Regarding Good and Evil

[no_spoon]

Hi gnomon (and others).

I continued my research after my recent reply, and then I stumbled on a C. S. Lewis book I haven't read yet, "The Problem of Pain" (I think you may agree that when deciding what is "evil" the question of what causes pain or harm is closely connected).

Also, I just remembered ONE example from Mere Christianity that I think shows his originality of thought (though others may not agree, I know). He said people have objected that burning witches used to be deemed "good". Lewis points out that what has changed is man's knowledge, not our ethics. He said that even today if you believe some being was capable of creating famine, causing you and your family to become ill and babies to be still born you would probably consider the death penalty acceptable. We no longer believe that so we deserve no credit for being morally superior. But again, I run the risk of just restating his whole chapter.

 

[GiantHouseKey]

Does anyone here have doubts as to whether using cocaine is bad?

Yes sir. What is so bad about it?

Questions:

If Good and Evil are concepts we instinctively know, why do I not have them. I can pretty happily say that I am a human...

If Good is God's will and Evil is against God's will, this brings up Theodicy. Why would God allow these 'Evil' things to happen if he doesn't want them? Free will would explain nothing if Good and Evil are so obvious to us that we would necessarily make Good decisions all the time. Basically, if people knew what was Good and what was Evil and everybody knew that it was right to do Good then why would anyone do anything else?

My answer is because Good is not always right for that individual. So then, do they consider it to be evil? And if so, how would they justify it to themselves? And if not, then Evil is not really definitive.

(Ps. ben d, thank you for being patient with me. I hope that one day I will understand as much as you )

GhK

 

[no_spoon]

GiantHouseKey, I may be missing your point, but are you saying you cannot think of cases (e.g., stories from the newspaper) where you could point and say "that is evil". I can imagine many actions where one could claim that the powers that be are just trying to maintain control, or that a theistic slant has become unquestioned. But there are still many (in my mind) which remain truly evil (i.e., where the manner in which one person gains an advantage or satisfaction of a desire is so needlessly and disproportionately destructive to others that relativism just cannot excuse it).

As for the "why does God allow evil?" question, I will quote a few fragments from C. S. Lewis "The Problem of Pain":

"not even Omnipotence could create a society of free souls without at the same time creating a relatively independent and 'inexorable' Nature...not all states of matter will be equally agreeable to the wishes of a given soul...Try to exclude the possibility of suffering which the order of nature and the existence of free-wills involve, and you will find that you have excluded life itself"

For more on the connection between free will and pain, see "Is God a Taoist" by Raymond M. Smullyan (just Google it).

 

[methylatedghosts]

I agree with you here.

There are some people in this world who think that they will not die! (sad)

In fact God has made us like that. Had God wanted to, then surely He would have made us like angels; but there is a Wisdom as to why God made us like that. From an Islamic perspective - we say that it is to test us. Since God has provided for us clear guidance (i.e. the Qur'an) then if people pass or fail they test, they will be Judged on the Day of Judgement.

What I mentioned in the previous post is general. These questions which you posed are exception to the rule.

In Islam there are general rules - such as don't eat pork; and also specific rules, for example: if someone does not have anything to eat and is starving such that he/she may die then in that case eating pork is allowed.

Again, the question you have mentioned here is exception to the general rule.

What do you think buddy? (smile)

What do I think? If there's an exception, it's not a rule

 

[methylatedghosts]

Under what circumstances would you find rape acceptable?

I wouldn't, under any circumstance, find rape acceptable, because I disagree with it

There are those, unfortunately, who DO rape others, and DO find it acceptable, for whatever reason (else they wouldn't do it, no?).

I'm not excusing their actions, I'm just saying that the way they understand the world and it's workings, is for them reason enough to rape people.

 

[Mister Emu]

I wouldn't, under any circumstance, find rape acceptable

So you believe that rape is intrinsically wrong then?

 

[methylatedghosts]

So you believe that rape is intrinsically wrong then?

Nope. Neither is it intrinsically right.

 

[Mister Emu]

Nope.

