Zone1 Behavioral Sink and Suffering

[Meriweather]

Years ago, a scientist, using mice, was working to understand the effects of over-population. The mice were given everything else they needed or a mouse could want. Yet within five years, the mice had become disinterested in taking care of their young, in socialization, in mating, in any other mouse and became extinct. This was used as a warning against over population humanity could face, is facing in some areas. Some take this theory seriously, others have their doubts.

I see it a bit differently. Over population was not the only aspect I see in this study. I see the mice were given everything they needed/wanted. Was over-population the only variable at work, or was the fact there was no suffering or hard-work in this rodent population contributing to the disinterest mice had developed towards the other mice, including their own children?

An issue that surfaces in a number of threads here in the religion forum, is God is a cruel meanie. The evidence: The amount of suffering in this world. However, could suffering be playing an integral part in the good health of human existence? What say you, especially those of you who assert God is cruel and mean?

 

[alang1216]

Years ago, a scientist, using mice, was working to understand the effects of over-population. The mice were given everything else they needed or a mouse could want. Yet within five years, the mice had become disinterested in taking care of their young, in socialization, in mating, in any other mouse and became extinct. This was used as a warning against over population humanity could face, is facing in some areas. Some take this theory seriously, others have their doubts.

I see it a bit differently. Over population was not the only aspect I see in this study. I see the mice were given everything they needed/wanted. Was over-population the only variable at work, or was the fact there was no suffering or hard-work in this rodent population contributing to the disinterest mice had developed towards the other mice, including their own children?

An issue that surfaces in a number of threads here in the religion forum, is God is a cruel meanie. The evidence: The amount of suffering in this world. However, could suffering be playing an integral part in the good health of human existence? What say you, especially those of you who assert God is cruel and mean?

There is probably something to what you say. I find poor people to often be the most kind, generous, and caring people. The rich on the other hand are usually less so. I ran a donation drive at my office one year and the difference was obvious, the secretaries gave as much or more than the bosses.

 

[1srelluc]

I've always maintained that 1970 was the "sweet-spot" for the US population.

1970....203.4 million.

2025....348 million.

A 145 million increase in population in just 55 years can't be healthy for a nation.

 

[ding]

Years ago, a scientist, using mice, was working to understand the effects of over-population. The mice were given everything else they needed or a mouse could want. Yet within five years, the mice had become disinterested in taking care of their young, in socialization, in mating, in any other mouse and became extinct. This was used as a warning against over population humanity could face, is facing in some areas. Some take this theory seriously, others have their doubts.

I see it a bit differently. Over population was not the only aspect I see in this study. I see the mice were given everything they needed/wanted. Was over-population the only variable at work, or was the fact there was no suffering or hard-work in this rodent population contributing to the disinterest mice had developed towards the other mice, including their own children?

An issue that surfaces in a number of threads here in the religion forum, is God is a cruel meanie. The evidence: The amount of suffering in this world. However, could suffering be playing an integral part in the good health of human existence? What say you, especially those of you who assert God is cruel and mean?

Having purpose might be important after all. Who knew?

 

[Hafar1014]

Years ago, a scientist, using mice, was working to understand the effects of over-population. The mice were given everything else they needed or a mouse could want. Yet within five years, the mice had become disinterested in taking care of their young, in socialization, in mating, in any other mouse and became extinct. This was used as a warning against over population humanity could face, is facing in some areas. Some take this theory seriously, others have their doubts.

I see it a bit differently. Over population was not the only aspect I see in this study. I see the mice were given everything they needed/wanted. Was over-population the only variable at work, or was the fact there was no suffering or hard-work in this rodent population contributing to the disinterest mice had developed towards the other mice, including their own children?

An issue that surfaces in a number of threads here in the religion forum, is God is a cruel meanie. The evidence: The amount of suffering in this world. However, could suffering be playing an integral part in the good health of human existence? What say you, especially those of you who assert God is cruel and mean?

You cant equate mice to human behavior. Our reality is free and it obeys the laws of nature but within that framework there is chaos. You can get struck by lightening die of cancer fight a war. That doesnt mean God is bad. IT means our reality is free and if we want life to be safe and fair thats our responsibility.

The bad god argument is always used by atheists. The need to be reminded that the atheists nations USSR Cambodia and Red China slaughtered over 120 million people.

