[Avodah] Rav Sharki on university students

[David Riceman via Avodah]

RMB:

> 
> Simplest example, in https://youtu.be/9pRzyioUKp0 Dr Sally Haslanger
> (of MIT) "proves" that an Omniscient Omnipotent Omnibenevolent (OOO)
> G-d could not exist because an OOO Being could prevent all evil and
> tragedy.
> 
>    1. If God exists, then he/she/it would be OOO
>    2. If an OOO being exists, then there would be no evil
>    3. God exists
> 
> First proposal. Therefore
>    4. There is no evil
> 
> But observation will tell you:
>    5. There is evil
> 
> We can't have a contradiction, so one of our givens must be false.
> (1) is true by definition -- G-d is by definition OOO

This is wrong.  Omnipotence is an incoherent concept.  I actually once started a thread here called “What can’t God do?”.  Some examples: Can God break his own promises? Can God punish people for doing good?  Can God lie?

I suspect omnibenevolence is equally incoherent.  But Hazal certainly reject it when they say that the world is a shituf of din and hesed.  Omnibenevolence is analogous to pure hesed,

Furthermore it is presumptuous to define God.

> (2) is not really an assumption, but a logical conclusion. (It hides a
> prior formal proof.) A G-d who would know about any evil, doesn't want evil
> to exist and can do anything would have eliminated that evil.

Again, evil is a fuzzy concept.  But this is an example of a general problem with utility functions.  People, and possibly, for all I know, God,
have multidimensional vector valued preferences.  Two bundles of goods may exist without one being fully better or worse than another.
So, for example, excising evil would also excise free will.  Would God really want that?

David Riceman