Then I must ask, though with slightly different wording to better get to my point... under what circumstances would you consider rape not wrong?

 

[methylatedghosts]

Then I must ask, though with slightly different wording to better get to my point... under what circumstances would you consider rape not wrong?

Figured it might come to that

Lets say the unlikely event occurs where you are forced between the choice of raping a person or if you don't your whole town and it's people gets destroyed.

Ok, that's a wee bit extreme as an example, but consider rape from a different perspective.

As I've said earlier, I think "right" and "wrong" are merely terms to describe what people agree with or disagree with, and there is nothing that has the intrinsic quality that everyone will either agree or disagree with it. (ugh.. bad sentence structure >_<).

Now, consider the perspective from a rapist. Classically profiled perhaps as having been abused as a child. Now... I don't personally know anyone who's raped a person, but it's my guess that some, (not all) will say that "rape is wrong" even before they do it, yet they do it anyway. But there are those who don't think it's "wrong" (my guess; mental health issues are involved as well), in fact believe it "right".

argh.. losing my train of thought...

It's difficult to try and take it from the point of view of an outside observer who wouldn't have emotion regarding this, but I'll try my best - it's a very sensitive subject.

The laws in place surrounding rape are there, as a result of the people as a whole of society (by this I mean, the vast majority) saying "We don't agree with rape, we believe it is an act that must have punishments attached". Now, say a child being brought up in an abusive environment, perhaps even having witnessed rape, and receiving the message from the adults around him that "rape is ok", either directly or by their actions. Granted, it's probably a whole lot more complicated than that, but you can see that he has no reason to believe that it is "bad" - perhaps even believing it's an acceptable way to show "who's boss". There are indeed people in the world who believe this way. And sure, this child, when he grows up, is responsible for the way he behaves and the actions he takes, but if you put a good 20 years of "rape is ok" training in, there's going to have to be alot of work to reverse that kind of education. I wouldn't say that it's the child's fault for learning this, and I wouldn't necessarily say that it was his parents fault... the REASONS for his beliefs, that is - not his actions. The actions are his, the reasons come from very very far back. He is a victim of victims of victims where somewhere along the line someone was initially taught that "rape is ok".

Maybe I'm going a little off track here, but the other perspective has an equal standing, where I have been taught from the beginning, by actions from the adults around me that "rape is not ok". Here, I am a victim of victims of victims who have been taught this . Again, my actions are mine, yet the REASONS for my actions come from a long way back.

(I don't feel I'm doing very well being articulate here )

... and now I've lost my train of thought. Perhaps an response from you will set me back on track

 

[Comicaze247]

There's really no good and evil, in my opinion. Only perceptions. Different people will see different things as good or evil. Example, a mob hit. The person who puts out the hit on the person sees it as a good thing. The victims think it's evil.

I do see opposites however, but only for the purpose of balance, not necessary a "battle between good and evil." I think the whole idea of a "battle between good and evil" is just human beings trying to understand the world trying to balance itself and applying our own selfish views on it. Anything we don't like that happened (even if nobody had control over it) just had to be the deed of some evil being.

 

[iloveislam]

Yes sir. What is so bad about it?

Questions:

If Good and Evil are concepts we instinctively know, why do I not have them. I can pretty happily say that I am a human...

If Good is God's will and Evil is against God's will, this brings up Theodicy. Why would God allow these 'Evil' things to happen if he doesn't want them? Free will would explain nothing if Good and Evil are so obvious to us that we would necessarily make Good decisions all the time. Basically, if people knew what was Good and what was Evil and everybody knew that it was right to do Good then why would anyone do anything else?

My answer is because Good is not always right for that individual. So then, do they consider it to be evil? And if so, how would they justify it to themselves? And if not, then Evil is not really definitive.

Here's the Answer from the Islamic viewpoint:

Is God Pure, Good, Loving and Fair?

If so, then where does evil, hatred and injustice come from?

Allah tells us He is Pure, Loving, and absolutely Just in every respect. He says He is the Best of Judges. He also tells us the life we are in here is a test. He has created everything existing and He created whatever happens as well. There is nothing in this existence except what He has created. He also says in the Quran He created evil (although He is not evil). He is using this as one of the many tests for us.

