Is death more welcome than perpetual torture?

Oct 2012
621
This is certainly my last post in this thread: some people are so low in understanding as to confuse the incapacity of the agent with the incapacity of the receiver, and to fancy that what can receive nothing at all is better than what can receive less (such that good mixed with evil would be worse than no good at all!!!) .
I am probably one of those with low understanding, because I am confused. Do you mean that it is better if the agent (God?) delivers good mixed with evil than if he delivers just evil?
 
This is certainly my last post in this thread: some people are so low in understanding as to confuse the incapacity of the agent with the incapacity of the receiver, and to imagine that what can receive nothing at all is better than what can receive less (such that good mixed with evil would be worse than no good at all!!!). I cross myself with astonishment seeing how confident in themselves and proudly boisterous can be people who are thoroughly ignorant in what concerns our beliefs, it won't hurt them if they go to learn something before fancying themselves so wise.
You haven't clarified your position. You were asked whether you were presupposing the existence of objective morality.
 
May 2013
1,721
The abode of the lord of the north
This is certainly my last post in this thread: some people are so low in understanding as to confuse the incapacity of the agent with the incapacity of the receiver, and to imagine that what can receive nothing at all is better than what can receive less (such that good mixed with evil would be worse than no good at all!!!). I cross myself with astonishment seeing how confident in themselves and proudly boisterous can be people who are thoroughly ignorant in what concerns our beliefs, it won't hurt them if they go to learn something before fancying themselves so wise.
Well, I'm not, well not at this point, questioning the omnipotent nature of this god. But the thing is, even if god himself is beyond human comprehension, even if he is beyond our objective physical understanding, the effect he has on our macro-universe should be rational. If it isn't, there must be something wrong with how the god has been designed.

Its like Quantum physics. Quantum phenomena are often counter-intuitive, is beyond comprehension for a mathematical nowise; even Einstein had problems with it. But the effect these phenomenon has on our everyday world isn't counter-intuitive. It is explainable and rational. God, if exists, should be along the similar lines.

So hence the problem. The worldly morals, whatever it may be is highly subjective. It is related to the concise frame which we're talking about. Gluttony to start with is not a sin in the animal world. Whoever can eat more, will certainly eat more. It's a part of natural selection. But when it comes to humans, we tend to see it from a society's frame of reference. And hence, gluttony is considered sin.

So the god we're speaking about seems to be a 'Society-head' of humans rather than someone who governs the objective reality of microscopical universe.
 
Jun 2016
1,832
England, 200 yards from Wales
Catholics believe that it is a mortal sin to kill another human being without a valid excuse. That goes for murder, suicide, the death penalty, and abortion. The only valid excuse is to prevent more death. E.g you shoot a suicide bomber who is about to detonate in the market
OK, your personal beliefs ;lead you to consider suicide as (always?) wrong. I'm not questioning that.
However the equation of suicide with murder seems a bit odd - suicide is hardly killing another person, a person who doesn't want to die. You may choose to believe that killing oneself as well as killing another is wrong, but surely they can't be considered as the same sort of action? In the first case there is no element of transgressing someone else's rights or will.
 
Mar 2018
728
UK
OK, your personal beliefs ;lead you to consider suicide as (always?) wrong. I'm not questioning that.
However the equation of suicide with murder seems a bit odd - suicide is hardly killing another person, a person who doesn't want to die. You may choose to believe that killing oneself as well as killing another is wrong, but surely they can't be considered as the same sort of action? In the first case there is no element of transgressing someone else's rights or will.
For the deeply religious, sin/wrongness does not come from transgressing someone's will. It comes from breaking the law/will of god. There are plenty of people (in history and the present), who will happily violate someone else's will in order to enact the will of god, and consider themselves very virtuous in the process.
 
Jun 2016
1,832
England, 200 yards from Wales
For the deeply religious, sin/wrongness does not come from transgressing someone's will. It comes from breaking the law/will of god. There are plenty of people (in history and the present), who will happily violate someone else's will in order to enact the will of god, and consider themselves very virtuous in the process.
I did not suggest that the wrongness is in the transgressing someone's will (though, for me, I suppose it is), but just saying that an act that so transgresses is not the same sort of act as one that doesn't, even if both are wrong.
As I said I wasn't querying the idea that suicide is wrong (though I don't, in all cases, agree with it), but rather the equation with murder. After all, if one thinks in such terms, many things presumably break the will of God, whether theft, certain sexual acts, and no doubt others, yet they are not all the same sort of act as murder.
 
Oct 2013
6,266
Planet Nine, Oregon
Is this the god that causes church buses to crash killing children on board, allows daughters to be raped on the corpses of their dead mothers, or kills people with collapsing churches during earthquakes:
A Fatal Quake Shatters Fresco In Assisi Shrine
allows us to develop the means to obliterate the planet and the other animals on it? Not my god, and I don't care what he thinks. You are brought into this mess without your consent; you have the right to leave it. The greatest thing our species could do is get rid of these ancient outdated memes that have caused so much misunderstanding, misery and destruction.
 
Last edited:
Feb 2019
19
Laniakea Supercluster
Say you're being subjected to perpetual, ruthless and excruciating torture by your oppressors. You're convinced there is virtually no chance you can escape their dungeons. Would you kill yourself if you get a chance? Is killing oneself ever justified in such a scenario?
If it was for the rest of my life, than yes. If it’s for a period of time, maybe. It would depend on how long the period of time is and how bad the torture is.
 
Jan 2019
32
Finland
I'd rather never know for sure. But from what I've read, yes. Absolutely. 'They' can make you confess to anything, do anything, with torture. In some Christian thought there is the idea that Hell is an annihition of a person rather than perpetual torture, so that tells to me that there is a tendency to see torture as worse than death.
 
Jan 2010
4,419
Atlanta, Georgia USA
I did not suggest that the wrongness is in the transgressing someone's will (though, for me, I suppose it is), but just saying that an act that so transgresses is not the same sort of act as one that doesn't, even if both are wrong.
As I said I wasn't querying the idea that suicide is wrong (though I don't, in all cases, agree with it), but rather the equation with murder. After all, if one thinks in such terms, many things presumably break the will of God, whether theft, certain sexual acts, and no doubt others, yet they are not all the same sort of act as murder.
I agree that those others are not the same sort of act as murder, but suicide is the same sort of act as murder—-both take a life. One just happens to be your own.
 

Similar History Discussions