The Problem of Evil

[Bond]

The Problem of Evil


Is Elektra's violent nature problematic?

The Most Potent Objection

There is one powerful objection to those Christians, Jews and Muslims who believe in an all powerful all good god. This, is the problem of evil.



What is the Problem of Evil?

There are two cores problems when we examine evil:

The Logical Problem. Some would argue the existence of evil itself is logically incompatible with the existence of god.

The Evidential Problem. The evidential issue deals with the quantity of evil and suffering. It is rational to assume an all good and all powerful god would have the ability to produce a world without suffering, or at least without quite so much suffering. And surely he would desire this.

The quantity of suffering is certainly a problem if it is to believed that there is an all good and all powerful god.



Dealing with the Logical and Evidential Problem

For theists, the evidential problem poses quite a challenge, but the logical problem can be dealt with fairly easily. An all powerful all good god would create some suffering if that suffering results in some greater good that outweighs it. Hence, the world would be a better place with this suffering. In example, compassion and sympathy are great virtues, but these virtues can not be exhibited without someone or something to feel this sympathy for.

The evidential problem is more difficult. Logically, an all good all powerful god would not produce a world in which so much suffering exists. For many, this makes the belief in god unreasonable.



Reasonability

There are certain degrees of reasonability – those beliefs that are very reasonable, somewhat reasonable and highly unreasonable. For example:

Very reasonable. Mars exists – though I have never been to Mars myself, I have ample evidence to assume that Mars does indeed exist and have no reason to think otherwise.

Somewhat reasonable. Existence of intelligent life on other planets – we know intelligent life has evolved on Earth and that there are countless planets like Earth, but we have no conclusive evidence to prove this.

Highly unreasonable. Fairies and goblins exist – there is very little evidence for the existence of these beings, and there is ample evidence against their existence.

With this in mind, it is logical to believe we can not conclusively prove or disprove the existence of god. But, even if the existence of god can not be proven either way, it is still possible to believe that the existence of god is very reasonable or highly unreasonable. In this sense, it is not an issue of there being proof for the existence or nonexistence of god, it is an issue of reasonableness.



Is Belief in God Reasonable?

There are two issues that cause the belief in god to be unreasonable. The first, is a popular argument for the existence of god:

It is highly unlikely for Earth to have formed the exact distance away from the Sun to flourish by chance, therefore there must be some type of intelligence behind the universe. This may be true, but the flaw with this argument is that you cannot draw a conclusion to do with the morality or goodness of this creator. All that can be drawn from this argument, and many others like it, is that there is some kind of intelligence behind the universe.

The second problem, is the evidence against the existence of god – this would be the problem of evil.



Responses to the Problem of Evil

There are several theological responses to the problem of evil:

Free will. God gave us free will, he did not wish us to be his puppets. He cut our strings and set us free. Unfortunately, often times we choose to do the wrong thing, which causes suffering. But, that suffering is outweighed by the good of free will.

This, is a good argument, but fails to explain a great deal of natural suffering. Such natural suffering includes tsunamis, hurricanes and earthquakes. It is difficult to reason these natural atrocities in light of an all good all powerful god. Surely this can not be explained in conjunction with free will, as we have no control over such natural disasters. These reasons lead us to explore an often overlooked scenario.



Is there an all Powerful all Evil God?

Interestingly, the argument for an all powerful all evil god is supported by many of the same arguments for an all powerful all good god. Of course, the belief in a supremely evil god is not reasonable, as there is too much good in the world for there to be an all powerful all evil god. This could be referred to as the problem of good. This of course can be countered: Why would an all powerful all evil good give us the feeling of love? Only so that it can be taken away.


Is Jennifer Garner the Philosopher Queen?

Conclusion

On the scale of reasonableness, the all powerful all good god and all powerful all evil god are highly unreasonable beliefs. A somewhat more reasonable belief would be that there is a form of intelligence that is neither all good nor all evil. An examination of daily life on Earth would lend itself well to this argument.

[Teuthida]

Quite distracting. But hey, at least it isn't Natalie Portman.

The concept of good and evil are both relative terms. You don't need to prove the existence of a god to determine if they are relevant. It's the basis of the religion you're scrutinizing that needs to be proven. While the notion of evil is prevalent in the Judaeo-Christian religions, in polytheistic religions this abstraction is almost nonexistent.

You have your trickster gods and your gods who cause hurricanes and such, but none of them are considered to be evil.

