The Probem of Evil

[Morten]

Sorry if this has been done before, but I stumbled upon ol' Swinburne recently and reread a dreadful essay he'd written, you know, the one in which he differentiates between moral evil and natural evil and explains why God allows it.

Then I thought of Ivan Karamazov, who said: "..if the suffering of children goes to make up the sum of suffering needed to buytruth, then I assert beforehand that the whole of truth is not worth such a price."

To me, the existence of evil precludes the possibility of an allegedly benevolent God's existence.

[El Viejo]

I may have a question for you, and possibly the start of a discussion, but it depends on whether or not you consider yourself benevolent. Do you see yourself in this way?

[Sarasvati21]

If evil didn't exist, you wouldn't be consciously aware of what true "benevolence" is. The existence of evil provides opportunities for God to demonstrate his righteousness. If everything were always well, and everyone were always kind, the human race would not even need to contemplate the existence a benevolent God. If he were thought of, it would be taken for granted that he is good, and thus his goodness under-appreciated.

The dictionary definition of benevolence is "the desire to do good to others; goodwill; charitableness." While you may express this sometimes, if a circumstance arose in which it would do you personal harm to be benevolent towards another, would you put this other person above yourself? If your answer is no, you are not truly benevolent; you do not truly have another's best interest at heart at all times.

[Morten]

If evil didn't exist, you wouldn't be consciously aware of what true "benevolence" is. The existence of evil provides opportunities for God to demonstrate his righteousness. If everything were always well, and everyone were always kind, the human race would not even need to contemplate the existence a benevolent God. If he were thought of, it would be taken for granted that he is good, and thus his goodness under-appreciated.

The dictionary definition of benevolence is "the desire to do good to others; goodwill; charitableness." While you may express this sometimes, if a circumstance arose in which it would do you personal harm to be benevolent towards another, would you put this other person above yourself? If your answer is no, you are not truly benevolent; you do not truly have another's best interest at heart at all times.
So genocide, disease, murder, rape, etc is all good and justified, then?

[Morten]

I may have a question for you, and possibly the start of a discussion, but it depends on whether or not you consider yourself benevolent. Do you see yourself in this way?

I do not consider myself benevolent. Shoot.

[Dori]

So genocide, disease, murder, rape, etc is all good and justified, then?

Those are products of the autonomy bestowed upon us by God.

[PeterL]

To me, the existence of evil precludes the possibility of an allegedly benevolent God's existence.

Why? I think that for you to make your comment and have it be true, you would have to know the workings of that God's mind. I greatly doubt that you do know the working of any God's mind. What may appear "evil" to you may have effects that you can't see that greatly outweigh the apparent evil.

[Wintermute]

Hi Morten,

I agree with you and M. Karamazov. What was the title of Swinburne's essay?

Thanks,
Doug

[Morten]

Why? I think that for you to make your comment and have it be true, you would have to know the workings of that God's mind. I greatly doubt that you do know the working of any God's mind. What may appear "evil" to you may have effects that you can't see that greatly outweigh the apparent evil.
Ah, yes. Of course. So you know the working's of God's mind, do you? I'll just turn a cheek to all the horror that happens everyday because, though I will never find any proof for it or reason to believe it, God is cooking something really great. Among its many ingredients are children's tears, blood, young women's dignity, human freedom and pine nuts. I like pine nuts.

I feel much better already.

[El Viejo]

I do not consider myself benevolent. Shoot.

Well, it depended on your seeing yourself as benevolent. Do you consider yourself evil then? Not that those are the only choices.

[Morten]

Well, it depended on your seeing yourself as benevolent. Do you consider yourself evil then? Not that those are the only choices.

Certainly capable of both evil and benevolence, like any human being. I wouldn't consider myself either (who would?) and on most days feel endlessly fallible, but able and capable of acting in the interest of others, particularly the small number of people in this world I very much care about.

