- Image via Wikipedia
When natural disasters strike it is common for people to pray for assistance and rely on their faith for comfort. The earthquake that devastated Haiti has been no exception. When watching the news coverage of the terrible aftermath I saw many people mention how they had prayed and how they had been relying on their faith.
On one hand, it would seem to be cruel and callous to offer any philosophical discussion of prayer and faith in such a context. After all, in such a disaster people need something to sustain them and give them hope. If this involves faith, then so be it.
On the other hand, there is certainly something here well worth discussing.
When watching the news clips of people speaking about prayer and faith in the face of an earthquake, I was reminded of the 1755 Lisbon earthquake. in philosophy, this event is best remembered in the context of Voltaire’s criticism of Leibniz‘ claim that this is the best of all possible worlds. After all, it is rather difficult to reconcile the idea of a benevolent and all powerful God with such natural disasters. David Hume also wrote on this problem and explicitly criticized Leibniz.
Rather than focus on the problem of evil, the point I am addressing is that it seems rather odd to pray to God in such a context. After all, if it is assumed that God exists and has the usual attributes (all good, all powerful and all knowing) then praying would make no sense. This is because the earthquake was allowed (or perhaps caused) by God. He knows about the event and hence prayer is not needed to let God know that a disaster has struck. Since He is all powerful, He could render aid. However, if He did not want the disaster to strike, then it would not have occurred. Praying to God would be like asking for help from the person who is punching you in the face-obviously that person is not going to render aid. Finally, if God is good then He would not need to be asked to help. A good being does not watch from the sidelines waiting for someone to beg for help. Further, if the initial disaster is compatible with God’s goodness (and perhaps part of his plan), then allowing people to continue to suffer would seem to be just as compatible. As such, praying for assistance would seem to make no sense at all (except insofar as a psychological salve).
As far as faith goes, it also seems odd to be sustained by faith in such situations. After all, God has shown that He is willing to allow terrible things to happen (or cause them to occur). Having faith in such contexts would seem to be somewhat like remaining in love with a cruel abuser. At the very least, if you look among the aid groups then you will see no angels. Oddly enough, God never shows up for His disasters.
Fortunately, people do. So, it makes sense to ask other people for help. Unlike God, we respond and take action. Then again, perhaps the reason for this is that there is no one here to help us but us.
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](https://i0.wp.com/img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png)
Best of all possible worlds for whom. For us or for God?
The Problem with Pain argument is not an argument in either direction for the existance of God. It is only an argument as to the nature of God.
There are several options here:
1) God does not exist.
2) God exists but doesn’t care or is melevolant. This seems unlikely, as He cared enough to create things. This argument, in its nature, is pessimistic and thus focuses on pain. It doesn’t seem to acknowledge things that make humans happy, like love, good food, music, friendship etc.
3) God does not have the power to stop all evil. This is the Manichean worldview. Light vs Dark.
4) God is good in all its definition, and we do not understand the true nature of the universe. For me, this is the best answer. If I had never seen a toilet and someone attempted to describe a toilet to me, its functions and in operation, I would have a very incomplete image in my mind of a toilet until I actually saw it. No ammount of words would suffice for a complete view. How much more so with God?
“To one who has faith, no explanation is necessary. To one without faith, no explanation is possible.”~St. Thomas Aquinas
Sounds like Aquinas pretty well shut down fruitful discussion between believers and non-believers.
Aquinas on the value of masturbation: “Well-ordered self-love is right and natural.” http://www.amazon.com/…masturbation…self-love/dp/B0006W606K I revere Aquinas.
Don’t worry here people. I found the cause of the earth-quake. All it took was another sane man to step forward and be willing to tell us all the truth…
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2010/01/21/chavez_us_weapon_test_caused_haiti_earthquake.html
Robertson and Chavez. Trying to corner the a-hole market. Sorry guys. There are too many out there.
Pat and Cesar step aside. This guy has just claimed a hefty chunk of the a-hole market.
http://thinkprogress.org/2010/01/23/bauer-stray/ Says people who get government help are like stray animals. You give’m help, they survive, then they breed. “You show me the school that has the highest free and reduced lunch, and I’ll show you the worst test scores, folks. It’s there, period.“ No other factors to consider. Simple thinking Not a scintilla of evidence of critical thinking skills in this guy. I conclude he must have attended a school that provided lots of free and reduced price lunches. Asshole.
of course, there is still the situation you did not mention( not that you mentioned all but one, just that you should have been able to at least realize this possibility) there is the situation in which we have a different definition of “good” where as, the real “good” is what “god” is actually doing.
“I” understand the situation of humanity; they are still suffering from the effects of a flawed indoctrination, “i” can not blame a human for still being at this level.
Extremely actual post.