When bad things happen

[Jembru]

Re: When bad things happen

It's fascinating to read Aeran's replies here, because they're almost exactly what I used to believe myself. At that time, I was very content with the answers I had. I was right in the heart of 'Wiccaland' so had others all around me echoing similar beliefs and reinforcing in me this feeling of contentment in the knowledge that I had the answers, that the rolercoaster that is our lives here was all part of the beautiful sacred experience..

It's not really that I don't accept it any more. I most certainly do still see the merits of the theory. I just don't feel comfortable with that answer now somehow. Maybe I'm just too angry at things that have happened in the world. Or maybe it is not that the answer I had before was wrong, but that it's the question I'm asking that has somehow changed. I wonder if my discomfort comes from not seeing why suffering is necessary, even as route to spiritual growth. There are other ways to learn, and mankind is rapidly moving away from the concept of punishing errors as a means of teaching children or training animals.. so why on earth would the universe in her wisdom have such an old fashioned 'it's for your own good' attitude towards human suffering?

I'm not expecting an answer by the way, I'm just thinking out loud. It's also worth noting that I'm talking about the big things; a parent losing their child; entire families being wiped out by a virus, or by militants; entire populations being controlled and starved by power-crazed leaders. When it comes to more personal crises; unemployment, the breakup of a long-term relationship, lifelong medical conditions, while still extremely painful, I can kinda get behind these being about our own personal journey. So again, I think it is the question I am asking that has changed, even though linguistically speaking, it seems the same.

Discovering an answer that works well enough for me that I can start getting on with my spiritual life, is an important search for me. One I intend to spend many hours meditating on, and researching. I've already been given an interesting vision in response to this question though, so I figure I may as well share it here while we're on the subject.

I was shown a still in my mind from the prologue of the movie, Watership Down. One of the hardest things for me to reconcile is that deeply religious people put their faith in their god(s) all the time, and live good holy lives, only to still suffer. It angered me that their prayers went unanswered, and made me question what the point was in worshipping at all. So being made to recall this scene, form a movie I haven't seen since my childhood was very moving. Many of you will recall it I'm sure, but for those who don't, the story speaks of how a species (in this case rabbits) grew out of control, destroying everything in their path. Their god gave them a choice to control their own numbers, but their leader the prince of the rabbits, refused. This angered their god who responded by turning other animals into predators. However, their god didn't just leave the rabbits to die. He blessed them too, giving them speed and cunning.. gifts to help them outrun and outwit their predators.

So now I am considering.. is it that there HAS to be war, famine, disease in order to keep human population in check, but we don't suffer because the gods want us to.. so they've actually blessed us with ways to survive, trying to give us a fighting chance. Is that why (for those of us who believe this anyway), we have the ability to use spells, why we have the intelligence to discover medicines and the gift of communication to negotiate with our enemies. People will continue to suffer, but are we as helpless as I thought? Or for every failed attempt to preserve life, were many more lives saved elsewhere?

I can't find the orginal on YouTube, but here's a remake of the prologue I'm talking about (the audio is unchanged): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bVMHeqxQlBs

[B. de Corbin]

Re: When bad things happen

Very interesting, Jembru.

I don't have answers, of course - I doubt if anybody, speaking honestly, does. But let me outline two different ways of approaching the problem, and maybe that will aid you in thinking.

The first comes from The Book of Job. If you're familiar with it, essentially, Job, a loyal and dedicated follower of Yahweh, is subjected to horrible tribulations... Simply because Yahweh has a bet going on with Satan. At the end of it all, Job asks (quite politely, considering the circumstances) for an explanation - why did you do this to me?

Yahweh's answer is, essentially this: I'm god, you're not. You will never understand why I do what I do, so don't even try.

The upshot of this is: our perspective as human beings is limited in comparison to that of an omnipotent, omniscient being, so we must trust in god, even when it seems completely idiotic to do so.


The converse is what I call the "Nietzcheian-existentialist" view. It begins with solipsism - because of our limited, human perspective - relying entirely on our limited, human senses, we can not know "ultimate truth." Therefore, the most reasonable thing we can do is take the universe as we find it, understand it as best we can, and act based on what looks to us as as the most sensible, decent, and appropriate way - and hope for the best.

My definite preference is for the later, but this is a place where people have to make their own call - and accept full personal responsibility for the results of that call.

History will judge. Are people better off when they do the former, or when they do the later?

