to any of these things that inspire grand dreams they are either lethal to us or not so lovely close up.

And yet we have been gifted with intelligence to get up close. These things provide the food that minds need.

[Fdesilva]

This appears to be addressing the "problem of evil" issue. But this thread is not about the problem of evil. The question is not why does God allow suffering in the world but why did God create a world full of beings that are constantly destroying and eating each other? What kind of God designs the world in this way?

In making this statement

So, I suppose my question is this: Why did God create the world this way? I'm not asking why did God create violence or why does God allow violence. The question is more fundamental than that. Why did God choose to make this "engine of violence" the very substance of the world that he created?

You are assuming that it is obviously true or a proven fact that the world is an engine of violence. From my perspective you can see I don't agree with that assumption. If the assumption is not valid then the question is not valid.

[Steve3007]

Carnivores eat herbivores, and herbivores eat living plants.

...and plants eat sunlight. Eating sunlight is slow. It's easier and much quicker to let someone else spend their time eating the sunlight and then eat them. Eating and digesting the things that eat the sunlight is a bit faster, but it's actually still quite slow. It's even quicker to let someone else eat the sunlight eaters and then eat them. Finally, catching/rearing and killing the sunglight eaters, or the sunighter eater eaters, is still quite a lot of hassle. So the most successful thing of all is to invent societies in which that process is largely automated and/or left to a few specialists. Then all you have to do is shop. Nowadays, you barely even have to do that, what with the internet and all.

Why did God design rabbits to procreate so prolifically that it would be necessary for them to be killed (e.g. eaten by a fox) at a faster rate than they would naturally die of old age?

Perhaps because He's lazy/economical and that's the easiest way He could think of to ensure that rabbits run fast and stay healthy, as a species? To give Him His due, it does seem to be working quite well so far.

Evolution is merely the process of a species adapting to a changing environment. It is not the end goal of life, but is rather a passive side effect of life.

It's not a passive side effect of life, in the same sense that gravity is not a passive side effect of falling off a cliff. It's the central theme.

[Sy Borg]

So heaven lies in the impersonal and hell in the personal?

A hurricane can be hell. While a cool water on a warm day can be heavenly.

True.

I remember a time standing on a tropic beach sunset when it suddenly occurred to me that things are only beautiful at a distance - that the Sun is not ball of light in the sky making beautiful reflections on the water but a monstrously huge zone of concentrated nuclear energy in space. I would drown quickly in the cold waters and the clouds exist in the freezing cold with low oxygen far above the safety of the ground.

Once you get close to any of these things that inspire grand dreams they are either lethal to us or not so lovely close up.

And yet we have been gifted with intelligence to get up close. These things provide the food that minds need.

I wonder about the kind of "food" as you put it that nature provides - the weather, plants and animals - and our evolved resonances with those things as we move into an ever more artificial way of existence. I wonder how much this lack of being able to "earth" oneself in nature contributes to increased depression levels?

[Mysterio448]

Why did this world of innate violence have to be created by a god ? I think in such a world like our own, if there indeed was no god, would yield a better answer to your question. Either way, biological evolution seems like a good place to start in order to answer this question. Maybe things are just the way they are with no ulterior motive ? I guess what I'm getting at is it seems hard to answer your question, unless one accepts a god created everything because postulating god makes adds so much more baggage to the question. It's like appealing to a mystery to solve a mystery.

I'm actually an atheist myself, but I am addressing the question to theists to see what they have to say about it.

[Mysterio448]

<r><QUOTE author="Steve3007" post_id="327975" time="1548231785" user_id="37742"><s>

</s>
<QUOTE author="Mysterio448"><s>

</s>Carnivores eat herbivores, and herbivores eat living plants.<e>

</e></QUOTE>

...and plants eat sunlight. Eating sunlight is slow. It's easier and much quicker to let someone else spend their time eating the sunlight and then eat them. Eating and digesting the things that eat the sunlight is a bit faster, but it's actually still quite slow. It's even quicker to let someone else eat the sunlight eaters and then eat them. Finally, catching/rearing and killing the sunglight eaters, or the sunighter eater eaters, is still quite a lot of hassle. So the most successful thing of all is to invent societies in which that process is largely automated and/or left to a few specialists. Then all you have to do is shop. Nowadays, you barely even have to do that, what with the internet and all.
<e>

</e></QUOTE>

I understand the practical, scientific sort of answer you are proposing, but my question was mainly directed to theists. I'm interested in learning a theological explanation for this phenomenon.