Consider people who do so much evil in the earth and then live to a ripe old age in the splendor and wealth of their ill-gotten gains and die without ever being taken to task for their deeds. Where is the justice or fairness in this? Allah provides a clear answer for us in Quran as to what is in store for these most evil of people:


A brief enjoyment in this world! - and then unto Us will be their return, then We shall make them taste the severest torment because they used to disbelieve [in Allah, belie His Messengers, deny and challenge His proofs, signs, verses, etc.]

[Noble Quran 10:70]




That Day mankind will proceed in scattered groups that they may be shown their deeds.



So whoever does good equal to the weight of an atom, shall see it.



And whoever does evil equal to the weight of an atom, shall see it.

[Noble Quran 99:6-8]




Do people think that they will be left alone because they say: "We believe," and will not be tested.



And We indeed tested those who were before them. And Allah will certainly make (it) known (the truth of) those who are true, and will certainly make (it) known (the falsehood of) those who are liars, (although Allah knows all that before putting them to test).



Or those who do evil deeds think that they can outstrip Us (i.e. escape Our Punishment)? Evil is that which they judge!



Whoever hopes for the Meeting with Allah, then Allah's Term is surely coming. And He is the All-Hearer, the All-Knower.



And whosoever strives, he strives only for himself. Verily, Allah is free of all wants from the 'Alamin (mankind, jinns, and all that exists).



Those who believe [in the Oneness of Allah (Monotheism) and in Messenger Muhammad peace be upon him , and do not apostate because of the harm they receive from the polytheists], and do righteous good deeds, surely, We shall remit from them their evil deeds and shall reward them according to the best of that which they used to do.



And We have enjoined on man to be good and dutiful to his parents, but if they strive to make you join with Me (in worship) anything (as a partner) of which you have no knowledge, then obey them not. Unto Me is your return, and I shall tell you what you used to do.



And for those who believe (in the Oneness of Allah and other items of Faith) and do righteous good deeds, surely, We shall make them enter in (the entrance of) the righteous (i.e. in Paradise).



Of mankind are some who say: "We believe in Allah," but if they are made to suffer for the sake of Allah, they consider the trial of mankind as Allah's punishment, and if victory comes from your Lord, (the hypocrites) will say: "Verily! We were with you (helping you)." Is not Allah Best Aware of what is in the breast of the 'Alamin (mankind and jinns)?



Verily, Allah knows those who believe, and verily, He knows the hypocrites [i.e. Allah will test the people with good and hard days to discriminate the good from the wicked (although Allah knows all that before putting them to test)].



[Noble Quran 29:2-11]



Reward and punishment are definitely a part of the Next Life on a very permanent basis. Those who suffer in this life and seemly have nothing to show for all their hard works, good deeds and sacrifices and maintaining the faith can look forward to a far greater reward in a place where these things will not be temporary but rather they will be for eternity. Those who corrupt, violate, injure and do evil and destruction seem to escape any justice here, yet in the Next Life they too will see the fruits of their labors, and certainly they will be paid according to what they have done as well.

As regards oppression, this is something Allah forbids for Himself to do to anyone and He hates it when anyone oppresses someone else. He does have absolute power over everything. He allows sickness, disease, death and even oppression so we can all be tested in what we do.

Taken from: God Allah - Did God Create Evil Too?

 

[Heneni]

One objection: that law doesn't describe what is good or evil. It merely describes what the people agree/disagree with (at least, in a perfect world, anyway - perhaps more so, what the government at the time agree/disagree with). I think you'll find it's not the law that labels a convict as "evil", but the judge's own... well... judgement (which, as we all know, isn't necessarily perfect ^_^).

Ok then...so if the law does not prescribe what is good and what is evil, and is simply based on what people agree/disagree with, then would they not agree with that which they think is commendable and disagree with that which they think is not?

It is commendable for some to do things which is disgraceful to others. And so i dont think our minds are able to not put things into a no zone of morality. Everything we do, in one way or antoher, is linked to what we believe. We act on what we believe, not on what we know.

