|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: ’tis human to err…….’ ?
|
shadeson
Shipmate
# 17132
|
Posted
While wondering what ‘the Kingdom of God/Heaven’ could mean, and remembering “thy will be done, as it is in heaven….”, I read the following quote from C.S. Lewis (The Problem of Pain) - admittedly I have yet to read the book;
“We can, perhaps, conceive of a world in which God corrected the results of this abuse of free will ………therefore, freedom of the will would be void”
There is quite a fuss at the moment about the rapid increase in security cameras - some people find it irksome (snoopers charter etc.), but others say if you do nothing wrong why worry.
I see a time when miniature body worn video will be used for security reasons (used by police now) and anything you do or say could be “shouted from the rooftops”.
It would be interesting to hear what the crew would think of their behaviour being continuously checked - let us assume without malice.
Posts: 136 | From: uk | Registered: May 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
Could you narrow down the OP at all? It seems to be all over the place. As an Open Theist, I'm of course intrigued to discuss your Lewis quote, which raises interesting questions re the nature of free will. But the 2nd half of your OP seems to want to take us in a different direction re the nature of surveillance and privacy, and how that might impact our personal moral choices. The two could possibly be conjoined, but may need to fill in a few dots there to make that connection. What precisely were you wanting to discuss?
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
hosting/
The privacy angle seems to be covered quite nicely by this active thread.
If people want to pursue that aspect, can I ask them to do so on that thread?
If anyone wants to take up the other aspects of the post, feel free to do so below...
/hosting
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
irish_lord99
Shipmate
# 16250
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by shadeson:
While wondering what ‘the Kingdom of God/Heaven’ could mean, and remembering “thy will be done, as it is in heaven….”, I read the following quote from C.S. Lewis (The Problem of Pain) - admittedly I have yet to read the book;
“We can, perhaps, conceive of a world in which God corrected the results of this abuse of free will ………therefore, freedom of the will would be void”
Having not seen the quote in context, it seems erroneous on it's face simply because it assumes that man didn't have free will before the fall.
Also, the church fathers made a pretty strong argument for free will being a component of one who is "made in the image and likeness of God." If you accept that, then free will is a part of our nature and we cannot be divorced from it.
Finally is the notion that God wishes for our love, and love from a drone is essentially worthless.
CMMV (Calvinist milage may vary) ![[Devil]](graemlins/devil.gif)
--------------------
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." - Mark Twain
Posts: 1169 | From: Maine, US | Registered: Feb 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
shadeson
Shipmate
# 17132
|
Posted
Sorry about the Kingdom of God bit - I was just indicating how I had arrived at the question.
The Lewis quote seemed relevant though.
The question is ‘would you object to your every action being continuously under surveillance (to repeat, without malice) for the greater good of society‘?
Although it does link with the extant thread, the question is a bit more fundamental to my mind.
Posts: 136 | From: uk | Registered: May 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by shadeson:
Sorry about the Kingdom of God bit - I was just indicating how I had arrived at the question.
The Lewis quote seemed relevant though.
The question is ‘would you object to your every action being continuously under surveillance (to repeat, without malice) for the greater good of society‘?
.
How do those three things link together? What is the point of the Lewis quote in a discussion of surveillance?
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
shadeson
Shipmate
# 17132
|
Posted
I can imagine such detailed electronic surveillance (not just body cameras) that all intended evil actions were prevented. This is the situation that Lewis thinks would make our free will void.
I don’t happen to agree with him, but if this surveillance became possible would you be willing to live like this?
(heaven is just an extension of the idea - I understand that no evil is possible there, yet we aspire to that place)
Posts: 136 | From: uk | Registered: May 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Moo
Ship's tough old bird
# 107
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by shadeson:
I don’t happen to agree with him, but if this surveillance became possible would you be willing to live like this?
(heaven is just an extension of the idea - I understand that no evil is possible there, yet we aspire to that place)
AIUI the idea is that people who reach Heaven do not want to do anything wrong. The thought never crosses their mind. They are purified.
Moo
--------------------
Kerygmania host
---------------------
See you later, alligator.
Posts: 20365 | From: Alleghany Mountains of Virginia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528
|
Posted
... or if it crosses their minds, they are instantly and wholeheartedly grossed out, and refrain of their own free will from any such disgusting thing. (I've often thought that heaven/perfection is another way of saying "regaining spiritual sanity")
[ 21. February 2015, 22:06: Message edited by: Lamb Chopped ]
--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!
Posts: 20059 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by shadeson:
Sorry about the Kingdom of God bit - I was just indicating how I had arrived at the question.
The Lewis quote seemed relevant though.
The question is ‘would you object to your every action being continuously under surveillance (to repeat, without malice) for the greater good of society‘?
Although it does link with the extant thread, the question is a bit more fundamental to my mind.
Now, to your point--
AFAIU my actions being under continuous, non-malicious surveillance is a precise description of my situation vis-à-vis God right now. All my actions (and thoughts! and intentions!) are known to him; but he is well-disposed toward me anyway, not malicious. (What's the opposite of malicious? auspicious? Anyway...)
So I can answer the question from experience. I would not object to that kind of surveillance from God, who has a right to know. I WOULD object to it from anyone else because created beings have a right to innocent privacy for at least some actions, some times--I wouldn't place even a dog under 24 hour surveillance. Besides, when would we wrap the Christmas presents?
Then, too, I doubt any human being could provide 100% guaranteed non-malicious surveillance of anyone else. Even a mother or father, who attempt to do this with babies on account of safety, will still have moments when they are thinking "that is totally disgusting" or "why the hell did you just do that?" and if the babies were aware of their parents' attitudes, no doubt they would object most strongly. And parental love is about the closest thing we have to non-malicious surveillance. Ask a government to attempt it-- okay, I'm laughing now.
--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!
Posts: 20059 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
shadeson
Shipmate
# 17132
|
Posted
I’m almost sorry I introduced the spiritual dimension to this discussion, but it was just to explain how my meandering mind got to the point. God only knows what heaven is like except we can agree that there is no evil. (Apart from warring angels which makes very good poetry!)
So ‘how much non-malicious surveillance are you prepared to allow to prevent evil actions’?
If we assume for the purposes of the question that the embarrassment of bodily functions did not exist, is there any more fundamental reason why surveillance should be limited?
In recent news, chip implants are used in some people for security.
As for the dog, Lamb Chopped , its true that sheep are under 24 hour surveillance for their protection.
Posts: 136 | From: uk | Registered: May 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
Total surveillance can't prevent evil actions. It wouldn't have prevented 911.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Horseman Bree
Shipmate
# 5290
|
Posted
The Tao of Tommy appears to have something to contribute to this. Scroll down to #3.
What is free will if everything is governed by the All-Seeing Eye-in-the-sky?
Of course, the other side of that question is: what then does govern the choices you make?
--------------------
It's Not That Simple
Posts: 5372 | From: more herring choker than bluenose | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
shadeson
Shipmate
# 17132
|
Posted
I think Martin60 misses the point. No amount of surveillance in a closed society would prevent evil imposed from outside. My question remains.
How far are you prepared to go in surveillance to eliminate evil in our own jurisdiction? If that surveillance were non malign, would you still have objections and why?
It also seems that Horseman Bree thinks I am suggesting total control rather than prevention of evil - again missing the point.
In any case I don’t want to divert into the ‘what is free will’ endless discussion despite its interest.
Posts: 136 | From: uk | Registered: May 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