<QUOTE><s>

</s>Evolution is merely the process of a species adapting to a changing environment. It is not the end goal of life, but is rather a passive side effect of life.<e>

</e></QUOTE>

It's not a passive side effect of life, in the same sense that gravity is not a passive side effect of falling off a cliff. It's the central theme.<br/>
[/quote]</r>

Are you suggesting that evolution is the central theme of life? What reputable biologists have made this claim?

[Dark Matter]

The questions has too many presuppositions to be meaningful.

[Mysterio448]

Why did this world of innate violence have to be created by a god ? I think in such a world like our own, if there indeed was no god, would yield a better answer to your question. Either way, biological evolution seems like a good place to start in order to answer this question. Maybe things are just the way they are with no ulterior motive ? I guess what I'm getting at is it seems hard to answer your question, unless one accepts a god created everything because postulating god makes adds so much more baggage to the question. It's like appealing to a mystery to solve a mystery.

My question was really directed at theists. I want to know the theist's explanation for this phenomenon.

[Fdesilva]

Why did this world of innate violence have to be created by a god ? I think in such a world like our own, if there indeed was no god, would yield a better answer to your question. Either way, biological evolution seems like a good place to start in order to answer this question. Maybe things are just the way they are with no ulterior motive ? I guess what I'm getting at is it seems hard to answer your question, unless one accepts a god created everything because postulating god makes adds so much more baggage to the question. It's like appealing to a mystery to solve a mystery.

My question was really directed at theists. I want to know the theist's explanation for this phenomenon.

I have taken the bait. I think you are stretching what was meant by the description of evolution as "Survival of the fittest" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survival_of_the_fittest by calling life an "engine of violence". Survival of the fittest really means survival of the genes of the fittest. Remember there was a time when it was all just plants

[Fdesilva]

Why did this world of innate violence have to be created by a god ? I think in such a world like our own, if there indeed was no god, would yield a better answer to your question. Either way, biological evolution seems like a good place to start in order to answer this question. Maybe things are just the way they are with no ulterior motive ? I guess what I'm getting at is it seems hard to answer your question, unless one accepts a god created everything because postulating god makes adds so much more baggage to the question. It's like appealing to a mystery to solve a mystery.

My question was really directed at theists. I want to know the theist's explanation for this phenomenon.

Here is more info that you need to consider before you can call life a engine of violence.
https://www.quora.com/What-percentage-o ... -predators
The above estimated that only about 11% of animals get eaten by predators.
https://www.discoverwildlife.com/animal ... s-compare/
The above shows that predators are not always successful. The last one is interesting, some estimates give tigers as succeeding in only 5% of the hunt chases.

[Steve3007]

The above estimated that only about 11% of animals get eaten by predators.

I don't really see how measuring the actual percentage of animals that are eaten by predators affects the substance of the OP. That appears to be the simple observation, which has occured to lots of people in the past, that Nature is red in tooth and claw. I don't see the point in arguing about precisely how deep a shade of red it is.

Are you suggesting that evolution is the central theme of life?

It's certainly the central theme in describing the current and historical nature of life, isn't it?

What reputable biologists have made this claim?

All of them.

[Steve3007]

By the way, when we say "life" here I assume we're talking in the context of Biology, not Sociology. i.e. we're talking about the physical character of living things and, to some extent, their mental character. But not to the extent of analysing the behaviour of entire populations of humans. That would be like trying to use particle physics to predict the outcome of a horse race or the weather this time next month.

[Sy Borg]

Why did we create our cells, only to let them die and be replaced without ceremony?

[Steve3007]

Not a bad reductio ad absurdum.