[blazeofglory]

There is some confusion regarding the existence of the Devil. In fact both devil and god are not two different beings. One asserts the existence of the other, or that it is the devil indeed who corroborates the existence of God. e

In fact there is no difference of God and the Devil, for ultimately the Devil will be submerged into God

Therefore there is no separate existence of evil from good at all.

[PeterL]

Ah, yes. Of course. So you know the working's of God's mind, do you? I'll just turn a cheek to all the horror that happens everyday because, though I will never find any proof for it or reason to believe it, God is cooking something really great. Among its many ingredients are children's tears, blood, young women's dignity, human freedom and pine nuts. I like pine nuts.

I feel much better already.

Whether I know the mind of any God or Goddess is not relevant. The question is whether anyone can truly unravel the skein of cause and effect to tell whether anything is ultimately good or evil. That thought always makes me feel better, also.

[Morten]

There is some confusion regarding the existence of the Devil. In fact both devil and god are not two different beings. One asserts the existence of the other, or that it is the devil indeed who corroborates the existence of God. e

In fact there is no difference of God and the Devil, for ultimately the Devil will be submerged into God

Therefore there is no separate existence of evil from good at all.

I'd be more careful using the phrase "in fact" when, in fact, none of what you said is in anyway a fact.

[blazeofglory]

I' be more careful using the phrase "in fact" when, in fact, none of what you said is in anyway a fact.

It is just because all that has been said is simply illusive and there is no iota of reality in the statement. What you call evil is a none eixistent entity singly. What you claimed fact is something born of your imagination.

Indeed people go astray if they become uncritically dependent upon bookish knowledge. Indeed it is exciting to broaden the domain of knowledge, yet it is unworthlwhile to remain hooked to particular sets of ideas simply because they are stylishly presented.

People take the meaning of evil based on what they might have read in books.
Their world is constricted within a narrow realm of dead ideas.

[blazeofglory]

This is a subject that stirrs loads of discussions.

Evil is a nonexistent entity per se. For what we call evil is the sheer creation of our imaginative faculty, for it is likened to a shadow, for it is the object it created the shadow.

To think the existence of shadows preceding objects is to be veiled by illusions.

Evil is like a state of darkness and once light pervades it becomes nonexistent.

Both light and darkness are states or kind of illusions and in truth they complement each other

[Virgil]

And what would you call a murderer? Let's say a gangster who kills for money or psychopathatic killer who kills for some perverse pleasure? I believe evil exists. Actually I believe it's the absence of good.

[Sarasvati21]

And what would you call a murderer? Let's say a gangster who kills for money or psychopathic killer who kills for some perverse pleasure? I believe evil exists. Actually I believe it's the absence of good.

Agreed.

[blazeofglory]

It is all circumstances that lead man to commit sins. Man is circusmcribed to commit murder and anybody is vulnerbale to such circumstances.

Imagine one is born to a family. The parents are thieves and naturally they are forced or conditioned to commit thefts and of course under that circumstance every child is so much prone to such an environment that conditions or shapes his or her mind to a great extent.

Here every child is likely to commit sins. Does he account for what he does when hemmed in a circumstance.

Anyone can be subject to evil and any body can be like anybody.

What we call good or evil is assoicated with human beings, and any human being is equally vulnerbale.

Good or evil is a state of mind.

[Sarasvati21]

If good and evil are states of mind, then murder, rape, torture, robbery are all only bad/evil because we -think- they are?

[Virgil]

It is all circumstances that lead man to commit sins. Man is circusmcribed to commit murder and anybody is vulnerbale to such circumstances.

Imagine one is born to a family. The parents are thieves and naturally they are forced or conditioned to commit thefts and of course under that circumstance every child is so much prone to such an environment that conditions or shapes his or her mind to a great extent.

Here every child is likely to commit sins. Does he account for what he does when hemmed in a circumstance.

Anyone can be subject to evil and any body can be like anybody.

What we call good or evil is assoicated with human beings, and any human being is equally vulnerbale.

Good or evil is a state of mind.

Well, those are interesting examples but they are not the totality of people. What about a gangster who kills for money or a psychopathic killer who kills for perverse pleasure?