If you submit to the Judadeo-Chrisitian God then the laws found in the Old & New Testaments, and the Qur'an (whichever of the three is your flavor of choice) are the word of God, which is enough of a reason to follow them. Who cares if you like pork? God forbids it...or he did...and then he stopped...and then he did again...

For those who don't believe in this God or his buddy Satan, the concept of evil still exists. If one does something "bad" chances are they'll feel regret or remorse. Not always though. And one's concept of what makes something "bad" can change just as easily.

I don't for a second believe there is "evil" in the world. There are things not socially acceptable but change the society and that changes as well.

I'll conclude how I always do: People are idiots. They make up laws and taboos and call things evil because they don't know any better.

[Bond]

Thanks for the reply Teuthida.

I added the pictures to... encourage people to keep reading. I can take them out for the next topic if they're too distracting.

Now, you said you don't believe there is such a thing as evil. Do you believe there is suffering?

[KillerGremlin]

I've always interpreted the Bible as a literary work, specifically an interpretation of events past; it is full of moral and stories that a religion was supposed to be built on. All literary works, at least fiction, have a good and an evil. I believe that good cannot exist unless there is evil. In order to qualify good you need to have an opposite, which is evil.

Too have a world with all good would mean that good would no longer exist. If there was no evil or no bad life would cease to exist because one could no longer experience good. By "adding" evil to the world, we are able to experience good. If you never felt pain you would never be happy because you would never know what it feels like to suffer, and then to not suffer. We, as we are now, could not exist without pain/bad/evil. It was like they said in the Matrix....The early Matrix was designed as a perfect world but no one was happy.

Morals work on opposites. You can't have morals without good and evil. If defining good means "don't kill people" than "killing people" needs an opposite definition, evil. Religions are based on a set of beliefs, and beliefs are rooted on morals, which all fall back on Good and Evil.

[Teuthida]

Originally Posted by Bond

Now, you said you don't believe there is such a thing as evil. Do you believe there is suffering?

Now suffering is something I can get behind. Everyone experiences suffering. Everyone. Stub your toe? You just suffered; unless you enjoy stubbing your toe. Your body sensed pain and received injury but to your mind it was an enjoyable experience. I'll focus on that for a bit.

People impose suffering upon themselves all the time. Usually it's for a greater good and thus tolerated. Want to get buff like Arnold? You're going to be in the gym breaking down your muscles to rebuild them bigger and stronger. When you life weights your body releases endorphins. Endorphins feel good. Without having a goal like in the bodybuilding example why else would someone subject themselves to pain? Consume a Bhut jolokia pepper and you'll feel like you’re dying. But no one sprung it on you. You'll injest it with prior knowledge that it'll hurt. Yet you do it anyway. It's painful but it still feel good. It's a rush.

Ascetics suffer as a way to reach spiritual enlightenment. Might be mistaken of the sect, but heard cases of Jainism in India where one fellow rolled along the ground for months, or maybe years instead of walking. Some other folks keep one arm raised above their head until it becomes withered and useless. Or take a look at monks giving up physical belongings and other things the typical person would consider to be pleasurable. Ascetics one up them by giving up their physical body.

Then there is suffering in the form of deprivation, which also goes hand in hand with the above. In prisons the most severe punishment is usually isolation. Sometimes one is deprived of light or food as well. Fasting is a form of suffering that can be quite healthy. Giving up food or certain types of food is found in almost every religion. One needs food to live. To eat is the most basic of instincts, so to deprive one self or another of food would be considered suffering.

Suffering is a bit more clear than the evil argument. It's still relative because what someone considers suffering, another might enjoy. Physical pain is observable though, so no matter if you hate it or like it, it's clearly wrecking havoc on your body. The fruits of one's labor almost always arise out of some sort of suffering.

A bit rambly.

[Yoda9864]

God and Satan are in an eternal struggle for the souls of men. Each side coerces people so that their souls may be taken. It's all explained in the movie Constantine.


Of course, this whole question relies on the fact that you believe in some higher power. If you do not, then the answer is simply that bad people exist and there is nothing you can do about it. Good people exist, and bad people exist. They balance each other. If they didn't balance each other (i.e.- one side massively outweighed the other), the world could not function. We would self destruct.

[Angrist]

Are we supposed to take this seriously with all those pictures of that woman in it?

[Bond]

Originally Posted by Angrist

Are we supposed to take this seriously with all those pictures of that woman in it?

Yes. The pictures don't alter the content, but I'll take them out next time.