 

[Meriweather]

You cant equate mice to human behavior. Our reality is free and it obeys the laws of nature but within that framework there is chaos. You can get struck by lightening die of cancer fight a war. That doesnt mean God is bad. IT means our reality is free and if we want life to be safe and fair thats our responsibility.

The bad god argument is always used by atheists. The need to be reminded that the atheists nations USSR Cambodia and Red China slaughtered over 120 million people.

Equating and observing similarities (or possible similarities) are different. An easy example is what does all life do when it is thirsty? It seeks water. The mice in this experiment did not have the option to leave its over-populated utopia. They were trapped. Humans have the option to leave an over-populated area and move to somewhere less populated. In the mouse experiment, I wonder what the result may have been if they had the option to leave?

I have been teaching for over twenty-five years, and of course, I was a student myself before that. In my day, it never would have occurred to us to run up and hug a teacher--or when told by a teacher to do (or stop doing) something, to begin arguing why they shouldn't have to. Or, to ignore directions and do whatever they wanted, because they didn't want to do the lesson presented. They believe they should be able to get up and wander around the room whenever they want, or sit wherever they decide to sit. It's all about them personally. A couple of days ago (and by students who seem to like me--or at least put up with me--told me that if I really wanted their respect, I should let them play computer games instead of doing the work. They were serious. So I seriously told them that I guess I didn't want their respect. (They went back to the lesson.)

Growing up, my life wasn't about what I wanted, having everything I wanted, or being in a very small family with both parents working outside the home. Both my parents were involved, and life/choices were about how they would affect all the siblings around me and sharing. I didn't have to be entertained 24/7, or do things that were entertaining 24/7. I didn't always have to my way or get my way. Many students today totally believe they should always have their way and are truly mystified when I say 'No, don't do that.'

These are good kids, and I want them to have good lives. How good is a life that is 24/7 playing computer games or seeking digital entertainment?

 

[JoeB131]

An issue that surfaces in a number of threads here in the religion forum, is God is a cruel meanie. The evidence: The amount of suffering in this world. However, could suffering be playing an integral part in the good health of human existence? What say you, especially those of you who assert God is cruel and mean?

So God is making us suffer for our own good?

Wow, that's messed up.

 

[Meriweather]

So God is making us suffer for our own good?

Wow, that's messed up.

We have different perspectives. One perspective is a life that can be compared to being wrapped in cotton batting and placed carefully, out-of-reach from all danger high on a shelf. The other is being willing to fall out of a tree for the sheer joy of climbing the tree and over-coming all its challenges.

Study the biographies of great, heroic people. One constant about all of these lives is that, at some point, they suffered.

 

[JoeB131]

The bad god argument is always used by atheists. The need to be reminded that the atheists nations USSR Cambodia and Red China slaughtered over 120 million people.

Actually, the numbers were nowhere near that. The only way you get even HALFWAY to those numbers is if you throw in famines and then take the high estimates.

Let's take the big magilla of them all, the Great Famine in China from 1959-1961. My wife actually survived that as a baby, and her mother was concerned she might be lost because she couldn't produce enough milk for her.

Okay, absolutely, policy had something to do with that. The Chinese adopted the debunked agricultural theories of Trofim Lyssenko (who also contributed to the Ukraine Famine), and the Four Pest Campaign killed the Sparrow, leading to an explosion of the insect population. But the biggest contributor was a multi-year drought. Can we blame that one on "God" punishing those godless commies? (Oh, no, wait, you probably would.)

China had Famines in 1928 (10 million dead) and 1906 (25 Million Dead). Was God punishing them, too? Or to hear Meri say it, "Helping them through suffering."

Or maybe we just realize that there is no man in the sky, and we take responsibility for our own actions.

Key point- China hasn't had a major famine SINCE 1961. Like most of the world, it participated in the Green Revolution, which made agriculture more efficient.

 

[JoeB131]

We have different perspectives. One perspective is a life that can be compared to being wrapped in cotton batting and placed carefully, out-of-reach from all danger high on a shelf. The other is being willing to fall out of a tree for the sheer joy of climbing the tree and over-coming all its challenges.

Study the biographies of great, heroic people. One constant about all of these lives is that, at some point, they suffered.

To quote Malcolm Reynolds,

“It's my estimation that every man ever got a statue made of him was one kind of sumbitch or another"​

Seems to me that a God who lets good people suffer and bad people prosper isn't a just God or a good God.

