What is the source of Evil?
-
I don't think I agree. It's completely possible to have good without evil because there are people in this world, millions in fact, that can't even consider committing an evil act.
Let's say some people in this world, due to a combination of genetics and conditioning, become immune to evil. Why couldn't God just make everyone like that from the start? We still have the possibility of evil, but everyone would be so averse to it that it wouldn't actually exist.
Whether we'd recognize good behavior as good then is an entirely different matter. Maybe in that world the concepts of good and evil wouldn't exist, but the behavior of people would still be "good."
What do you think. -
I don't think I agree. It's completely possible to have good without evil because there are people in this world, millions in fact, that can't even consider committing an evil act.
Let's say some people in this world, due to a combination of genetics and conditioning, become immune to evil. Why couldn't God just make everyone like that from the start? We still have the possibility of evil, but everyone would be so averse to it that it wouldn't actually exist.
Whether we'd recognize good behavior as good then is an entirely different matter. Maybe in that world the concepts of good and evil wouldn't exist, but the behavior of people would still be "good."
What do you think.Millions of people that can't even consider committing an evil act? I think it's quite naive to think this way.
And at any rate, that's missing the point. I'm saying goodness implies evilness.
The two are interrelated concepts, like back/front. One presupposes the existence of the other, logically.
Now, saying things like "to become immune to evil" is a different discussion altogether, for you are now admitting that evil exists, since the person in your hypothetical has become immune to it. You can't be immune to something that doesn't exist after all, right? And that's the point I was making.
On that topic, though, I'm not sure how one can become 'immune to evil.'
You are right, I suppose, in that God could have chosen to create automatons in a universe without good or evil. That's logically possible, though it seems rather pointless?
But, you are trying to make the point that God could have chosen to create a universe that contains good but does not contain evil. And that's where I disagree. Because the two concepts necessitate each other.
It's like asking God to create a square circle. It is completely nonsensical, a logical impossibility.
-
peace Lobster,
Long time no see )
While I'd normally agree with this argument, here's a possible flaw
The company making the knives is bound by physical laws. For example, something that is sharp and can cut eggs can also cut through human skin.But God himself is not bound by any laws. Usually in our world to gain something you have to lose something orjust deal with side effects, but why can't God create something without any downsides or possible risks, without any possible risks?
Can you tell us how it is possible to allow a sharp enough knife to cut meat/vegetables but not able to cut or kill another human being?
Or if you say the knife is sharp enough to do both but humans would simply not do it, i.e. we do no evil.
Such a human would have no free-choice, or at least, I cannot think how this would work without erasing free-choice, or how a test to distinguish people would work in such an environment.
As soon as you eliminate free-choice, you eliminate the test.
I recall watching the film "Bruce Almighty" and Jim Carrey remarked "how can i make her love me without affecting free-choice?" and God said "welcome to my world". ;D
-
Caveman doctor, I don't think it's naive. I consider myself to be someone who is generally good, and so are most other people I know. We may slip up from time to time but we would not commit all out "evil" acts. But anyway, let's say God created humans that were genetically so predisposed to doing good that they never did evil. Let's call them "the people of the good."
The possibility of capability of something existing doesn't mean it exists. So if these people of the good never committed evil then evil wouldn't exist.But obviously that would be pointless. So I guess the hidden premise here is that there has to be a point?
Wakas, peace to you too. I have missed you guys.
If, let's say, humans were made of diamond, but ate vegetables to survive. You could certainly make knives that would be completely harmless to us.
But anyway, that's irrelevant.So our existence has to have a point, we have to have free-will. So you (and Caveman) would say that God created this life as a test, and that's why evil exists, because its the byproduct of our free-will. Fair enough point.
-
"how can i make her love me without affecting free-choice?" and God said "welcome to my world".
Like that one too! It might sound very simple to many but the consequence is at least as great as the universe.
In response to Lobster's point on "people of the good who never committed evil", I can't but think that no matter how advanced some human beings could be, they will still have to face the option of "progress" and congress "no progress" (which would lead to "regress". And even if they would never touch evil, someone else (less advanced) will.
