Fun with Logic

[Lorizael]

So a long time ago a number of Christian philosophers sat down to answer the age old question "Why does a good god let bad things happen?" In philosophical and logical terms, this question can be stated as "How can a god that is creator of all things and good by its very nature not be evil if evil exists in the universe?"

The answer they came up with is that there really is no such thing as evil, and that evil is merely the absence of good. Now because good can come only from God (he being good by nature and creator of all things), the absence of good is the absence of God.

There are only two ways that there could be an absence of God, however. The first is for God not to be omnipresent and omnipotent, which goes against most Christian writings, so this is probably not right. The other possibility is that God allows for the absence of himself. This, we know, is quite in tune with the ideas of Christianity. God created free will, whereby individuals have the right to reject God, in essence creating a lacking of God, a lacking of good, and the presence of evil.

A will is the ability to act. Free will is the ability to act towards an end other than God. The only difference between regular action and free will is that free will can be without good - it can be evil. Free will is the only thing in the universe with the potential to create evil. Free will is defined by the fact that it can be evil. The one distinguishing feature of free will is the presence of evil within it.

Now the only creatures in possession of free will are humans. God had grown bored with the rest of creation and so he decided to create free willed beings - humans. What makes humans unique is their ability to choose, their potential for the rejection of god. Human's remarkable quality is that they can be evil.

When creating humans, God had to have known that he was creating beings that could be evil. If he did not know this, then he is not omniscient, which is not a very Christian idea. So, assuming God knows all, he created human beings because they had free will. But he did not create them so that they could do good, for if he had wished good, he already had that in the rest of creation. Humans only unique utility is their potential for evil. Thus God must have intended to bring evil into the universe when he made human beings. God willingly pursued an evil end.

Therefore, God is evil.

I'd like to hear what the religious posters on Poly think of this line of logic. If you can see a flaw in my reasoning, please point it out.

[Rex Little]

The flaw I see is that evil isn't the only thing that's unique to humans. The ability to choose evil is just one consequence of the human race's most important uniqueness: the ability to make conscious choices (for good, evil or anything else).

[Kirnwaffen]

Well, I'm definitely not a religious poster, but I think your argument is self-defeating. The initial premise is that God, by it's nature, cannot be evil. The conclusion is that God is evil. A valid argument, or even a good argument, cannot end by defeating one of it's central premises.

[Urban Ranger]

Several months ago, I outlined a proof for monkspider that evil and the Christian god cannot co-exist as defined by orthodox Christian doctrines. However, I forgot what I did, and I didn't write it down.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Kirnwaffen
Well, I'm definitely not a religious poster, but I think your argument is self-defeating. The initial premise is that God, by it's nature, cannot be evil. The conclusion is that God is evil. A valid argument, or even a good argument, cannot end by defeating one of it's central premises.

Since god cannot be both good and evil at the same time, so god cannot exist.

[SnowFire]

What Rex Little, the atheist said.

Humans only unique utility is their potential for evil.

A false premise. Humans have lots of unique qualities. This is like saying that because I drive a car, I clearly hate the enviornment, since I'm intentionally burning gasoline and putting pollutants into the air. Well... yes. But I don't drive a car for the sheer joy of running the engine.

[GePap]

Why can't God include the posibility of evil within itself? Ater all, within itself, according to the notion of omnipotence, everything exists.

Now I don;t believe in the Christian God, but nowhere does it say God can't be evil or contain the ability to be evil.

[GePap]

Originally posted by SnowFire
What Rex Little, the atheist said.

Humans only unique utility is their potential for evil.

A false premise. Humans have lots of unique qualities. This is like saying that because I drive a car, I clearly hate the enviornment, since I'm intentionally burning gasoline and putting pollutants into the air. Well... yes. But I don't drive a car for the sheer joy of running the engine.

Actually, Human are unique in the ability to define something as evil. No other animal we know of can create that sort of meaning.

[Zylka]

hi

[Lorizael]

Originally posted by Rex Little
The flaw I see is that evil isn't the only thing that's unique to humans. The ability to choose evil is just one consequence of the human race's most important uniqueness: the ability to make conscious choices (for good, evil or anything else).

But their are only two possible outcomes of any action with moral implications. It can be good or it can be evil. Now all other creations of God are not allowed the choice of evil, so they all act in good ways. Therefore the only difference between humans and everything else is that humans can do good and evil, and the only thing that makes them unique is that they can do evil.

Originally posted by Kirnwaffen
Well, I'm definitely not a religious poster, but I think your argument is self-defeating. The initial premise is that God, by it's nature, cannot be evil. The conclusion is that God is evil. A valid argument, or even a good argument, cannot end by defeating one of it's central premises.

Hey, I'm just following their own argument to its logical conclusion. It's their fault it's flawed.

[Kirnwaffen]

Since god cannot be both good and evil at the same time, so god cannot exist.

Still fallacious because God's existance is an implicit premise of the argument. I also take issue with the ambiguity of the term "evil".

[Kirnwaffen]

But their are only two possible outcomes of any action with moral implications. It can be good or it can be evil.

I disagree. Many significant choices have outcomes which have several effects, some of which could be seen as "evil", and some of which could be seen as "good".

[Dinner]

I think the old phyisophical anwser was that god=good and evil=the absence of god.

That is of course bull**** and proves that god doesn't exist and is a figmant of man's collective imagination.

[SnowFire]

Actually, Human are unique in the ability to define something as evil. No other animal we know of can create that sort of meaning.

Maybe so. It's irrelevant. Humans are unique in lots of other manners. Maybe God made humans because humans use complex tools, or something. Lorizael needs to show that the ONLY thing that makes humans unique is their evil capacitors.

But their are only two possible outcomes of any action with moral implications. It can be good or it can be evil. Now all other creations of God are not allowed the choice of evil, so they all act in good ways. Therefore the only difference between humans and everything else is that humans can do good and evil, and the only thing that makes them unique is that they can do evil.

Lots of shaky assumptions here. Let me just throw this at you: what if something "Good" must be something chosen of free will? A lightning bolt hitting a tree isn't "good," it's neutral. In this case, by creating free will, God increased the capacity for goodness in the world as well.

Even if you don't buy that and say all natural occurrences are good, then there are still issues. Why can't human activities be neutral? Is me picking up a pencil good or evil? It's useless and therefore sloth and evil! But wait, it's exercise and staving off gluttony- good!

Lastly, it still doesn't defeat the entire point of what Rex & myself said, merely added to fallacies. Fine, God created evil. Isn't it possible that humans have some other unique property, and creating evil was a byproduct?

Edit: Ugh, evil fingers making hideous evil eye-burning spelling mistakes. "falacies?"

[Lorizael]

Originally posted by Kirnwaffen


I disagree. Many significant choices have outcomes which have several effects, some of which could be seen as "evil", and some of which could be seen as "good".

Damnit, I knew I should have added this before, just to preempt this possible counter-argument. Yes there can be good and evil results of an action, but in the end, the balance will swing one way or the other. Or it can be balanced in the middle, and you have a morally neutral action. But in that case beings without free will can act in such a way as to produce no good at all, and thus humans are still unique in being evil.

Oh, and of course good and evil are ambiguous. But because we are assuming the existence of the Christian God, we are also assuming that Christian morality is true, because their morality is based upon their god.