[Medusa]

Re: When bad things happen

Very interesting, Jembru.

I don't have answers, of course - I doubt if anybody, speaking honestly, does. But let me outline two different ways of approaching the problem, and maybe that will aid you in thinking.

The first comes from The Book of Job. If you're familiar with it, essentially, Job, a loyal and dedicated follower of Yahweh, is subjected to horrible tribulations... Simply because Yahweh has a bet going on with Satan. At the end of it all, Job asks (quite politely, considering the circumstances) for an explanation - why did you do this to me?

Yahweh's answer is, essentially this: I'm god, you're not. You will never understand why I do what I do, so don't even try.

The upshot of this is: our perspective as human beings is limited in comparison to that of an omnipotent, omniscient being, so we must trust in god, even when it seems completely idiotic to do so.


The converse is what I call the "Nietzcheian-existentialist" view. It begins with solipsism - because of our limited, human perspective - relying entirely on our limited, human senses, we can not know "ultimate truth." Therefore, the most reasonable thing we can do is take the universe as we find it, understand it as best we can, and act based on what looks to us as as the most sensible, decent, and appropriate way - and hope for the best.

My definite preference is for the later, but this is a place where people have to make their own call - and accept full personal responsibility for the results of that call.

History will judge. Are people better off when they do the former, or when they do the later?

But what if you go by the stance that humans made 'god' any god. And so put into words the bible. Because we know factually a supernatural hand did not find a pen in the universe and write this book down. Let's not even go the replay on that. What if WE said, yeah let's make rules and put down our beliefs. Said god said so. And for all those things we can't explain because we are in fact human..let's just say god say I know and you don't. The end.

Something like that sounds about right to me.

[B. de Corbin]

Re: When bad things happen

That, of course, is a possible explanation - one which I tend to agree with.

But can I prove it?

No.

Therefore, I don't know - for sure. But it seems (based on my observations & experience) likely.

[Medusa]

Re: When bad things happen

That, of course, is a possible explanation - one which I tend to agree with.

But can I prove it?

No.

Therefore, I don't know - for sure. But it seems (based on my observations & experience) likely.

Dude. Imagine a hand coming out of thin air with a giant pen!?!

[B. de Corbin]

Re: When bad things happen

Dude. Imagine a hand coming out of thin air with a giant pen!?!

LOL - for fun, I can. For reality, I can't.

But I'm an atheist, so what do I know?

[Aeran]

Re: When bad things happen

LOL - for fun, I can. For reality, I can't.

But I'm an atheist, so what do I know?

An Atheistic Buddhist Alchemist? How does that work?

- - - Updated - - -

Very interesting, Jembru.

I don't have answers, of course - I doubt if anybody, speaking honestly, does. But let me outline two different ways of approaching the problem, and maybe that will aid you in thinking.

The first comes from The Book of Job. If you're familiar with it, essentially, Job, a loyal and dedicated follower of Yahweh, is subjected to horrible tribulations... Simply because Yahweh has a bet going on with Satan. At the end of it all, Job asks (quite politely, considering the circumstances) for an explanation - why did you do this to me?

Yahweh's answer is, essentially this: I'm god, you're not. You will never understand why I do what I do, so don't even try.

The upshot of this is: our perspective as human beings is limited in comparison to that of an omnipotent, omniscient being, so we must trust in god, even when it seems completely idiotic to do so.


The converse is what I call the "Nietzcheian-existentialist" view. It begins with solipsism - because of our limited, human perspective - relying entirely on our limited, human senses, we can not know "ultimate truth." Therefore, the most reasonable thing we can do is take the universe as we find it, understand it as best we can, and act based on what looks to us as as the most sensible, decent, and appropriate way - and hope for the best.

My definite preference is for the later, but this is a place where people have to make their own call - and accept full personal responsibility for the results of that call.

History will judge. Are people better off when they do the former, or when they do the later?

I think you're generalizing, and I don't see any actual practical difference. What does "Trust in God" mean outside of a context where a direct divine force is communicating with you and involving itself in your life? Outside of that context, which only a minority these days believe they live within (the types who pray over their sick kids instead of taking them to hospital), it doesn't impact the actual outcome of events. Your majority of religious people these days will pray for a sick child, and consult scripture for emotional and spiritual support, and maybe believe that what is happening is part of some mysterious divine plan, but they will also take their damn kids to hospital. Your "Nietzcheian-existentialist" will just take the kid to hospital and skip all the other stuff. So other than the emotional support the religious believer gains through their beliefs, according to the atheistic worldview, there's no difference in the actual outcome.