Originally Posted by Yoda9864

God and Satan are in an eternal struggle for the souls of men. Each side coerces people so that their souls may be taken. It's all explained in the movie Constantine.

That's a bit of an easy way out. Absolutely anything can follow that - so nothing can count as counter evidence against it.

[BreakABone]

Personally, I'm a fan of the women.

Haven't got around to reading the thread yet.
So guess doesn't disprove they are a distraction.

[Professor S]

Well, it all depends on what you think is the definition of Evil. There are theological beliefs in evil, but quite honestly, I think the dieas of good and evil go far beyond religion. They are a shared belief that pretty much all humans have, regardless of religion or lack thereof.

Is evil a compulsion to do horrific things by a deity working towards our distruction?

Is evil a natural trait developed to ensure survival of that being's DNA that can go terribly awry?

Is evil simply a lack of empathy?

Is evil apathy towards your common man?

I tend not to try and lend definitions to that which is the sublime. I know what evil is, but if I had the capacity to put something so archetypical to the human existance into words, it would no longer be an adequate definition.

Back to the specific ideas, I find the entire wording of the "problem" to be extraordinarily weak. To even state that the existence of evil is incompatible with God reveals an severe misunderstanding of religion in general. And honestly, there is no reason that evil and God have to be married at all.

Most events that I would describe as stereotypically "evil" took place in cultures that abandoned God (Hitler's Germany and Stalin's Russia).

So then, if we want to bring this back to the religious statements, is evil the absence of God?

[Yoda9864]

Originally Posted by Bond

That's a bit of an easy way out. Absolutely anything can follow that - so nothing can count as counter evidence against it.

Exactly

[Bond]

Originally Posted by Professor S

Back to the specific ideas, I find the entire wording of the "problem" to be extraordinarily weak. To even state that the existence of evil is incompatible with God reveals an severe misunderstanding of religion in general. And honestly, there is no reason that evil and God have to be married at all.

I believe I said that some would view the existence of evil logically incompatible with God. Personally, I do not, but I was trying to look at the issue from a generalist point of view.

Now, you addressed the evils created by man in Nazi Germany and Communist Russia, but how do you feel about gratuitous suffering - the kind that is not inflicted by humans, but we suffer at the hands of?

[TheGame]

Originally Posted by Bond

I believe I said that some would view the existence of evil logically incompatible with God.

Anyone who believes that has a huge misunderstanding about religion in general. Ask yourself, what is evil? According to the most religions, anything that's against their god's will is evil, and everything god approves of is good. Some religons support war, some don't. Some support people haiving 10 wives, some don't. Some support worldy lusts, some don't.

So all in all, whoever said evil is relative is correct.

The general consent from christians is that god created men with free will, just because he wanted men to chose him themselves. Of course, men would frown upon this idea, but that's what's believed to be true generally.

If he wanted mindless slaves who had no choice but to follow him and who had no will to do evil or suffer whatsoever.. well, we wouldn't be haivng this conversation. :P Maybe he felt that having people chose to follow him was better than enforcing the will on people to follow him.

So following god and his own morals is good, rejecting them is evil. And if someone rejects it he has every right to react however he wants to it... cause he's god?

Hope that clears it up somewhat for you. According to religion: Following him = good, not following = evil, god himself = whatever he wants to be... you can call him good or evil, that's your choice. Most people who believe and follow would call him good for giving them the oppertunity in the first place.

[Bond]

Again, I wasn't stating my opinion, I was stating others opinions. I was trying to cover the issue fairly objectively.

I've had twelve years of religious education. I'm fairly well versed when it comes to Christianity/Islam/Judaism/Taoism/Buddhism.

[TheGame]

Originally Posted by Bond

Again, I wasn't stating my opinion, I was stating others opinions. I was trying to cover the issue fairly objectively.

I've had twelve years of religious education. I'm fairly well versed when it comes to Christianity/Islam/Judaism/Taoism/Buddhism.

Note: I wasn't attacking you personally. You just said that some people (not nessicarily yourself) use the existance of evil as a reason that it wouldn't have been reasonable for god to exist. I was explaining how evil is relative to the religion/nation/person you are talking about. There is no "objective" way to define evil really, there's only subjective. One day's good can be the next's evil. And vice versa.

No need to get somewhat defensive, I just offered the true explanation for the classification of evil, and how it doesn't debunk god's existance whatsoever.. If you think the info I gave in my last post is wrong though, feel free to explain how.