Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site pyuxd.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!pyuxww!pyuxd!rlr
From: rlr@pyuxd.UUCP (Rich Rosen)
Newsgroups: net.religion
Subject: Re: Why is there evil?
Message-ID: <278@pyuxd.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 16-Nov-84 13:15:13 EST
Article-I.D.: pyuxd.278
Posted: Fri Nov 16 13:15:13 1984
Date-Received: Sat, 24-Nov-84 02:42:32 EST
References: <128@ihdev.UUCP> <1096@trwrba.UUCP> <1001@umcp-cs.UUCP> <352@gitpyr.UUCP>
Organization: Bell Communications Research, Piscataway N.J.
Lines: 41

A simple question deserves a simple answer.

There is evil because there are other people in the world doing things that
might harm us.  A hurricane demolishing an entire village is a natural
phenomenon, and is therefore not good or evil.  The same applies to epidemics
and other natural disasters/catastrophes.  A person/persons taking advantage
of a catastrophe by exploiting the victims (e.g., selling them needed supplies
at overinflated prices) might be considered evil.  But, then again, if he's
the only one making supplies available, and he is taken away/killed/stopped
by someone who feels that he is evil, some might consider his being killed/
stopped/whatever to be an evil act.

This is because evil is defined as whatever does us harm.  The invading armies
attacking a city might be considered evil to the city's inhabitants.  But the
attackers may be attacking because they blame (maybe unjustly) the city they
are now attacking for an attack made against THEIR city.  Who is evil?
Everyone.  Because who is evil depends on your perspective.

A society may set up rules that describe things that are "evil" not to
particular individuals, but rather to the society as a whole.  (e.g.,
treason)  To keep a society stable, rules may be defined that make any
number of things "evil" or wrong.  (e.g., rules on murder, adultery, theft,
etc. may apply here)

Religion claims that there is something beyond these notions of subjective
good and evil, promoting the notion of an objective or universal set of
good-evil rules.  Yet clearly there can be no such thing.  In the "twin
cities" example above, who was good and who was evil?  Is city 2 evil because
they are attacking?  Is city 1 evil because city 2 assumes that they committing
an "evil" act?  Is city 2 good because they justify their attack by saying
that a deity has told them that it is good to attack them?  (or because they
invoke an "eye-for-an-eye" law?)

This is a prime example of wishful thinking in religion.  It would be nice
for there to be absolute good and evil, but given that there are innumerable
people with innumerable perspectives on what is good and evil to them, can
there be a universal version of the dichotomy that applies to everything
the same way (or would you just like it to be that way)?
-- 
"Come with me now to that secret place where
 the eyes of man have never set foot."		Rich Rosen    pyuxd!rlr