Being and Nonbeing

[Metacrock]

but ot's not a brute fact. there is a purpose. The purpose is beings own purpose. no your assertion is wromng, There can be purpose behind it,m that is being's purpose,. Being is not suibstancei t;s' not material it's not energy it's mind, mind has purpose. the purpos ios love. Love is thie real stopping point, But love and being areclosely linked.

How would one know this independent of a belief in God as depth of being?

It is the logical consequence of understanding God as will and volition. whydo we need to understand it apart from depth of being?

[Magritte]

Yes, it's a state of affairs, but the evil is not. The evil would be the absence of something. It's a paradoxical thing, where goods and evils are not necessarily existing things, altho they depend on things that did exist or could have existed.

Following that logic, I'm sadly deprived of a brain tumor, antibiotic resistant tuberculosis, and a pack of hungry wolves chasing my family.

Doesn't make sense to say the son I could have had is worse off for never having existed.

Careful, Jim! That way lies antinatalism.

[Metacrock]

Yes, it's a state of affairs, but the evil is not. The evil would be the absence of something. It's a paradoxical thing, where goods and evils are not necessarily existing things, altho they depend on things that did exist or could have existed.

Following that logic, I'm sadly deprived of a brain tumor, antibiotic resistant tuberculosis, and a pack of hungry wolves chasing my family.

the things you list like brain toumors are not evil They are problems they lack moral content.

[Jim B.]

Yes, it's a state of affairs, but the evil is not. The evil would be the absence of something. It's a paradoxical thing, where goods and evils are not necessarily existing things, altho they depend on things that did exist or could have existed.

Following that logic, I'm sadly deprived of a brain tumor, antibiotic resistant tuberculosis, and a pack of hungry wolves chasing my family.

Not all deprivations are bad. But some bad things are deprivations. In his article "Death," Thomas Nagel uses the scenario of a man suddenly transformed into having the mental life of a three month old infant who nevertheless is perfectly content. Assuming all his needs can be met and he lives out the rest of his days perfectly content but never advancing mentally, has a bad thing happened to him? If so, what exactly is that bad thing?

Careful, Jim! That way lies antinatalism.

Right. There has to be, or have been, a someone there in the first place. But looked at collectively, antinatalism could make sense. If the world becomes an irredeemable shit hole with utterly no hope of improvement, then not procreating could become a moral obligation because of all the suffering one is preventing.

[Magritte]

Yes, it's a state of affairs, but the evil is not. The evil would be the absence of something. It's a paradoxical thing, where goods and evils are not necessarily existing things, altho they depend on things that did exist or could have existed.

Following that logic, I'm sadly deprived of a brain tumor, antibiotic resistant tuberculosis, and a pack of hungry wolves chasing my family.

the things you list like brain toumors are not evil They are problems they lack moral content.

I was discussing them in the context of "natural evils", which is the proper terminology according to Jim's wiki link. I dunno, I also don't want to call them evils, but this is the received tradition in ethical language.