[SirRaustusBear]

Blazeofglory it sounds like you are a naturalist, or at least subscribe to some of their beliefs. It is a compelling argument that genetics, upbringing, and our outside environment control our actions. I am, frankly, unable to come up with any kind of decisive counterargument to this point of view, but I still believe in free will.

Assuming that free will does not exist as you suggest, however, still does not preclude the existence of evil.

I am of the opinion that almost all evil derives from selfishness. Evil acts are selfish ones. A murder for money, or for a perverse pleasure as has been mentioned above, places the murderer's wants and needs above the life of the victim. This is true with most actions regarded as evil or hurtful: theft, racial/religious intolerence, cheating in a relationship. Even if I am bred to be selfish, my selfishness is evil, and a poor upbringing does not excuse it. I know if I were the victim of a crime I would feel an evil act had been done to me, and I think you would feel the same in that situation.

[Dori]

I will elaborate on my previous post. By all means, feel free to be as critical as you see fit in replying. ;)

I believe that God (if he exists), in his omnipotence, omniscience, omniperfection, and aseity, bestowed upon us the gift (or perhaps the curse) of free will. If a flawed being (a human being, in other words) is able to freely make decisions, the opportunity for that being to be evil (to rape, murder, etc., etc.) must coexist with the opportunity for that being to be virtuous.

[SirRaustusBear]

Okay, I will accept the free will argument, but a lot of evil actions, wars, etc., are started because of competition over resources. For instance Japan's violent expansionism in WWII was driven in large part by the need for resources on a small island with a growing population. Why would God create a world without adequate resources to sustain his creations? Could he not foresee that this would lead to violence and evil?

Also, all of the world's cruelty does not come from humans. Why does God create storms at sea that drown sailors? Saying it is meant as a punishment for their sins isn't really an adequate response because plenty of worse people go unpunished every day, unless God is doling out these "punishments" on a whim, which doesn't sound very godlike.

Suggesting that we simply can't understand God's motives so we shouldn't think about it is very dangerous. People said the same thing when Jim Jones, founder of the suicide cult The People's Temple, began breaking his own rules. He was holy and should not be questioned. Then he fed everyone cyanide. If you refuse to question the world around you, you risk becoming a sheep.

[Sarasvati21]

Perhaps there were adequate resources for the way God intended the world to be. He started Adam and Eve off in their garden of Eden, and it was enough until they grew discontent. Also, the Japanese made a choice when they decided to so violently expand--they chose to kill thousands of people to achieve additional resources.

God is omnipotent, omnipresent, and omniscient. Those are the attributes which make him God. Who are we to pretend that we know his reasons for acting? Storms at sea and everywhere else are part of the balance of the planet's climate. You are right: God does not act on whims. If he saved everyone from everything, wouldn't it be too easy to believe in him? No one would have to have any faith then.

I'm not sure who said we shouldn't think about God's motives because we can't understand them. God is not human, he does not act on cruel whims, nor does he break his own rules. It's rather contradictory to attribute him with enough God-like power to expect him to save sailors caught in a storm out at sea, and then place him back on our level by comparing him to a human who led his followers to death.

[SirRaustusBear]

Sarasvati I don't think it is contradictory at all. Why must power come with wisdom? Zeus was very powerful, but he certainly made mistakes.

If God is omniscient couldn't he foresee the will of the Japanese to expand? They were, after all, merely being fruitful and multiplying. The whole omniscience thing is rather confusing anyway. If He knows everything, then He knew that putting the tree in the garden would cause Adam and Eve to fall, so He must have wanted that to happen or He would have averted it somehow. Man's suffering is a direct result of that original sin, so did God want us to suffer? If the answer is no, then God is not truly omniscient, and if the answer is yes, he is cruel. If He loved us, he would have given us a world with free will, but without suffering.

And why does God want to make it hard to believe in Him? What is his goal in doing so? If his goal was to be worshipped it would seem appearing in person would effectively accomplish this goal. I know questions like why did God create us and why does he want us to worship Him are not completely answerable without asking Him, but we should be able to come up with some reasonable theory. The inability to do so suggests a flaw in the God theory.