 

[Hafar1014]

Equating and observing similarities (or possible similarities) are different. An easy example is what does all life do when it is thirsty? It seeks water. The mice in this experiment did not have the option to leave its over-populated utopia. They were trapped. Humans have the option to leave an over-populated area and move to somewhere less populated. In the mouse experiment, I wonder what the result may have been if they had the option to leave?

I have been teaching for over twenty-five years, and of course, I was a student myself before that. In my day, it never would have occurred to us to run up and hug a teacher--or when told by a teacher to do (or stop doing) something, to begin arguing why they shouldn't have to. Or, to ignore directions and do whatever they wanted, because they didn't want to do the lesson presented. They believe they should be able to get up and wander around the room whenever they want, or sit wherever they decide to sit. It's all about them personally. A couple of days ago (and by students who seem to like me--or at least put up with me--told me that if I really wanted their respect, I should let them play computer games instead of doing the work. They were serious. So I seriously told them that I guess I didn't want their respect. (They went back to the lesson.)

Growing up, my life wasn't about what I wanted, having everything I wanted, or being in a very small family with both parents working outside the home. Both my parents were involved, and life/choices were about how they would affect all the siblings around me and sharing. I didn't have to be entertained 24/7, or do things that were entertaining 24/7. I didn't always have to my way or get my way. Many students today totally believe they should always have their way and are truly mystified when I say 'No, don't do that.'

These are good kids, and I want them to have good lives. How good is a life that is 24/7 playing computer games or seeking digital entertainment?

Humans have the ability to increase the carrying capacity of their environment. Mice dont and they cant be used in sociology or psychology.

In human behavior everything we choose to do is what we want. Thats basic Adlerian psychology. All behavior has a purpose. We can want the wrong things.

Teleology is the idea that things, events, or actions are explained by their ultimate purpose, goal, or end result (telos) rather than just their causes, suggesting everything has a design or inherent function,.

The human mind is driven by emotion. Thats how problems are created. When the emotion that begins a thought is misunderstood. IN neuropsychology thoughts begin in the limbic system(emotion and memory) go up to the prefrontal cortex(rational thought) that must interoperate the message. Often its misunderstood

Let me give you an example based on your experience teaching that you used.
We have uncovered a process in children called ACEs. Adverse Childhood experiences. This is a form of trauma. Its more widespread than we thought. One of the responses to trauma is the pathological need to be in control at all times. So in class you tell a student to stop using his phone and it becomes a power struggle. He is trying to stay in control no matter how sully it seems or trivial. Stop using the computer and the kid freaks out in anger.

It also creates hypervigilance which looks like ADHD but is nothing like it

 

[Meriweather]

China had Famines in 1928 (10 million dead) and 1906 (25 Million Dead). Was God punishing them, too? Or to hear Meri say it, "Helping them through suffering."

Not what I said, but that's not new. Individual suffering was switched to a nation, or even a world, suffering. Even so, the same principles would apply, except now we are looking at a nation (or world) working through its suffering. Did the nation come through it even stronger?

 

[1srelluc]

To quote Malcolm Reynolds,

“It's my estimation that every man ever got a statue made of him was one kind of sumbitch or another"​

Seems to me that a God who lets good people suffer and bad people prosper isn't a just God or a good God.

View attachment 1195838

IMHO....We would do just as well in worshiping the Sun.

 

[Meriweather]

Seems to me that a God who lets good people suffer and bad people prosper isn't a just God or a good God.

Compared with eternity, how long was the suffering?

 

[Meriweather]

We have uncovered a process in children called ACEs. Adverse Childhood experiences. This is a form of trauma. Its more widespread than we thought. One of the responses to trauma is the pathological need to be in control at all times. So in class you tell a student to stop using his phone and it becomes a power struggle. He is trying to stay in control no matter how sully it seems or trivial. Stop using the computer and the kid freaks out in anger.

This is true. What I have also noticed that may be related to how children react to Adverse Childhood Experiences, or what they, as a child, perceive as adverse. I am sure it cannot be a hundred percent, but what is noticeable that children of faith are less likely to have these issues. I am speaking of any faith, but where I teach there is a broad spectrum of faiths: Judaism, Muslim, Christianity, and Hindu. Every so often, Buddhist. Have you noticed that in your line of work?

 

[Meriweather]

IMHO....We would do just as well in worshiping the Sun.