It is also true, that for some really strange creatures out there, the fact that the law says something is not agreeable, makes them feel rather tempted to break the law and get a sense of satisfaction out of it. So to them it is commendable to break the law. They would be disgusted if they were caught. So not getting caught, is the better way, for them, than not breaking the law. If such men came into power they would be the first to use violence on those who oppose them, since they have been used to doing violence against the law. The fact that they are violent is a moral issue. The law cannot make a man good. By the same token the law cannot make a man bad. What is in a man determines who he is. And if there is no bad or good in any of us, then all men just are, and you believe that it is 'good' to think that way. Which means, there still is 'good' and 'bad'.

Lots of love
Heneni

 

[Willamena]

1) What are Good and Evil?

Good is what is better than something else. Evil is what is worse than everything else.

Definitive? Subjective? Can all acts be put into the catagories of Good or Evil?

Yes; yes; and yes.

2) So therefore what make's any thing, act or belief 'Good' or 'Evil'? What are the criteria?

See #1 above.

Is a Good action to one an Evil action to another, and who's viewpoint does the burden of definition lie on?

For each, as with everything evaluated and judged, it lies with each.

3) If Good and Evil are obvious natural instincts that all men should possess then why do I not possess them?

You're special. And it's good that you're special, though perhaps evil that you don't recognize it in yourself.

 

[lophophora]

There is nog good or evil, only perspective and opinion..

 

[Mister Emu]

Figured it might come to that

Lets say the unlikely event occurs where you are forced between the choice of raping a person or if you don't your whole town and it's people gets destroyed.

The extremity of the scenario aside... do you believe the rape itself is less, or even not at all, wrong because of those circumstances?

As I've said earlier, I think "right" and "wrong" are merely terms to describe what people agree with or disagree with, and there is nothing that has the intrinsic quality that everyone will either agree or disagree with it.

My apologies for any confusion, but I was never trying to say that there was a universal understanding of the terms "right" and "wrong"...

Now, consider the perspective from a rapist.

I am not, for now, trying to understand the perspective of the rapist, but yours...

Are you arguing that because not everyone would accept the same definition of right and wrong that the concept does not exist at all?

Now, say a child being brought up in an abusive environment, perhaps even having witnessed rape, and receiving the message from the adults around him that "rape is ok", either directly or by their actions

Now, I would never say that we shouldn't understand people, but that does not take away from the fact that even if he or she grew up in a society dating back thousands of years where rape were the norm, that I would still consider it a grave wrong if that person continued in their tradition...

 

[methylatedghosts]

The extremity of the scenario aside... do you believe the rape itself is less, or even not at all, wrong because of those circumstances?

In this specific case, I believe there's a certain well-known phrase for it:
"The lesser of two evils"

I wouldn't call it "wrong", neither would I call it "good".

My apologies for any confusion, but I was never trying to say that there was a universal understanding of the terms "right" and "wrong"...

Okiedokie then ^_^

But that would suggest that there is indeed no real intrinsic value to any "right"- or "wrong"-ness of an action.

I am not, for now, trying to understand the perspective of the rapist, but yours...

Are you arguing that because not everyone would accept the same definition of right and wrong that the concept does not exist at all?

The perspective of the rapist must also be considered, as he is part of it

The concept itself exists as our own personal creation - merely judgements made by us in response to an action - not as a value of the acts themselves.

Now, I would never say that we shouldn't understand people, but that does not take away from the fact that even if he or she grew up in a society dating back thousands of years where rape were the norm, that I would still consider it a grave wrong if that person continued in their tradition...

And that's exactly it. YOU would consider it wrong, THEY consider it right. Intrinsically it is neither, it is only an action. Perspective, opinion and our own judgements are what label the action "right" or "wrong". The act is not right or wrong of itself.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

I believe Good and Evil exist, but only through action. They do not have any meaning apart from a specific act - they don't exist as some sort of entities.

I would define them in relation to the "golden rule". Any action which is in accordance with it would be good, and any action which is in opposition to it would be evil.

