His pessimism can be attributed to the relations between his perception of the external world and his mental state, however right now his pessimistic perception of the world is purely a reaction to his past experience.
If i was his friend i would talk to him, take him back to the time he was not so pessimistic and reason the reason for his present dilemma (if I may say if it is...)
Snow is White or Sugar Sweet
Snow is white and sugar is sweet...
well, beyond the physical realm of the objects we see lies the existential aspect that is closely related to the frame of mind that sees/feels the object.
Ethically which is more moral - Snow being white or Sugar being sweet ??
Psychologically would I at first sense - Snow being white or sugar being sweet ????
the relative aspect of the whole objectivist point of view is more or less attributed to Physics but the Subjectivist point of view is completely controlled by the subject
Freedom:
Other: Direction is free from the laws of gravity.
Jithendar: "Laws of Gravity" dont necessarily necessitate effects caused by gravitation. The laws have no control over the phenomena because the laws were formulated by observing the phenomena.
In this particular case, "Direction" is an abstract physical aspect of different phenomena. Hence this can be regarded secondary to a phenomena. Obviously we are not in a comfortable state to relate direction and laws of gravity without ambiguating any more than it already is...
Gods Responsibility of a perfect world:
Perfect ??? well today perfect would mean a lot of different things, from an idealistic notion perfect seems to be the natural and imperfection would allude to defective nature, but the materialist world is so not in conjecture with this idea of perfectionism.
Hence,the very contradiction is an imperfection or "perfection" ??
Getting back to the topic, the responsibility of God is totally a thought which belongs to the realm of the unknown which could ultimately be reasoned but the fact that we are inconclusive of the nature of perfection and imperfection is a sure barrier...
The Problem of Ethics:
The problem of ethics is basically a relative one, just as we still aint sure what good means.
Resolving this delimma will not aid us any more than we already are but understanding the secondary aspects that directly or indirectly influence the very fact i hope will.
Ethics is nothing to an individual but is everything to an individual in relation with another individual.
We see that I have nothing to do with morality but We.
However "we" is just relationship and society, hence when dealing with this notion which is not an abnormality but the very essence of humanity, a cautious presumption to this problem is imminent...
The Self:
The self is what we seem to assume that which was or will transcend or otherwise as some would call it just "what is", however said; the essence of the self which being the common thread on which many have tread could never be complete...
The indiscerptibility of the fact is that which seems to confound as a fragmental approach would be much easier as we are conditioned to reason with divisions
Creationism or Evolutionism:
anti - evolution and pro - creationism are never the same.
The innate anti - evolutionist will substantiate claim by either suppoting or opposing evolution and the same goes for the pro - creationist. the degrees also vary...
The point being that there is no clarity on the stand and this chiefly influences the stultiloquence/absurdity immanent in the very discussion. We could argue eternally but the loopholes are infinite...