The life-death dilemma

[_Z_]

The life-death dilemma


Given there is wisdom in the universe, define the wisest option;

a, Bringing someone into the world; is evil
b, Taking someone out of the world; is evil
c, Stopping someone from living; is evil

A being born.
B being terminated.
C not being born.

note that these are universals, if you apply a rule to e.g. murderers should be killed, thats not the same as applying it to everyone [e.g. that everyone should die because there are murderers].

I would say that you first have to deny option c in order to be good, that means you have to go with a, which leaves you with no option about b.
What do you think is the wisest option, or the better option for any given reason?

For example, you may deny option a, by agreeing with option b ~ I.e. by killing everyone you stop all three options from further occurrence, although you are then committing b.

we could say this is 'gods dilemma'

 

[shawn]

Another few options:

-Keeping people in ignorance and limiting their life-span so they will have little likely-hood of remembering who they really are is evil.

-making hybrid creatures (with built-in, serious genetic flaws, when the ability to do otherwise is there) as slaves, then confusing their ability to communicate and setting them against each other is evil.

-using spiritual entities to animate one's genetic creations is imprisonment and is evil.

The questions are pejorative, and assume that the respondent has a similar paradigm of reality that you do.

God's dilemma????....which God?
The supreme source?
The annunaki posers (Elohim)?

IMO, the questions you ask arise from the confusion created due to the above conditions/circumstances of our situation.Alleviate those issues and the questions you ask will be a much simpler thing, if even a matter at all.

 

[OAT]

Z, Shawn,
Your posts seemed to me to be another way of setting out the problem of postulating an almighty Creator as the source of everything.

 

[shawn]

Z, Shawn,
Your posts seemed to me to be another way of setting out the problem of postulating an almighty Creator as the source of everything.

I do not believe in random evolution by chance.
IMO everything came from a Source, some kind of Intelligent Design, if you will. I don't totally agree with everything that school of thought says, but the jist of it I agree with.
There have, IMO, been several creators, or creative forces/agencies at work in our history.

 

[_Z_]

Shawn

There is life and death and the three primary ways of dealing with that, which I outlined, everything else are other moral and ethical issues ~ unless they affect the universals.

No one is keeping us in ignorance? I don’t know what you mean there.
No one has made ‘hybrid creatures’ at most the universe was made with the potential for evolution built in.

Using spiritual entities to animate one's genetic creations

Who does that? And by what means.

‘Gods dilemma’ is a metaphor.

Oat

Your posts seemed to me to be another way of setting out the problem of postulating an almighty Creator as the source of everything.

It can be if that’s how people see things, for me it’s a question of principles and wisdom [+ infinite intellect].
　
　

 

[shawn]

Shawn

There is life and death and the three primary ways of dealing with that, which I outlined, everything else are other moral and ethical issues ~ unless they affect the universals.

No one is keeping us in ignorance? I don’t know what you mean there.
No one has made ‘hybrid creatures’ at most the universe was made with the potential for evolution built in.



Who does that? And by what means.

‘Gods dilemma’ is a metaphor.


　

The questions in the OP are pejorative, and assume that the respondent has a similar paradigm of reality that you do.
If you read my thread on intervention theory you should find some data on this paradigm I am exploring.http://www.interfaith.org/forum/intervention-theory-12796.html#post227785

 

[_Z_]

　

The questions in the OP are pejorative, and assume that the respondent has a similar paradigm of reality that you do.

Well we can debate weather or not each aspect is evil, and we can debate if there is such a things as evil. In the end it seams adequate that death is evil [and suffering] and the others pertain to that to some degree. why compicate things when we already have life an death as definite realities.

Ok I’ll read your thread, but I’ll stick with the above as a sufficient logical basis.