Re: Cruel Logic
Posted: Sun Nov 15, 2015 5:37 pm
I would agree with your analogy if God were the only one who values the world or things in the world, but unlike cars where only humans value them thus humans are necessary for cars to have value (cars don’t value themselves) humans value the world and things within the world also thus as long as humans exist the world has value.Kurieuo wrote: Kenny, I've been following this discussion here and there.
And I might agree with you to a certain extent, but then disagree with you to another.
Consider this. For me, I can't even fathom a world without God because as I see it such is just not ontologically possible.
It's like trying to consider the value of cars without anyone ever existing. How is this similar? Well,
- firstly, someone must exist to have created them.
- secondly, value is something subjective beings assign. (as you've reasoned right?)
So if no one exists, then 1) cars have no value and 2) not just that, they can't exist.
Therefore, to ask someone to consider the value of cars without anyone having existed is just absurd and ultimately nonsense. From where I stand, so too is any discussion of the value of the world (or things in the world) without God.
I don’t agree existence itself has value.Kurieuo wrote:Here is the thing about value.
You (Kenny) are perhaps correct to a degree that it is something "subjects" give rather than inherent.
Let's consider something like existence. Does existence itself have any value?
Common sense tells us, "yes, of course." We intuit such.
YesKurieuo wrote:So does its value exist just because Kenny says so? Because I say so?
I can agree if God exists and he is on a different level than we are, then his existence is necessary for us to have value beyond just what someone on the same level thinks.Kurieuo wrote:I've agreed with you that value cannot be given unless there is someone to give it.
Now I might disagree with "existence" having any value, but then perhaps I really don't exist.
What I think doesn't have any bearing on the matter -- it seems clear to me that I'd be just as wrong in both cases.
And if I would be wrong, then a subject greater than I must exist to give "existence" its value.
The kicker is that things do exist, and sentient beings at that which didn't previous.
Our value wouldn't be possible unless there was a necessary something, a subjective being like God.
Therefore if existence has value, indeed we have value beyond just what someone on the same level thinks...
Obviously I believe our value is limited to what someone on the same level thinks.
Ken