Like everything else about us, human conation has evolved subject to the pressures of natural selection to fit, more or less, the contours and confines of human life.
Human desires, aversions, and preferences do not naturally extend to every imaginable or abstractly possible set of opportunities, options, or alternatives.
Hence the economist's or mathematician's invocation of indifferences to cover over massive lacunae.
And they most certainly do not extend to the creation of worlds, to the set of all possible worlds, or to choices among them.
All the same, some religions posit, more or less explicitly, a divine choice whether to create a world and which world, among all possible, to create.
Moral theology then faces the questions how that choice was made and whether it was well made.
Imaginary questions concerning imaginary choices of imaginary divinity, appealing to wholly imaginary criteria, for which natural human preferences are entirely unsuited, which humans nevertheless imagine they can or must answer.
Questions inherited and perpetuated by existentialism and pessimism.
Questions to which humans can provide only imaginary answers.
No comments:
Post a Comment