- - - Updated - - -

It's fascinating to read Aeran's replies here, because they're almost exactly what I used to believe myself. At that time, I was very content with the answers I had. I was right in the heart of 'Wiccaland' so had others all around me echoing similar beliefs and reinforcing in me this feeling of contentment in the knowledge that I had the answers, that the rolercoaster that is our lives here was all part of the beautiful sacred experience..

I personally wouldn't say I have a feeling of "contentment" per se from my beliefs surrounding reincarnation, as I said it's something I struggle to come to terms with, but examined in light of the rest of my worldview informed by my life experiences, it's the answer that currently makes the most sense of those I've been presented with or otherwise contemplated. Just as, once upon a time, the idea that consciousness is an emergent property of a pile of neurons inside a machine of meat and bone which just happened to evolve a certain way and would one day cease to function, consigning that consciousness to non-existence, was also the answer that made the most sense in light of my then worldview informed by what I had experienced in life up to that point.

It's not really that I don't accept it any more. I most certainly do still see the merits of the theory. I just don't feel comfortable with that answer now somehow. Maybe I'm just too angry at things that have happened in the world. Or maybe it is not that the answer I had before was wrong, but that it's the question I'm asking that has somehow changed. I wonder if my discomfort comes from not seeing why suffering is necessary, even as route to spiritual growth. There are other ways to learn, and mankind is rapidly moving away from the concept of punishing errors as a means of teaching children or training animals.. so why on earth would the universe in her wisdom have such an old fashioned 'it's for your own good' attitude towards human suffering?

And is moving away from that concept doing us any good? My experience is that reasonable punishment is a very necessary part of learning and development, and that to deprive an individual of it is to do them a great wrong in the long term. Children don't learn how to function by some kind of osmosis, they do it through the guidance of adults. Sometimes they behave in a way that, if continued, will have a negative impact on themselves or their environment. If they don't stop said behavior when the reason it must be stopped is explained to them (as often happens, not because they're a bad individual, but because they don't understand the reasoning as a result of their immaturity), then a combination of positive and negative incentives must be used as tools to alter their behavior. You aren't doing a child any favors by refusing to punish them when they eg. don't do their homework (after all other methods of altering their behavior have been tried), all you're doing is ensuring that they'll undergo a greater suffering down the line when they perform poorly academically. There's a reason "discipline" has become synonymous with "punishment" when speaking of children, and discipline is key to living a successful and fulfilling life.

[Medusa]

Re: When bad things happen

You sure you ain't a Christian?

[anunitu]

Re: When bad things happen

The whole hand out of nowhere writing,did not David Copperfield do that..Like look over there...then poof and handwriting on the wall thing...(excuse me while I kiss the sky)

[B. de Corbin]

Re: When bad things happen

An Atheistic Buddhist Alchemist? How does that work?

Easily.

Buddhism works just fine without a god or gods - Buddha was a teacher, not a prophet or incarnated deity. See The Big Thread of Buddhism for more info.

The God-concept in Alchemy is developed experientially, and my experiences have led to a view of "God" which most people - including myself - would call atheist.

- - - Updated - - -

I think you're generalizing, and I don't see any actual practical difference. What does "Trust in God" mean outside of a context where a direct divine force is communicating with you and involving itself in your life? Outside of that context, which only a minority these days believe they live within (the types who pray over their sick kids instead of taking them to hospital), it doesn't impact the actual outcome of events. Your majority of religious people these days will pray for a sick child, and consult scripture for emotional and spiritual support, and maybe believe that what is happening is part of some mysterious divine plan, but they will also take their damn kids to hospital. Your "Nietzcheian-existentialist" will just take the kid to hospital and skip all the other stuff. So other than the emotional support the religious believer gains through their beliefs, according to the atheistic worldview, there's no difference in the actual outcome.

Yes, describing two opposed world views does require making generalizations, since there will always be a rainbow of options between the two.

As far as you critique of application - I was only speaking of world views. I didn't address application. You may well be right, for all I know.

[Aeran]

Re: When bad things happen

Easily.

Buddhism works just fine without a god or gods - Buddha was a teacher, not a prophet or incarnated deity. See The Big Thread of Buddhism for more info.

