A big argument for the existence of God is this circular thing about the argument from desire or argument from need The idea that if human beings desire something, like a relationship with their Creator, such a thing must therefore exist and be possible
-
Show this thread
-
That it would be perverse, cruel, just WRONG to give people a desire for something that doesn't exist and therefore can never be fulfilled Well, why the fuck not? The only reason to believe such a thing is impossible is believing in God in the first place
2 replies 3 retweets 44 likesShow this thread -
It is, in principle, trivially easy to imagine a desire for something that doesn't exist and can't be satisfied - a desire for a three-sided square, a desire to be simultaneously hot and cold, a desire for the comfort of being loved without the terror of being known
2 replies 2 retweets 36 likesShow this thread -
You could easily program a robot that wants there to be a three-sided square and spends eons trying to stick three 90-degree angles together and never actually succeeds and therefore is always unhappy and always will be unhappy It sounds more like the human condition than not
2 replies 1 retweet 47 likesShow this thread -
So I mean this family discourse "It's built into the way human development works: we all start as helpless babies, we need some adult or group of adults to have absolute power over is to survive, and those adults will have a profound effect on our psyche" Okay and that's bad
3 replies 6 retweets 53 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @arthur_affect
This isn't a good argument. "That's bad" isn't a coherent thing to say if you are starting from the "Its all meaningless" stance you took in the first tweet. You don't get to handwave away everyone else's intuited sentiments and keep your own.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @GreenBeing6
I'm not *making* the argument here, I'm just stating that that's what I already believe and why I find people's intuitions that it can't be true so easy to dismiss
1 reply 1 retweet 9 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect
"and that's bad". What does "bad" mean there. I know this argument is preempting a criticism of a position you are taking in a related debate, not the meat of the main argument itself. You are still going to have to make "bad" coherent thing to say we shouldn't make families.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @GreenBeing6
My moral system is that to do so inflicts unjustifiable suffering, and the fact that this suffering is ubiquitous and normalized only makes it more immoral
1 reply 0 retweets 7 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect
Immoral in reference to what? If you want to throw out those other ungrounded intuitions about the value of life you have to give grounding for your own. Unjustified implies there is a theoretical just version of suffering, what makes your idea of the just version correct?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Honestly I don't think any suffering is actually justified, I only use that term in the relative sense
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.