Tell me someone you call "good" that doesn't like to help. Now let's say that, the people of the earth have all become "good", that even the least good ones behave like Jesus did. What would be the next logical step for their progress? Yes, they would have started to explore the universe to find other "human beings" to help!
Back to our current reality, even if what you say were true, that millions of people are good etc (well i'd love to believe that we have --at least the potential of-- billions, but only God knows), these people would still have to face the choice of progress/non-progress. And a famous quote fits the theme only too well "All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing."
-
Diamond humans? Exactly. Also, if they eat vegetables, how can one make it so one diamond-human cannot withhold vegetables from another diamond-human?
As you can appreciate, the hypotheticals and the solutions become increasingly absurd, until all logic breaks down. Or at least, I cant think how an alternative would work without affecting free-choice. But of course, a person could say "well God is all knowing, He could have came up with a solution that worked" and whilst that is theoretically possible, no-one I have met has ever came up with a plausible alternative, not even close to one.
-
How can one make it so one diamond-human cannot withhold vegetables from another diamond-human? I offered an explanation of that to the part of my post addressed to Caveman doctor.
The hypotheticals serve simply as thought experiments, so they can be as absurd as you like. The point is to show that logically the possibility exists.
But I don't have an argument against your point. I agree that to eliminate evil would most probably eliminate free-will as well.
-
Salam,
I'm having some trouble understanding the initiation of evil. If all comes from God, does that mean evil also comes from god? Did God create Evil?
YES
Without "Evil" there's no "Good".
Without "Good" there's no "Evil"
Everything in this universe are created in "pair".
Good and Evil, Positron and Electron, Light and Darkness,And just recently, we also found out that there's Matter and Anti-Matter...
When "matter" are separated from "anti-matter" then "IT EXIST", when matter unified with anti-matter then "IT DOESN'T EXIST".
The state of universe before "creation" was a unification of matter and anti-matter, also called "NON-EXISTENCE".I have heard the argument that Satan used to be an Angel, and then he turned "evil." What caused Satan to do this? Satan may tempt all of us, and we may "sin." But how did satan manage such a sin? Who tempted satan?
PRIDE AND ARROGANCE..
Usually human does "Evil" without anyone tempting them.. although human also have a chronic tendency to blame other human for their misconduct, if they have no other human to blame, they blame SATAN...
Again everything was created in pair the opposite of PRIDE AND ARROGANCE is HUMILITY...
By those you can easily decide what to do for yourself.. and every action has its consequences..Salam / Peace
-
Greetings and peace, all group
When matter and antimatter meet, all that happens is that the form changes into another constant (energy and subatomic particles). As science explains (and demonstrates), nothing is ever created nor destroyed--only forms change. Maybe one day this understanding will change.
Regarding concepts such as "front" and "back"...consider the M?bius strip! It is one sided. ! Where is the "front" on a perfect sphere?
Maybe evil and bad are human concepts, similar to time. They are only labels, similar to numbers. Do numbers exist in any real construction except as a concept? To different observers, the same phenomenon can be either "good" or "bad." To a farmer, rain may be welcome or "good"--to a vacationer, the same rain may be considered "bad." The rain cares nothing for labels--it is, and exists without care for what it is called.
"What's in a name? That which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet." ~Juliet, from Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet"Not if they were called Stink Blossoms." Bart Simpson
Does darkness exist, or is it merely the absence of light? Does cold exist, or is it the absence of heat? I'd argue that the absence of one thing does not constitute the presence of another (except as a concept or description). Can anyone "create" darkness in the midst of light? Can anyone create or destroy time? Likewise, cold can't be created without (re)moving heat.
What is the opposite of chocolate? <heh> Of course it might pair well with something else.
Has anybody here heard the story about a man who asked Allah to create an immovable object? In the story, Allah did this. Then, the man asked Allah to move the object from one place to another (point A to point B). In the story, Allah shifted the entire creation except for the immovable object so that the object was next to point B.
Allah knows best, in all things.
peace
~Abdul-Hadi
-
When matter and antimatter meet, all that happens is that the form changes into another constant (energy and subatomic particles). As science explains (and demonstrates), nothing is ever created nor destroyed--only forms change. Maybe one day this understanding will change.
Right you are.. "Creation" and "Destruction" are 'virtual' concept as well..