The God-concept in Alchemy is developed experientially, and my experiences have led to a view of "God" which most people - including myself - would call atheist.

I get all that, I was actually more curious about what your viewpoints on those worldviews/practices were personally and how you put it all together into a coherent worldview/belief system/"spiritual" practice. If you'd care to explain, that is, if not, I understand.

You sure you ain't a Christian?

Quite certain Although Hermeticism did originally informed, and in turn over the years was informed by, Christianity, it originated in Egyptian and Greek polytheism and the Mystery Schools contained therein and was influenced by - though to what extent is debated - Eastern mysticism (which also informs my worldview in it's modern incarnation to a lesser degree). But no, my worldviews, beliefs and practices are quite far from Christian.

I know the concept of suffering/punishment as a method of teaching is commonly associated with Christianity, but in my case, my belief in it's necessity (reasonably practiced and only when other methods have failed, I have to emphasize) comes from my own experiences with certain family members and acquaintances, and my general observations of society. We've developed this warm and fluffy idea that children can be raised properly purely through good example, encouragement and positive incentive, and it's absolute nonsense. If that was the case, parents would never have started using punishment as a method to bring their children up properly in the first place - no decent parent enjoys inflicting even the tiniest form of suffering on their child. Which is exactly what's caused this rubbish concept that children will just develop strong discipline and proper social behavior automatically if left to their own devices in the first place (if I had to speculate, I'd say the modern reticence towards negative incentive in raising children is a rebound effect from it's excessive use in earlier eras), and as a result we've got a generation with an epidemic of lazy, narcissistic drop outs who have no idea how to function as a adult in the real world because they were never taught (many of them diagnosed with aspergers or ADD or whatever excuse the DSM can provide for what's really, 9 times out 10, just poor parenting, then often drugged up to the gills with whatever the corrupt pharmaceutical industry is pumping out that year).

So no, I'm not Christian at all (although I do have a certain respect for many aspects of the original, basic message of Christ), but in this particular case, I agree with the Bible.

Proverbs 13:24 - "Whoever spares the rod hates their children, but the one who loves their children is careful to discipline them."

Although I think the "rod" part can be taken metaphorically in this day and age, as the necessity for any but the lightest corporeal punishment no longer exists. There are plenty of ways of creating a sufficient negative incentive without inflicting physical pain which previously didn't exist.

[Medusa]

Re: When bad things happen

Ok. I'm going to sound flippant because I'm sleepy and don't want to type up a long reply here. I have a problem with the universe using punishment as a teaching tool.

my belief in it's necessity (reasonably practiced and only when other methods have failed,...

1. Who exactly in the universe is doing this punishing and teaching? I mean EXACTLY. A being? An idea, an abstract? I want to know who so I can thoroughly kick them in the nuts. If they have any.

2. Reasonable. I get that. I actually agree with that. The 'bad things' going on in this world that you believe are caused by the universe as a form of punishment to learn goes beyond reason. I mean. Girl. Serious evil shit goes down on a daily basis.

3. Let's talk personal beliefs. Because you brought up this is your opinion because of your experiences. And I respect that. I can't call them wrong at all. Not for you. You have your reasons based on your experiences that have caused you to come to this conclusion. That the universe punishes us for a learning good reason.

4. I'm sincerely sorry you got effed over by the universe that you think this is reasonable. I assure you. The bad shit that happens to you is no cause of your own for not learning the first time you were around.

5. My quick personal laundry. My father passed when I was 11 years old. My mother was a mentally ill bi polar schizophrenic woman in and out of mental hospitals. Finally forced into electroshock therapy. She passed away 2 years ago a horrible painful death in the hospital. I was by her side. I was raped as a child. Enough to have big giant black gaping holes in my psyche of complete memory loss.

6. If that is the universe teaching me a lesson I didn't learn I must have been Hitler's right hand woman. That aint true. I didn't need this to teach me some lesson. I have a black heart. But it aint that black to believe that shit. Not once is the universe my mortal foe like some Marvel comic. Not a once.

7. I believe the universe is just that. The universe. There is no he or she to it. There is no ghost like robe. No beard. No wise aura. The stars are not the eyes of the omni one from above. It is a vast black cold universe. And there's nothing evil about it. There is no teaching. There is no learning. That is a human construct. The universe is beautiful for being just what it is. Nothing more. Nothing less.