[blazeofglory]

Blazeofglory it sounds like you are a naturalist, or at least subscribe to some of their beliefs. It is a compelling argument that genetics, upbringing, and our outside environment control our actions. I am, frankly, unable to come up with any kind of decisive counterargument to this point of view, but I still believe in free will.

Assuming that free will does not exist as you suggest, however, still does not preclude the existence of evil.

I am of the opinion that almost all evil derives from selfishness. Evil acts are selfish ones. A murder for money, or for a perverse pleasure as has been mentioned above, places the murderer's wants and needs above the life of the victim. This is true with most actions regarded as evil or hurtful: theft, racial/religious intolerence, cheating in a relationship. Even if I am bred to be selfish, my selfishness is evil, and a poor upbringing does not excuse it. I know if I were the victim of a crime I would feel an evil act had been done to me, and I think you would feel the same in that situation.


You sound very convincing. Despite the fact I have some counterargument I subscribe to your ideas considerably.

[Dori]

If God is omniscient couldn't he foresee the will of the Japanese to expand? They were, after all, merely being fruitful and multiplying. The whole omniscience thing is rather confusing anyway. If He knows everything, then He knew that putting the tree in the garden would cause Adam and Eve to fall, so He must have wanted that to happen or He would have averted it somehow. Man's suffering is a direct result of that original sin, so did God want us to suffer? If the answer is no, then God is not truly omniscient, and if the answer is yes, he is cruel. If He loved us, he would have given us a world with free will, but without suffering.

Perhaps as human beings we misconstrue what suffering actually is. Is suffering so bad?

[SirRaustusBear]

It's easy for me to say suffering isn't so bad and it's worth it for reward in some next life as I sit comfortably in my relatively spacious and warm dorm room eating a delicious 3 musketeers bar. If I was starving on the streets of Lagos or living in constant fear that my government would decide I was a traitor and send me to some labor camp until I died it would be a bit different.

I can't look at images of refugees fleeing Sudan and think "Is suffering so bad?" Tutsis in Rwanda were dragged from hiding places and hacked to death with machetes in the street. Suffering is bad, suggesting otherwise reveals the pampered lives that I and most members of this board have lived.

[El Viejo]

It's easy for me to say suffering isn't so bad and it's worth it for reward in some next life as I sit comfortably in my relatively spacious and warm dorm room eating a delicious 3 musketeers bar. If I was starving on the streets of Lagos or living in constant fear that my government would decide I was a traitor and send me to some labor camp until I died it would be a bit different.

I can't look at images of refugees fleeing Sudan and think "Is suffering so bad?" Tutsis in Rwanda were dragged from hiding places and hacked to death with machetes in the street. Suffering is bad, suggesting otherwise reveals the pampered lives that I and most members of this board have lived.

Good answer. Suffering and poverty are relative until you reach the level where there is actual pain and deprivation. SirR, for instance, is snacking in a dorm room. He isn't being attended to by domestics and private tutors, nor is he dying of malnutrition in a mud hut somewhere, his nostrils clogged with flies.

Maybe it's like an experiment. God, in his infinite love, omniscience, and white labcoat is examining human endurance. He's got a ninety-six well microplate with environments ranging from nutrient-rich in the upper left to corrosive on the lower right, and we happen to have been dropped into the midrange somewhere.

[blazeofglory]

I will elaborate on my previous post. By all means, feel free to be as critical as you see fit in replying. ;)

I believe that God (if he exists), in his omnipotence, omniscience, omniperfection, and aseity, bestowed upon us the gift (or perhaps the curse) of free will. If a flawed being (a human being, in other words) is able to freely make decisions, the opportunity for that being to be evil (to rape, murder, etc., etc.) must coexist with the opportunity for that being to be virtuous.

Free will is not free the way we think, and things happen or people make them happen out of the DNA of their bodily makes and the environment one is in.