The same thing as "live" and "death"..Good and Evil also depends on the 'perception'.. one of the most important and common thing among Abrahamic philosophy is EMPATHY..
"Treat others as you would like to be treated", that's the most important commandment, a young jewish sage 2010 years ago once said..To judge one deed as "Good" or "Evil" just shift the viewpoint..
For example
'slavery' is it good or evil? If you're the master then shift your viewpoint to be the 'slave'.. and judge by yourself... how would you like to be treated when you're the 'slave'..And also every action has it's own consequences.. whenever how good or evil it is..
What goes around comes around or as the before mentioned young jewish sage once said "you'll reap what you sew"..Salam / Peace
-
Greetings and peace, all group
I certaintly agree regarding empathy! The golden rule, no matter how it is stated, is key to all systems of worship.
Christianity
All things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye so to them; for this is the law and the prophets.
Matthew 71Confucianism
Do not do to others what you would not like yourself. Then there will be no resentment against you, either in the family or in the state.
Analects 122Buddhism
Hurt not others in ways that you yourself would find hurtful.
Udana-Varga 5,1Hinduism
This is the sum of duty; do naught onto others what you would not have them do unto you.
Mahabharata 5,1517Islam
No one of you is a believer until he desires for his brother that which he desires for himself.
Sunnah
Not equal are the good and the bad response. You shall resort to the one which is better. Thus, the one who used to be your enemy, may become your best friend.
Qur'an 4134Judaism
What is hateful to you, do not do to your fellowman. This is the entire Law; all the rest is commentary.
Talmud, Shabbat 3idTaoism
Regard your neighbor?s gain as your gain, and your neighbor?s loss as your own loss.
Tai Shang Kan Yin P?ienZoroastrianism
That nature alone is good which refrains from doing another whatsoever is not good for itself.
Dadisten-I-dinik, 94,5 -
Peace All
I don't think that evil can be said to be the absence of Good because I can perceive of a middle ground where one is neither good nor evil but purely neutral but i cannot do this in the case of light and darkness so the two are not the same.
Caveman Doctor, not so sure on your exmaples.....
Front requiers a back and a bachelor is neccessarily not married but this is just a thing with language in which the word entails certain things and rules out certain things. It is certainly impossible to perceive that overall an act be good and evil at the same time (kinda like the square circle example) BUT consider thisIf the only shape in the world was triangle, would we be able to recognise it as a triangle? I'm not sure but we would still experience it.
Similarly if there was only good in the world, would we recognise goodness? Again, not sure but we would experience it. We might not define it as such and PERHAPS not recognise it but it does not mean that we would not be able to experience it. So good could have existed without evil.So good cannot be disitinguished in the absence of evil but this does not mean that good logically cannot exist without evil. So whilst a human mind would not acknowledge goodness, it could still experience goodness. This is concievable.
I gotta go but i'l come back to this thread as theres more i wanna say.
Peace
-
Not so sure how you arrived at the "so good could have existed without evil" conclusion.
It's not about defining it as such or even recognizing it. I don't think it's merely an issue of semantics.
I think it's quite clear that the phrase "if there was only good in the world" is simply nonsensical. If there is only good in the world, then the word "good" itself simply loses all meaning so as to be pointless to even mention. Good is a diametric concept; it is a concept that only finds its meaning in opposition to something else. If the "something else" does not exist, then it too does not exist. It wouldn't be about not recognizing good or not. There would be nothing to even recognize, or distinguish from.
It is much like the front/back thing. The concepts have no meaning without the existence of the other. To say the "back" of something is meaningless unless the experiencer also has a concept of what "front" entails. Same thing with "good" and "bad." If the world is only "good" (i.e. the resident of the world has no concept of "bad", then the experiencer wouldn't recognize anything as "good." Experiences would just "be."
You CAN have a world with neither good nor bad; that's logically possible. But you CAN'T have just one without the other.
-
I don't think a true understanding of duality is actually based in good and evil.
It is more like male and female. Polar ends of a magnet.
We don't know enough about history or the universe to determine the exact circumstances behind something like a comet or some other object nailing the earth and causing mass destruction and affliction... but I imagine that there is a kind of reverberation which followed it and echoes in everything we do.