8. This thread turned dark because under all the words...words like punishment and deserving are a bleak idea. A bleak idea that comes from a broken soul.

Tell me I'm wrong. But you and I know. I'm not.

[Aeran]

Re: When bad things happen

I think you're confusing my spiritual views on the meaning of suffering throughout a person's life with my personal views on the place of negative reinforcement (ie punishment/disciplining) in raising children. My bad I guess, I should have made it clearer when I was referring to which, but I thought the spiritual side of the discussion was over.

For the record, post #26 (on page 3, unless you have a different posts/page count) and everything after it (including the most recent post you're responding to) are referring to my opinions on the real world and practical interpersonal behavior, not metaphysics or spirituality.

[Jembru]

Re: When bad things happen

I am late to get back to this thread and there's more to reply to than I really have time to do, but I'll do my best to say as much as I can on this..

Very interesting, Jembru.

The first comes from The Book of Job. If you're familiar with it, essentially, Job, a loyal and dedicated follower of Yahweh, is subjected to horrible tribulations... Simply because Yahweh has a bet going on with Satan. At the end of it all, Job asks (quite politely, considering the circumstances) for an explanation - why did you do this to me?

Yahweh's answer is, essentially this: I'm god, you're not. You will never understand why I do what I do, so don't even try.

The upshot of this is: our perspective as human beings is limited in comparison to that of an omnipotent, omniscient being, so we must trust in god, even when it seems completely idiotic to do so.

I've never read the story myself, but I have heard of it, from South Park, and my feelings are pretty much the same as Kyle's. I can't find comfort in the concept that deity would harm their devotees for the sake of proving a point. I can't even stomach human beings who emotionally abuse their partners because it reassures them that they're loved. I see that as a sign they have mental issues that really need to be addressed. So God is mentally ill? At least Satan knows he's a d*ck and makes no appologies for that. Nah, I won't find any convincing or comforting answers in the Bible. Because yes, I do think it was written by human beings with an agenda and while it does offer a code to live by, it doesn't speak for any god I'd feel comfortable having faith in.

The converse is what I call the "Nietzcheian-existentialist" view. It begins with solipsism - because of our limited, human perspective - relying entirely on our limited, human senses, we can not know "ultimate truth." Therefore, the most reasonable thing we can do is take the universe as we find it, understand it as best we can, and act based on what looks to us as as the most sensible, decent, and appropriate way - and hope for the best.

My definite preference is for the later, but this is a place where people have to make their own call - and accept full personal responsibility for the results of that call.

History will judge. Are people better off when they do the former, or when they do the later?

Your next suggestion is a bit easier to digest, because I'm used to looking at everything from wine making to red stone (the way builds in minecraft are powered) with a sense of 'someone gets this sh*t but it's way beyond my comprehension'. That said, my reaction to the fact that the Truth is beyond my understanding doesn't lead me to the conclusion that all I can do is make the best of the world as I experience it. Having experienced my life without deity I know that I'm one of those people who get real benefit from having faith. That said, I may well feel differently about Atheism if I'd chosen to explore it, because a belief there is no god is still a belief. I wasn't really Atheist, I was void of any belief at all. Neither knowing nor caring whether or not there was such thing as god, but assuming that if there is he or she is powerless and worthless of my time and effort.

Now though, so much is happening in my life that I can't ignore the presence of spirits and deities in my life (although I no longer see 'deities' as a separate category). I also can't say for sure that I'm not creating these events with my own mind. However, I wouldn't be creating these events with my own mind if I didn't believe it's coming from outside influences.. so if I stop believing, I'll stop enjoying the world I've recently found myself back in.. the world that until recently, I'd convinced myself had all been my imagination.

My experience is that reasonable punishment is a very necessary part of learning and development, and that to deprive an individual of it is to do them a great wrong in the long term. Children don't learn how to function by some kind of osmosis, they do it through the guidance of adults. Sometimes they behave in a way that, if continued, will have a negative impact on themselves or their environment. If they don't stop said behavior when the reason it must be stopped is explained to them (as often happens, not because they're a bad individual, but because they don't understand the reasoning as a result of their immaturity), then a combination of positive and negative incentives must be used as tools to alter their behavior. You aren't doing a child any favors by refusing to punish them when they eg. don't do their homework (after all other methods of altering their behavior have been tried), all you're doing is ensuring that they'll undergo a greater suffering down the line when they perform poorly academically. There's a reason "discipline" has become synonymous with "punishment" when speaking of children, and discipline is key to living a successful and fulfilling life.

