Richard of the secular realm

32.8K posts

Richard of the secular realm banner
Richard of the secular realm

Richard of the secular realm

@LatFilosof

🇸🇪 "From so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being, evolved." - Darwin 🏳️‍🌈 Ally Atheist. He/Him.

Sverige Katılım Ekim 2014
97 Takip Edilen1.2K Takipçiler
Richard of the secular realm
Richard of the secular realm@LatFilosof·
The argument from evolutionary suffering. I've talked about this before but I've never actually written something extensive about it. So, here we go: Link: rickardkarlsson.substack.com/publish/post/1…
Richard of the secular realm tweet media
Sarah Salviander@sarahsalviander

What are the best arguments for God not existing? I'm not talking about defending a lack of belief by saying "there's no evidence for God," but strong arguments in favor of the statement "God doesn't exist." When I was an atheist, I didn't pursue these arguments, because to me it was just a given that all religion was false. It was the way I was raised, it was the environment I grew up in. Now that I'm on the other side, the vast majority of what I encounter (especially here) is extremely weak tea - lack of evidence, religion is dumb, haha magic sky fairy, which god do you believe in, etc. I'd like examples of strong, intellectual atheism. I'd also genuinely like to know why the vast majority of atheists on social media don't use these strong arguments, but instead rely on weak antagonistic stuff.