People usually say something is evil when they are afraid of it but it's still a relative conclusion, regardless of what they are comparing a thing to or basing their determination upon.
-
Peace Cavemandoctor
Cavemandoctor i reread my post and realised i just jumped unappropriately to the conclusion nope (sorry)
What i should have made clear is that good could exist without evil because the absence of evil does not mean the presence of good nor does an absence of good mean the presence of evil. As an example think of an act that is neither good nor evil.Can you do this with light and darkness? You cannot think of something that is not lit nor in darkness (you can't have neutralness in this matter it must be either lit or in darkness) Which is why im suggesting that light and darkness is an example that does not fully and appropriately relate to good and evil. What's your take? Don't you think it logically possible for God to create the universe without evil?
Peace Shadowpuppet
In some sense I agree on what you say on relativity. But ultimately i don't think that good/evil is subjective or relative. I think it's clearly objective. Humans however may not have uncovered all the objectiveness there is to good/evil or may not have fully obtained the concept to comprehend good/evil objectively.Peace Wakas and Lobster
To make sure i understand what been exchanged between you two
Of Wakas' knife example. I understand the knife to be free-will. A tool with uses and dangers and that it could not have been created or brought about any differently considering it's functions to cut fruit etc (needs to be sharp) and how this function would serve as a danger to other things.
considering the neccessary nature of the tool (sharpness), changing it (not sharp) would make the tool devoid of it's function and purpose. Same thing with freewill. Lobster is saying BUT the context and circumstances could change.@Lobster. You agreed that without evil there would most probabely be no freewill. But if this is your take on the matter then how else can the context and circumstance change to accomodate the nature of the knife (freewill)?
I don't think your diamond solution works becuase of the difference in the nature of a knife and freewill. You cannot alter the state/nature of humans to make them freewill proof or resistant as being freewill proof is like having no freewill if you get what im saying. Where as being knifeproof does not effect you having a knife.You cannot conceive of a change in humans that would make freewill less dangerous because of the very neccessary nature of freewill.
The only thing you could do is to make all humans morally good as then freewill would be used well and the danger side of the tool (freewill) is gone. But morality comes from exercise of freewill thus this option is ruled out and thus logically and rationally there is no possible hypothetical scenario as you suggested the possiblity of. Unless you believe that morality is not derived from the exercise of freewil.....
Thus you cannot make humans in such a way that GUARANTEES freewill to be harmless to them due to the neccessary nature of the tool. Altering the user as you originally suggested would make the tool devoid of its purpose and function.
a person could say "well God is all knowing, He could have came up with a solution that worked
Knowing all things does not mean that a solution that works exists. For there could be no such solution and the allknowing would know about this (that there is no solution)
But on the Almighty side of things, someone MAY be able to say he could have come up with a solution to the problem as he is almighty (capable of all things) But i agree with cavemandoctor. Could illogical things be possible?Could that which is able to do all things make a square circle? Or a married bachelor? No because it is impossible and therefore does not count as a thing IMO
Therefore God is able to do all things provided it is a thing. A married bachelor is not a thing Thus this isn't a problem so far as i can see.
Peace
-
http//sio.midco.net/m3zh3p/though.mp3
-
Peace,
And goodness can perhaps be seen as the normal state (in the "eyes" of Allah), while evil is the extent to which one is distant from this state. One who is close to Allah is more good than one who is far from Allah. Hell would be the farthest place away from Allah, but don't ask me for a quote on that. -
To make things seem simpler, rather than doing 'evil' vs 'good' in a spectrum. Do 'good' vs 'non-good'.
In order for goodness to exist, non-goodness (or evil) should exist.
The 'non-goodness' is a spectrum since obviously certain non-good things that people do is a lot worse than other 'non-good' things people do.
-
Satan threatens you with poverty and orders you to immorality, while Allah promises you forgiveness from Him and bounty. And Allah is all-Encompassing and Knowing.
Scarcity a factor in Evil.
Rich people Evil because the scares in life expectancy, they don't live forever.
why Iblees evil? It does not have the total freedom, ie heaven, free from Allah.
To prevent evil is with good morality and abundance of human needs. Life extension technology also a way to prevent evil.
