The Problem of Evil

[MattJack]

Link

Yea so anyways does anyone know much about this? I mean, obviously the link provides tons of information. I just have a queer essay, and so I'm trying to look for other rebuttals to the original argument that are sound and make sense.

[kahljorn]

Nietzsche talks about the death of god from the problem of goods that can never be achieved.


Aquinas' rebuttle to to the problem of evil is that god is so good that he creates good out of evil or something like that.

i think an interesting approach with nietzsche might be that he doesnt really think there are good and evil, because good and evil is all relative to the person. So maybe gods nature of good is so above us that the presence of evil is somehow a part of it or some crap. Basically, what's good and evil to humans might be completely different than what's good and evil to god. god might not even see good and evil, they could be nonexistant to him. there's a couple of things on that page that look like they are getting at that.
However, i dont even think god has inclinations towards good or evil in the first place, thats kind of silly! If anything, it could be that the problem of evil proves that god doesn't exist as a good god in the way we think he is good.

[MattJack]

Yea I agree with the notion of "what is evil?" Like you said, it is relative to the person, but with that said I think there are some things most everyone would and could consider evil. Such as how did God allow the holocaust to happen, or smallpox, or simply being born into complete poverty where there is no way to escape.

My argument is a simple one that I believe is in that link. I believe that the problem of evil doesn't disprove God's existence and that I think that God has no moral obligation to us as humans. I think that God can still be completely omnipotent, and yet not give a shit about us in the slightest. We simply could be a toy or play thing.

[kahljorn]

beyond good and evil and a geneology of morals are the two books on this subject in case you dont know

[kahljorn]

you could end your paper with, "God doesn't give a damn about me (ho ho ho) and i don't give a hoot about him! as it should be"

[kahljorn]

didn't the nazis think they were doing the RIGHT thing?

i dont know most of the time i wonder what evil even is or if it exists.

in order to say something is evil doesn't it have to be consciously evil?

[MattJack]

lol that'll go over pretty well.
I ended it with basically that there is evil in the world whether God created it or not and he has obviously no moral obligation to fix it. This in turn denies God being a benevolent god, thus refuting how most theologians see God, and that even though he's an uncaring asshole he can still exist. Only I made it sound alot better and put in more sentences.

Basically, God can't be both benevolent and omnipotent. Just can't happen. I just don't want that to seem like a copout. It's perfectly fine for God to be one or the other, right?

[kahljorn]

God can be benevolent and omnipotent if for example the evil was designed to lead us to some good. there was something on that link you posted about that.
and yea i dont see the problem with god being one or the other maybe there's more than one god and ones the omnipotent one and ones the benevolent one.

[kahljorn]

but then if the evil is designed to lead us to good you could say that evil doesn't actually exist because it's purpose is still good..

when you say that it's kind of getting into nietzsche territory that will kill god though. by saying that you are almost indicating that evil acts are fine because they lead to good. lol

[MattJack]

No I don't think all Nazis believed they were doing the right thing. A lot of Nazis had serious drug issues and alcohol issues (during the war), and mix that with a good dose of propaganda and economic depression.

I'm not saying every nazi had a meth and heroin problem, but I know that the ones that would shoot you in the back of the head in the woods after you dug a pit with your friends and family did. That is how alot of the genocide stories leaked into Europe in that day.

Imagine being so fucked up mentally and physically from drugs, alcohol, and war trauma that you couldn't execute a man correctly with a rifle from roughly 5-10 yards away. The guy you thought you killed only got an injury and played dead til all your comrades left, and then he ran into the nearest town naked and bloodied screaming genocide on the Germans part.

Point is, SOMEBODY knew some evil shit was going down.

[kahljorn]

that's true. But is it necessarily evil to be swept along with the evil? What if like hitler and all his friends thought they were doing the right thing and that's what caused the movement in the first place. those people under him were just following orders they didn't want to follow and stuff ;o

[MattJack]

Originally Posted by kahljorn

God can be benevolent and omnipotent if for example the evil was designed to lead us to some good. there was something on that link you posted about that.
and yea i dont see the problem with god being one or the other maybe there's more than one god and ones the omnipotent one and ones the benevolent one.