 

[Bishadi]

good thread

Greetings

Regarding the concepts of 'Good' and 'Evil'... I don't get it. I don't believe that Good and Evil exist. Not just that they are not actual things that exist in the form of God and The Devil, but that the conceptual ideas behind Good and Evil are non-existant.

when looking at the big picture, in a sense, you are correct.

So I ask 3 main questions:

1) What are Good and Evil? Definitive? Subjective? Can all acts be put into the catagories of Good or Evil?

the subjective is the perspective. We are alive 'within' existence, so we are subjective to the opinions derived within. Hence cultures.

What you pointed out above is observing from a collective standpoint (all of existence), then no good/bad exists without its opposite. almost like a Hydrogen atom is composed of both polarities, and neither is a whole atom without the other.

but since we are 'within' existence and life is what we experience, then in our state, 'good and bad' do exist relative to 'life'.

2) So therefore what make's any thing, act or belief 'Good' or 'Evil'? What are the criteria? Is a Good action to one an Evil action to another, and who's viewpoint does the burden of definition lie on?

awesome!

words and the opinions (culturally derived)

'burden' is upon honesty as the roots of decision are actually within each.

3) If Good and Evil are obvious natural instincts that all men should possess then why do I not possess them?

but you do and choose what you accept

this thread was opened, by choice, for a purpose; whether acknowledged or not.

'the' good and bad of it will depend on the 'life' of the knowledge being conveyed.

so let's hit the 'life' of good and bad:

life is 'purposed' to continue..... (we are of this period of tangible awareness, within existence, so life is relevant)

the choices we each experience are observed at each cross-road of action. such as we can each choose whether to cause an action to exist or not.

the good and bad, are what define the life of the action. Often the purpose or reason may not be understood at the time, but many impositions have biased purpose before being caused.

the choices to measure can be rooted to reality versus opinion, based on the reality of the 'life' we are experiencing (time of choice)

life and the continuance thereof, is the ultimate goal of all living things

good (choices): support life to continue

whether teaching a child, planting a tree, procreation.. etc... the 'gift' a person can cause, giving of their energy (self) to contribute for the 'good' of life.

it is like giving a piece of yourself to support life, thereby living in that gift even when having no more choice (physical death) you still alive in that gift. (see confucius, darwin, jesus, muhammed, they all still alive as we (mankind) are talking, using and appreciating the knowledge they gave by choice)

bad: loss to the common

the taking for the self.... that causes a loss to existence.

whether it be a tangent (a lie), stealing, murder, etc etc etc.... all cause adversisty to life, the total and existence.

The good, will live longer

the bad, is ooosually a mess, that will always go extinct, eventually.

the ultimate judge is time

so 'within' existence, relevance to life, is the observable measuring stick

to combine all existence, like many a monk does in mediation, then good and bad are fignewtons of the single plane of 'observing'.

problem thereof is, the monk is not contributing to existence, and why many are never known but their suffering of not knowing, is gone. (no children, no gifts by choice, shorter life) Sure the splash is still upon existence, but the contributions are 'less than' the potential of the life.

i always wondered why any teaching would ever suggest not to procreate. As then their parents, their lineage, the 'light' that is their aura (life) has no continuance.

That chain is gone and all that is left is what they did.

 

[Masourga]

If you feel something is a wrong/harmful to you, then it is evil in your eyes. If you feel something is a benefit to you, then it is most probably good in your eyes. The only reason the broader concept of "good and evil" exists is because there are certain extreme conditions that the vast majority of humanity agrees on as beneficial or detrimental - for instance murder classified as "evil", or beneficence classified as "good". Otherwise, the benefit or detriment of a thing is completely subjective.

Let's say you're allergic to peanuts. To you, peanut butter is "evil".

 

[idea]

Good and evil exist: example:
Illustrations of the Tao

Good and evil are relative terms. Take two things / two actions / two objects... one will always be better than the other (if they are not the same) hense one will be "good" compared to the other. To say there is no good/evil is to say everything is the same, everything has equal value. That is simply not true.