Yes, when the punishment is there to teach us that our actions will be harmful, that's fine. But our evolution already ensures that for us. If we do something dangerous we risk injury and that causes pain. A parent smacks their child, or removes privileges or whatever, because that is a kinder, less harsh punishement than the child losing a finger, or their life. Such punishments come from kindness and the desire to protect the individual from greater harm. You even felt the need yourself to make it clear you were talking about 'reasonable punishment'. I agree with that, but the kind of suffering I am talking about is not reasonable punishment and isn't in anyone's best interest. I don't know if you believe in ghosts. I managed to reconcile a believe in reincarnation AND the concept of earthbound souls, but I know not everyone can. If you do believe in that too, surely you have heard the stories of how souls become earthbound.. and they're rarely happy tales. I don't believe all, or even the majority of people who die in atrocities become earthbound, but some do and in either case, these spirits haven't grown into shining beings thanks to the rape and torture they experienced before they died slowly from blood loss. And there is nothing 'reasonable' about such a punishment.

Punishing bad behavour is NOT however, as effective as rewarding positive behavour when it comes to becoming creative, intelligent, motivated and well rounded individuals. You bring up a child in an environment where every positive achievement is praised and rewarded, you get a child who learns because they want to, not because they have to.. I have first-hand experiencing from teaching teenagers English that those who were there because they loved Western culture and wanted to be able to watch movies and American sitcoms without subtitles, were much easier to teach and did far better than those who were there because their pushy parents thought English would be good for them. Motivation is definitely stronger when it comes from reward rather than punishment.

The same is true of animals. Are you familiar with the 'round pen technique' or 'join-up' of horse training? I've seen it first hand and it is amazing. Rather than beating a horse to within an inch of its life as was apparently common practice in the States (I never saw this in the UK, but daresay it's happened here too), the technique just uses natural horse behaviour*. I've only witnessed it done with tame youngsters, but I've seen Monty Roberts do it on TV with wild mustang with almost identical results (getting a completely unbacked horse to bear a rider within hours). There is still an aspect of 'punishment' in that the reward to the horse is feeling safe, so you need the horse to begin by not feeling safe. This is now bringing up new questions of whether or not the technique is ethical but in my opinion, you now don't have to beat the animal for days on end, so like the parent protecting their child from greater harm, the fear the horse feels before the join-up is achieved is nothing compared to the treatment they used to face at the hands of their trainers. Best part is that a process that used to take days now happens in just hours (and in many cases less than an hour). The result is happier animals that serve their masters because they feel comforted doing so, rather than fearing mistreatment.

If dumb humans can learn this, then so can the gods!

For me, it really seems that the best answer is that the gods are simply not as all-powerful as we'd like them to be. Yet that's no reason not to respect them. It doesn't mean they're completely powerless either. Some bad things happen because we simply made poor choices. If we're smart, we'll learn to change our patterns of behavour to avoid similar incidents happening in future (like the child not putting their hand in the fire a second time), sometimes our gods might intervene and divert us from greater harm by making us miss that train, fail that job interview, essentially smacking our hands before we touch the fire. Sometimes the 'bad things' are too big and too far outside of the control of the gods. I'm still not entirely happy with this answer, but I was so moved by the story of the Prince of Rabbits that I can't help but feel there's some truth in it.. that the gods haven't abandoned us.. they've tried to arm us with the ability to avoid danger and help ourselves, but ultimately the demands of nature, the complexities of population growth mean that human suffering can't be avoided.

Where this now leaves me is.. I know that nothing I do will prevent something horrible happening in my life, but if I practice my religion.. using psychic protection, listening to my hunches (I had an awesome experience a few days ago where a vision I had turned out to be spot-on and an incident was avoided as a result.. but that's for another thread I think), and using spells to draw positive experiences to me, as well as covering the mundane routes of common sense, the risk of harm can at least be reduced. I don't have to like that there is human suffering an a massive scale, but I don't have to let it become an excuse not to attempt to live a good life myself, and I don't have to blame and hate the gods because of it.

*But it's been proven only the horse's behaviour matters.. human body language is less important as we used to think.