Well, why could God just not program it into us the notion of evil, thus we'd know not to do it and instead be good.

Or again, couldn't God do one single huge act of evil to make a point like, "Hey, stop fucking around down there, this is how your suppose to act. " *Boom* Smallpox kills 100 million.

[MattJack]

Originally Posted by kahljorn

that's true. But is it necessarily evil to be swept along with the evil? What if like hitler and all his friends thought they were doing the right thing and that's what caused the movement in the first place. those people under him were just following orders they didn't want to follow and stuff ;o

Yes I think good people can def get swept up into by evil. There was a book, shit I forget the name (maybe Ordinary Men?), but it was basically about this normal physician in Germany at the time who simply "got swept up" in all the hysteria and propaganda of the day. He was not evil to begin with, yet he supported evil things and conviently realized later he was the asshole.

I think that eventually, whether it's years later or decades later, one would realize the evil they committed or supported. Obviously not everyone would, as probably a majority die with their beliefs still intact. With all of that said, a vast majority of people know that there is evil. For every Nazi that thought he was doing something good I assure you there was a Jew that knew that he was doing something evil.

Thus how does God come into play into all of this? How would a benevolent and omnipotent God allow such a thing? If it were indeed to lead people or show people a greater good, why all the suffering? Why not just have that programmed in us, for a lack of a better term.

[MattJack]

I think being deceived by evil does not make you evil, but rather after a realization of your actions without any form of drastic change to mend those things does indeed make you evil.

Just following orders is a copout.

[kahljorn]

like the flood :O

the program thing is a good idea i dont know why god's not a little more creative with his power.
maybe evil is necessary. If we couldn't do evil at all, would it be like a magic device in us that holds us back whenever we want to commit a sin? because if we couldn't commit sins, how could we kill to protect ourselves, and how would it be differentiated?
or maybe evil doesn't exist at all and evil is only something we call that demeans our self-interest.

[kahljorn]

so if evil can be unconscious can it be performed by inanimate objects? Like cliffs people fall off of. Are cliffs evil? or what about guns that kill people? are guns evil?
what about the weather and stuff too

there was somewhere i was going with this line of questioning but i forgot because i was studying ;o

[kahljorn]

I'm writing a paper right now about how cultures can sweep people along like that. ;o

anyway im going to bed. good night.

[MattJack]

If evil did not exist, then we simply would not need sins to protect ourselves. We could live in a utopia so to speak. Nobody would try to kill you because that is evil.

I look at it like this: If God elimates all evil, men can't do it.

This is a weak analogy but here goes nothing. You can't fly can you? Like Superman fly, not like on a plane or by some hella bud. You can't fly because you don't have wings or some physical attribute that allows you to do so. Because God created you that way. It is just accepted, you don't go outside everyday and say, "Well I guess I'm gonna go try this flying thing again!" You simply know that it can't happen.

I think the same thing with evil could work only in a much different way. Your mind simply could not compute stealing from or killing another man. It would be absolutely silly or impossible.

[MattJack]

Right, I gotta catch some sleep myself. I'll catch up on this shitbag of a thread tomorrow!

[Gabby GaGa]

Nighty Night! Pleasant dreams.

i have to agree with kahl on this one.

Except,
i dont think evil is comparitive to the person,
but instead the society that creates rules and defines boundries.

For good to exist, there has to be evil, yada yada.
I think some people are designated, or predestined, to commit evil acts.
God's way of creating an equalibrium. So that the existing "good" is dependent on its evil counterpart.

To define one, we always need the other.
Nietzche was interesting because, here again, is a prime example of one who believes himself (and all others) to be their own gods.

This is a strange contradiction,
because on one hand, the individual is supposed to have enough disipline to restrain himself,
while at the same time, he can't be greater then that which came before him.