English
23
4
64
7.5K
Richard of the secular realm
Richard of the secular realm@LatFilosof·
@AtheistOwner No, not even remotely close. I don't even say God is doing anything wrong by allowing it. If you want to create a strawman, at least understand the material first.
English
1
0
0
21
AtheistOwner
AtheistOwner@AtheistOwner·
@LatFilosof So just a really really long ass essay on "grr god mean" reducing it to base laziness and opinions because extinction is somehow painful or something in your eyes when it happens naturally for...reasons.
English
1
0
0
20
Richard of the secular realm
Richard of the secular realm@LatFilosof·
@DeEchteRuben Costly? Not necessarily. Also not necessarily unnecessary, I also explain that in the article. But undesirable? Yes, by definition. I'm sorry but I now highly doubt you read it carefully, I took great care in defining my terms in the article. These questions are answered therein
English
1
0
0
19
DeEchteRuben
DeEchteRuben@DeEchteRuben·
@LatFilosof And in your own words this phenomenal experience is undesirable, costly and unnecessary, right?
English
1
0
0
14
Scott Thomas
Scott Thomas@DPSThomas·
The same way we might try to understand altruism from a naturalistic perspective. How can we make sense of it? You could throw out naturalism as a framework altogether or try to understand it. God, as a functional concept, deserves the same. Especially given that, at least, God conceptually underpins all reality.
English
1
0
0
11
Richard of the secular realm
Richard of the secular realm@LatFilosof·
@ektromati Yes, I am actually very unhappy with how I formulated the syllogism. And I will likely rework it today or tomorrow so look out for that. It's messy and unclear, and I also don't talk about it afterwards. It was actually the last thing I added, and arguably it was a mistake.
English
1
0
1
7
...Adveniat...
...Adveniat...@ektromati·
@LatFilosof Fair enough. Then my point is more narrow: (4) my be formulated more correctly as a relative confirmation claim, not as naturalism being more likely simpliciter, to be consistent with your conclusion. I´ll check on the rest , hopefully , on the weekend.
English
1
0
0
6
Harry D'Agostino
Harry D'Agostino@agostino_harry·
@LatFilosof Seems like any argument from suffering is of the latter rather than the former kind: it’s concerned with evil outweighing good on the scales of the aggregate experience of the cosmos. Life and peace being the fragile contingency, death and violence the brute necessity.
English
1
0
0
9
...Adveniat...
...Adveniat...@ektromati·
@LatFilosof The premises support: evolutionary suffering is more expected on naturalism. They do not support: naturalism is therefore more likely true. That stronger conclusion requires weighing all evidence, including evidence independently favoring theism.
English
1
0
0
12
Richard of the secular realm
Richard of the secular realm@LatFilosof·
@agostino_harry Mine takes the former. My conclusion is literally that -- while I do think the argument has force -- it is by no means a "knock-down" argument. I don't think anyone should be convinced by it alone. It's just one piece in a wide net of arguments you have to consider.
English
1
0
1
17
Harry D'Agostino
Harry D'Agostino@agostino_harry·
@LatFilosof He takes exactly two objections to God’s existence seriously: -the parsimony of explanations in natural terms -evil as framed above Every worthwhile objection to God’s existence falls into one of those two broadly construed. He really did just set the terms.
English
1
0
1
13
Richard of the secular realm
Richard of the secular realm@LatFilosof·
@agostino_harry Yes. But it is, in my opinion, even more forceful than Aquinas could ever imagine. He was not aware of how long this have taken place and the very process that demands such suffering.
English
2
0
0
7
Harry D'Agostino
Harry D'Agostino@agostino_harry·
@LatFilosof It’s one of the contours I address in the piece I’m sharing as a reply, under the subsection “untangling ‘natural’ evils”. Would you say this is a roughly fair characterization of the force of it?
Harry D'Agostino tweet media
English
1
0
1
13
Harry D'Agostino
Harry D'Agostino@agostino_harry·
@LatFilosof You are, you’re very clear and charitable! I do think it’s a special case of the “problem of evil” broadly construed, in the manner St Thomas elucidates it, applied especially to the case of constitutive suffering in the fabric of nature:
Harry D'Agostino tweet media
English
2
0
1
17
Richard of the secular realm
Richard of the secular realm@LatFilosof·
@DPSThomas By framing it in this Thomistic sense I'm not sure we can make sense of what "loving" even means. Is God loving? Yes, but also no, not in a way recognisable to us. Ok, so then what are we talking about?
English
1
0
0
17
Scott Thomas
Scott Thomas@DPSThomas·
I’m, of course, being a little bit absurd here. But the notion is relevant. Most of these arguments stem from our human descriptions of God: “all powerful”, “all loving”, etc.. These should be understood as approximations and not used as definitive traits on which to base arguments.
English
1
0
0
15
Drew Haas
Drew Haas@TheDrewHaas·
@LatFilosof Will definitely have to read this! Quick question without reading it yet: if animals, outside of humans, are not moral agents, then can the evolutionary suffering of animals really be an argument against God?
English
1
0
0
49
Starry
Starry@StargazySky·
@LatFilosof Fair enough. So you’re solely arguing against a all powerful, benevolent God who also cares about unnecessary suffering.
English
1
0
0
5
Scott Thomas
Scott Thomas@DPSThomas·
@LatFilosof Kids get hurt on the playground. Therefore, a loving parent must not exist.
English
1
0
0
40
ZaatarHoney3
ZaatarHoney3@ZaatarHoney3·
@DeEchteRuben @LatFilosof He tried to indirectly sneak morality into his argument, or failed to avoid it. Now that it's been pointed out he disappeared. His argument is basically "God caring = suffering less probable" yet the justification can't be other than an appeal to morality.
GIF
English
1
0
0
16
Richard of the secular realm
Richard of the secular realm@LatFilosof·
@DeEchteRuben The phenomenal experience amongst many living creatures that is highly undesirable. Such phenomenal experience is easier explained on naturalism. Take great care in noticing that I am NOT saying it CANNOT be explained on theism, only that naturalism has an easier time.
English
1
0
0
26
DeEchteRuben
DeEchteRuben@DeEchteRuben·
@LatFilosof I have. Explain to me then: what is it about suffering that you single it out for this argument?
English
2
0
0
44

Keşfet

@HunterHarpy @AtheistOwner @ZaatarHoney3 @DeEchteRuben @DPSThomas @ektromati @agostino_harry @elonmusk