One person in hell for all eternity or a bunch of people in the same hell for all eternity? Which scenario has the most suffering? By "all eternity" I mean never ending time.
-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
-
CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
Which suffering is greatest?
- Thread starter GrowingSmaller
- Start date
SithDoughnut
The Agnostic, Ignostic, Apatheistic Atheist
When you hit concepts such as infinite suffering, comparisons largely become invalid.
Upvote
0
Ok forget suffering, and look at experience instead. Is one eternity of experience less than a bunch?
Upvote
0
SithDoughnut
The Agnostic, Ignostic, Apatheistic Atheist
Less in what way? If you're talking in terms of time experienced, then they're exactly the same, because it's infinite.
Upvote
0
Eudaimonist
I believe in life before death!
- Jan 1, 2003
- 27,482
- 2,738
- 59
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Private
- Politics
- US-Libertarian
It depends on the individual. For some, it would be a comfort to "share" hell. For others, it might be a burden.
Or are you hinting at some bizarre utilitarianism of suffering where suffering-units are being added up for one person, and then another, and another, and then summed together for an aggregate value?
eudaimonia,
Mark
Upvote
0
Seems like all of these questions point out how Christian theology falls apart if you apply rigorous thinking to it.
Upvote
0
But can eternity ever be reached? If we question at one point in time, "Which has more suffering?" then because it is a point in time there will have been only a finite amount of suffering. So, from a finite perspective the hell with more people will have more suffring. Bt from an infinite perspective we cannot compare amonts, because amounts are expressions of finite limits.
Upvote
0
Maybe. I am wondering if there is there any difference between one lost soul and a million or a trillion lost souls. Hypothetically speaking, of course.
Upvote
0
Eudaimonist
I believe in life before death!
- Jan 1, 2003
- 27,482
- 2,738
- 59
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Private
- Politics
- US-Libertarian
Any difference to whom and for what purpose?
Let's bring context into this. The question of whether or not it makes any difference without consideration of context doesn't mean much.
eudaimonia,
Mark
Upvote
0
Does it make any difference according to a utiltarian calculus?
Lets assume one second of suffering per person = 1 bad.
Now conventionally speaking, a world with three times as many people suffering the same hell will have three times more bads.
But conventionally speaking means we analyse things according to a certain number of days and seconds (ie a finite measure), rather than all eternity.
Upvote
0
To be clear, the utilitarian formula breaks down because god is causing an INFINITE amount of suffering. In other words this is the worst possible scenario fram a utilitirian perspective.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Eudaimonist
I believe in life before death!
- Jan 1, 2003
- 27,482
- 2,738
- 59
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Private
- Politics
- US-Libertarian
See what happens when one tries to mathematize ethical issues? Now we have to consult a mathematician who is knowledgable about the mathematics of infinities!
Isn't infinity plus infinity equal to infinity, for this type of infinity? Anyway, we are going to miss subtle conceptual issues if we get lost in mathematics.
eudaimonia,
Mark
Last edited:
Upvote
0
SithDoughnut
The Agnostic, Ignostic, Apatheistic Atheist
No it doesn't, because utilitarian deals with amounts of all kinds, not just people.
Upvote
0
My point is that from a purely utilitarian perspective more suffering is bad.
The maximum amount of suffering possible is infinite.
Therefore an infinite amount of suffering is the worst possible scenario.
I'm not sure I understand your response.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