[kahljorn]

when you're a child you try to fly though, and then you learn you can't. That's not so much a matter of choosing as it is biology, though, but i guess that's your point.

What about animals who attack humans? Of course, it's not considered evil to kill animals because you can eat them. So what's so evil about killing for personal gain, then, since that's what happens in nature? Some animals even kill for fun. So that brings to the table, what's so evil about killing another person for personal gain? Isn't that a part of life, and a part of surviving?

Isn't it only deemed evil out of our own personal interests?

[kahljorn]

if evil did not exist, then we simply would not need sins to protect ourselves. We could live in a utopia so to speak.

yea but a utopia? even in a utopia you're going to have to eat and drink, have rent or whatever a utopia needs to work. You'll be exposed to "suffering", regardless. Is suffering evil? If not, what about the acts that are performed through it's influence?
It almost sounds like a definition of heaven or the paradise in the bible before we "Fell".

[MattJack]

Originally Posted by kahljorn

What about animals who attack humans? Of course, it's not considered evil to kill animals because you can eat them. So what's so evil about killing for personal gain, then, since that's what happens in nature? Some animals even kill for fun. So that brings to the table, what's so evil about killing another person for personal gain? Isn't that a part of life, and a part of surviving?

Isn't it only deemed evil out of our own personal interests?

I think the reasons animals attack other creatures are far different than why humans attack other humans. I think most animals kill for survival, not really just to kill time.

What makes it evil to kill for personal gain is that it puts someone else at a rather ultimate loss. I think most of the time when people kill they kill because of some form of basic greed. Motivations vary, but normally when it comes to taking another person's life the motifs are irrational.

I can't really think of too many scenarios where one would have to kill another individual in order to survive.

Originally Posted by kahljorn

yea but a utopia? even in a utopia you're going to have to eat and drink, have rent or whatever a utopia needs to work. You'll be exposed to "suffering", regardless. Is suffering evil? If not, what about the acts that are performed through it's influence?
It almost sounds like a definition of heaven or the paradise in the bible before we "Fell".

I would think of it to be like a heaven or paradise how the bible presents it before man fell, yes. It is a perfect world, and suffering is completely gone.

This all brings me back to something rather simple I seem to be investing more into:
God cannot be both benevolent and omnipotent. I don't even want to really refer to him as God, but rather The Creator or something to that tune.

Originally Posted by Gabby GaGa

I think some people are designated, or predestined, to commit evil acts.
God's way of creating an equalibrium. So that the existing "good" is dependent on its evil counterpart.

I don't believe anybody is predestined or designated to be or do anything. I believe that one chooses their own path through the decisions they make in life based off their circumstances and morality. If we indeed are predestined to be anything we truly don't have freewill do we? No matter what one would do or say, that individual's outcome is already decided. Therefore, that individual is not responsible for their actions in my eyes.

Why would God need to even create some "equalibrium?" He's God, he doesn't need an excuse to why he has created good. He doesn't have to answer to anyone does he? Why a counterpart? We do not need to have an counterpart of everything to know two sides of something. Further, many things do not have any counterparts. What is the counterpart of chalk? We know perfectly what chalk is without knowing what its counterpart is.

So my rebuttal is a very simple, why did God make it that way? Can God not do everything and anything? If he can't he isn't omnipotent.

If He decided to do it just because, well, He is not benevolent.

[Preechr]

I got an e-mail today that explained all this.

It was a powerpoint slide presentation that had a succession of really dramatic nature pictures, and some with puppies, and the captions explained pretty well that evil is not a thing, just as darkness is not a thing, nor cold. These are just our words to describe the absence of their opposites, which, apparently, are things. It was all very satisfying, and I highly recommend both of you idiots receive similar e-mails. You too, fake-ass moron character.

[kahljorn]

lately ive been picturing preechr as an indignant kid waving his finger at people because his icecream spilled.

"Oh no people are discussing philosophy on a philosophy forum this should be about the middle east or economic problems cause that's all i know about"