Pain and Morality and how moralists seem to care more about the rule than the suffering you endure

Pain is seen as a warning that something is wrong. That is how we read it but that does not imply it is intended for telling us something is wrong. It may just do it.  For most of the creatures that ever have lived this warning generally has been useless. What use is dying from the plague? Pain is a threat. Why would pain need to warn you so severely of a toothache and not of pancreatic cancer? Even if pain is nothing compared to suffering the fact remains that it is cruel to condone pain. Suffering is not only about great pain but about being in a bad situation even if you do not know it.

Suffering is the experience that living is no longer any good.  It is odd how so many argue that pain is good but suffering is bad for suffering can be a warning that life is meaningless and you must do something to make it mean something.

Most of us take it for granted that to cause pain without need is wrong.

But if it is wrong then how wrong is it? Surely it would be always wrong but the more hurt then the more wrong it is.

Some do not think that pain being unneeded is enough to make it wrong. They think that if pain is sometimes good as many say then why can’t we say it is always good or neutral? Why accuse person of being bad for causing pain? Why do we find it okay to give them the pain of condemnation?

What if you consent to pain? Does that make it okay even if it has no benefit for you?  Does it make a cruel action less immoral when the victim consents?   But that does not convince many people. Why? Because you cannot really consent to great pain for you cannot really know exactly what it is like beforehand. 

Religion tells people to accept whatever evil God allows to happen to them.  That makes the people feel supported by religion.  They feel trouble is inevitable to it is best to accept it.  They imagine religion is helping them.  But it is not.  It is the obvious that says we must be prepared to accept trouble not religion.

According to the concept of morality, if you are immoral you will suffer even if you think you are only hurting others.  You would expect a God maybe to rig it so that sin or evil brings bad consequences for the sinner or evildoer who really does do wrong.  But how can God ensure there will be bad results for you if you mistake water for poison and give it to your thirsty archenemy?  Most so-called evil deeds are mistakes.  Good can be a mistake too.  People can suffer terribly for doing good or what they think is good.  Obviously then God must intervene to ensure that mistakenly doing good when you intend to be bad will make you suffer like you would if the action were harmful!!  The idea that God does not punish but evil punishes itself is utter soppy nonsense.  If you suffer and your intention is only to hurt a person then what if your intention is also to offend God? It follows then that you do more harm to yourself. Even if there is no God you still intend badness so if bad intentions damage you then religion is harmful for telling you if you do wrong you mock God.

In what way will you suffer if you intend to do wrong? Here are examples. You breed evil temptations in yourself.  You invite people to not care about you.  You invite them to maybe do evil to you. And some will take up the invitation.  Your evil breeds evil in yourself and in others.  Religion adds that there is some mysterious harm done that cannot be described well or explained.  The latter is it's wishful thinking for evildoers cannot relate to that one and their experience proves to them that it is nonsense.  If evil cannot happen without breeding new evils then it does not have to be that way. If it is then it is God's fault.  A stomach upset does not have to breed further stomach upsets.


But with morality the damage you do to yourself by being immoral is not a consideration.

Religion says there is no problem of evil when we talk about natural evils such as bad viruses being made by God or floods.  They only care about what they want to blame human beings for.  They see natural evil as not really evil but merely bad as in horrible but not really bad.  Pain and suffering are in fact turned into kind of good and justifiable in themselves and not just for any end result by faith in God. Nobody can reallycontrol the pain they put on you. So it follows that pain and suffering are not reasons to condemn an action.


No Copyright