The problem with worshiping the Sun, Moon, or even Nature, is that it always turns into anthropomorphism. True, the same happens with God, but there is more of an effort to recognize He is divine, not human. With religion/faith we are striving to get to know a higher being in a higher existence. The Sun is merely a different existence, and one with which we cannot establish any relationship.

 

[Votto]

Years ago, a scientist, using mice, was working to understand the effects of over-population. The mice were given everything else they needed or a mouse could want. Yet within five years, the mice had become disinterested in taking care of their young, in socialization, in mating, in any other mouse and became extinct. This was used as a warning against over population humanity could face, is facing in some areas. Some take this theory seriously, others have their doubts.

I see it a bit differently. Over population was not the only aspect I see in this study. I see the mice were given everything they needed/wanted. Was over-population the only variable at work, or was the fact there was no suffering or hard-work in this rodent population contributing to the disinterest mice had developed towards the other mice, including their own children?

An issue that surfaces in a number of threads here in the religion forum, is God is a cruel meanie. The evidence: The amount of suffering in this world. However, could suffering be playing an integral part in the good health of human existence? What say you, especially those of you who assert God is cruel and mean?

It reminds me of Jesus feeing the multitude with the miracle of a few fish and a little bread to work with.

After the event, the multitude sought to force him to become their king. He then inexplicably left the scene and declined their invitation.

His apostles must have been the most perplexed with such behavior than they ever had been before. After all, was he not already they king? Was he not there to free them from the oppression of Roman rule? Was he not there to help feed the poor like he just did? Why then did he decline becoming an earthly king and become their meal ticket for life?

Simply put, Jesus is not some temporal earthly entitlement that those on the Left make him out to be. The world we live in now and its governments are NOT a part of the kingdom of God, nor can be. Feeding the multitude was simply to get their attention to a greater truth, which is that life is more than eating and drinking and meeting our temporal needs. Having need of any kind is simply a reflection of a greater need, and that is for God. Jesus was there to usher in his kingdom into the world which will someday replace the current one. The people really cared nothing about Jesus, other than the free meals he provided. This was not the goal.

What secular humanists are doing, is trying to meet all of our temporal needs so that God will not be needed at all in our lives. Remove any symptoms of pain and suffering, apart from God, and you will be anesthetized into thinking you have no need for God at all in your life. That is, until at some point you do.

This is why I think Jesus said that it was easier for a camel to enter the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. It is also why the gospel only seems to thrive in the Third Word as the richer nations lean more towards atheism and human secularism.

It also reminds me of the rich man who came to Jesus to justify himself saying that he had tried to keep all the commandments since his youth and asked if he would have eternal life. Jesus then turned to him and asked him to give all he had to the poor. He simply could not do it and turned away very sad.

Does this mean we all have to give our money away to the poor to be saved? No. But God has an inexplicable gift for looking into our soul and seeing what we value more than him. With Abraham, it was not his wealth as Abraham was a very wealthy man. No, what worldly thing God valued the most was his son and not his wealth, so God asked for that, just like he asked the rich man for his wealth.

In other words, as Jesus said,

Matthew 10:37
“Anyone who loves their father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; anyone who loves their son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me.

People have to understand that all we have in this world comes from God, so placing them before the giver is idolatry.

That is the point.

 

[JoeB131]

Compared with eternity, how long was the suffering?

Ah, the afterlife bullshit.

Yes, your "eternal" life will be entirely determined by the 0-80 years you spent on planet Earth, and if you don't worship the right sky pixie or make bad decisions based on the circumstances of your life, you will be eternally punished.

Burning in hell for all eternity or praising God for all eternity, they both sound kind of tedious.

 

[1srelluc]

The problem with worshiping the Sun, Moon, or even Nature, is that it always turns into anthropomorphism. True, the same happens with God, but there is more of an effort to recognize He is divine, not human. With religion/faith we are striving to get to know a higher being in a higher existence. The Sun is merely a different existence, and one with which we cannot establish any relationship.

Well, other than a few ritual sacrifices here and there the body count would be far less.

 

[Votto]

Ah, the afterlife bullshit.

Yes, your "eternal" life will be entirely determined by the 0-80 years you spent on planet Earth, and if you don't worship the right sky pixie or make bad decisions based on the circumstances of your life, you will be eternally punished.

Burning in hell for all eternity or praising God for all eternity, they both sound kind of tedious.

You have been separated from the God that made you is all as he is the source of all life.

What then happens if you reject such a God?