Why would god create humans?

I am guessing that you intend this as a counter-example to the idea of "the disregard for the well being of other people" being the essence of evil. But it seems to me that Asperger syndrome effects a lack of awareness of the existence of other people as people which is not the same thing at all. You cannot call this evil any more than the actions of someone without the senses of sight, sound and touch and as a result no awareness of the people around him. Or what about the man having a heart attack or stroke while driving? Immense tragedy may result but as their is no awareness of people in his path, there can be disregard for their well being.Edited by mitchellmckain, : gramatical mistake

---

See my relativistic physics of space flight simimulator at Astahost.com

Yes, that's right, you cannot call it evil, and that's why I called it a counterexample. You said empathy with other people is a choice, and I provided examples where it is not a choice but is under genetic influence.The key question for you is how you tell the difference between a person who lacks empathy by choice, and one who lacks empathy due to genetic makeup. And the same question exists for telling the difference between a person who achieves empathy through conscious choice and effort, and one who possesses empathy due to genetic makeup.The way we are as individuals is a combination of genetics and environment, and identifying the separate threads of the two influences is never an easy matter. Mozart did not write more symphonies than me or you simply because he chose to work harder at it than we did. Sure, he had to work at it, but he was able to do it because he won the genetic lottery with respect to musical ability. John F. Kennedy didn't exude charisma because he chose to. He probably worked at it, but to a large degree he was charismatic because he won the genetic lottery for whatever controls this quality, including a winning personality, good looks and a commanding presence.There are many things over which we have control and a choice, but there are also many things over which we do not, and empathy for others is one of those things that is a choice for some and not a choice for others. You cannot conclude evil for something not under someone's control, and it is difficult to know whether it is under their control or not.--Percy

quote:

---

The key question for you is how you tell the difference between a person who lacks empathy by choice, and one who lacks empathy due to genetic makeup. And the same question exists for telling the difference between a person who achieves empathy through conscious choice and effort, and one who possesses empathy due to genetic makeup.

---

Good question. But identifying the nature of evil is not about making such judgements, it is about clarifying your own choices. You provide a good example why such judgements should ultimately be left to God. In any case, where there is no choice I do not think there can be responsibility.

quote:

---

The way we are as individuals is a combination of genetics and environment, and identifying the separate threads of the two influences is never an easy matter.

---

A combination of genetics, environment and choice! And of course you are right.I choose to emphasize choice because it is pragmatically more helpful, for whatever abilities and talents you have, what really matters is what you choose to do with them. Resting on your innate talents is little different that resting on your laurels. It is a waste. Real genius derives from passion.

quote:

---

There are many things over which we have control and a choice, but there are also many things over which we do not, and empathy for others is one of those things that is a choice for some and not a choice for others. You cannot conclude evil for something not under someone's control, and it is difficult to know whether it is under their control or not.

---

Your counter-examples only show the danger in making judgements of other people which is always true no matter what you call evil, they do not change the value of this idea as guiding principle for living ones own life. Regardless of whether I can prove it or not, I assert that most people can choose and must choose. Pragmatism upholds this postion even if rationalism does not.Anyway back to the original topic, which was why would God create a species as twisted and as sick as this one. Your counter examples then divide the question into why would God create people who can choose have regard for other people or not, and why would God create any people who cannot choose to have empathy at all? But again I say that the real question is why would God create life at all? For it is the nature of living things to make their own path in life whether by genetic choice or conscious choice. The point is still that life precludes absolute determination and control.

---

See my relativistic physics of space flight simimulator at Astahost.com