[Aeran]

Re: When bad things happen

Yes, when the punishment is there to teach us that our actions will be harmful, that's fine. But our evolution already ensures that for us. If we do something dangerous we risk injury and that causes pain. A parent smacks their child, or removes privileges or whatever, because that is a kinder, less harsh punishement than the child losing a finger, or their life. Such punishments come from kindness and the desire to protect the individual from greater harm. You even felt the need yourself to make it clear you were talking about 'reasonable punishment'. I agree with that, but the kind of suffering I am talking about is not reasonable punishment and isn't in anyone's best interest. I don't know if you believe in ghosts. I managed to reconcile a believe in reincarnation AND the concept of earthbound souls, but I know not everyone can. If you do believe in that too, surely you have heard the stories of how souls become earthbound.. and they're rarely happy tales. I don't believe all, or even the majority of people who die in atrocities become earthbound, but some do and in either case, these spirits haven't grown into shining beings thanks to the rape and torture they experienced before they died slowly from blood loss. And there is nothing 'reasonable' about such a punishment.

Punishing bad behavour is NOT however, as effective as rewarding positive behavour when it comes to becoming creative, intelligent, motivated and well rounded individuals. You bring up a child in an environment where every positive achievement is praised and rewarded, you get a child who learns because they want to, not because they have to.. I have first-hand experiencing from teaching teenagers English that those who were there because they loved Western culture and wanted to be able to watch movies and American sitcoms without subtitles, were much easier to teach and did far better than those who were there because their pushy parents thought English would be good for them. Motivation is definitely stronger when it comes from reward rather than punishment.

The same is true of animals. Are you familiar with the 'round pen technique' or 'join-up' of horse training? I've seen it first hand and it is amazing. Rather than beating a horse to within an inch of its life as was apparently common practice in the States (I never saw this in the UK, but daresay it's happened here too), the technique just uses natural horse behaviour*. I've only witnessed it done with tame youngsters, but I've seen Monty Roberts do it on TV with wild mustang with almost identical results (getting a completely unbacked horse to bear a rider within hours). There is still an aspect of 'punishment' in that the reward to the horse is feeling safe, so you need the horse to begin by not feeling safe. This is now bringing up new questions of whether or not the technique is ethical but in my opinion, you now don't have to beat the animal for days on end, so like the parent protecting their child from greater harm, the fear the horse feels before the join-up is achieved is nothing compared to the treatment they used to face at the hands of their trainers. Best part is that a process that used to take days now happens in just hours (and in many cases less than an hour). The result is happier animals that serve their masters because they feel comforted doing so, rather than fearing mistreatment.

If dumb humans can learn this, then so can the gods!

For me, it really seems that the best answer is that the gods are simply not as all-powerful as we'd like them to be. Yet that's no reason not to respect them. It doesn't mean they're completely powerless either. Some bad things happen because we simply made poor choices. If we're smart, we'll learn to change our patterns of behavour to avoid similar incidents happening in future (like the child not putting their hand in the fire a second time), sometimes our gods might intervene and divert us from greater harm by making us miss that train, fail that job interview, essentially smacking our hands before we touch the fire. Sometimes the 'bad things' are too big and too far outside of the control of the gods. I'm still not entirely happy with this answer, but I was so moved by the story of the Prince of Rabbits that I can't help but feel there's some truth in it.. that the gods haven't abandoned us.. they've tried to arm us with the ability to avoid danger and help ourselves, but ultimately the demands of nature, the complexities of population growth mean that human suffering can't be avoided.

Where this now leaves me is.. I know that nothing I do will prevent something horrible happening in my life, but if I practice my religion.. using psychic protection, listening to my hunches (I had an awesome experience a few days ago where a vision I had turned out to be spot-on and an incident was avoided as a result.. but that's for another thread I think), and using spells to draw positive experiences to me, as well as covering the mundane routes of common sense, the risk of harm can at least be reduced. I don't have to like that there is human suffering an a massive scale, but I don't have to let it become an excuse not to attempt to live a good life myself, and I don't have to blame and hate the gods because of it.

As I said to Medusa, the post you're responding to was referring to purely mundane, material punishment in a social/familial context, nothing metaphysical beyond my short aside about the influences on/influence of Hermetic philosophy throughout history, which is something I threw in because she mentioned Christianity. Didn't mean to give the impression that the rest of the post was referring to anything metaphysical/spiritual or to be taken at anything other than face value.