gratuitous evil

User avatar
Aletheia
Regent
Regent
Posts: 2176
Joined: Mon May 21, 2018 8:44 pm
Location: England

Unread post

When we look around the world, and at recorded history, we see many examples of actions that appear to us to be gratuitously evil.

What do I mean by the phrase "gratuitous evil"?

Let's start off by trying to construct an example of action that, as universally as possible, is seen as being evil.

Suppose Olive is a 6 month old baby girl, and Michael is a 40 year old man. If Michael kills Olive, we'd generally see that as bad. But everyone has to die sometime, and perhaps it was an accident, so let's add in that he isn't stupid, sick or being forced at gun point. He deliberate kills her in a way that that involves extreme pain for several hours. Perhaps he was a doctor trying to save her life and, after hours of failed surgery, put her out of her misery? Then let's specify that his actions were in no way to her benefit or thought to be in her benefit. He chucks her into a fire then stands back to watch her burn and, after she crawls out, slowly die in agony from the burns, fully intending when he chucked her into the fire that this would happen.

For want of a better example, let's call that an example of an "evil" action.

But suppose he was doing it, not for her benefit, but for the benefit of others? That by doing so he could save 10 other children from a similar fate, or cause rain to come thus causing great happiness to millions?

If we now specify that the "evil" wasn't a just action (the child didn't deserve that fate) and that it wasn't done to prevent greater evil, or to allow a greater good, then we can term it a "gratuitous evil".


(SOURCE = https://forums.delphiforums.com/freethi ... g=13049.17)



Over the years, philosophers and theologians have spent much time discussing this. I've come up with a way of classifying their opinions. I have two questions for you, here on the Delphi 'Religious Issues' forum:

1. Are there any branches of the logic tree that I've missed out?

and

2. Which category do you fall in? (and, optionally, which religion and denomination/sect of that religion, do you follow, if any?)

-------------------------------------------------

CATEGORIES

(A) God does not exist

(B) God does exist, AND good and evil are arbitrary things that God can define however He chooses

(C) God does exist, AND good and evil are defined independently of God, AND God is a being that is less than 100% good

(D) God does exist, AND good and evil are defined independently of God, AND God is 100% good, AND we don't observe that any things have ever happened that have appeared to us to be gratuitously evil

(E) God does exist, AND good and evil are defined independently of God, AND God is 100% good, AND we observe at least some things that have appeared to us to be gratuitously evil AND those things which appeared to be gratuitously evil were all in fact good

(F) God does exist, AND good and evil are defined independently of God, AND God is 100% good, AND we observe at least some things that have appeared to us to be gratuitously evil, AND some of those things which appear to be gratuitously evil were in fact gratuitously evil, AND God is insufficiently powerful to stop more of them than He currently does

(G) God does exist, AND good and evil are defined independently of God, AND God is 100% good, AND we observe at least some things that have appeared to us to be gratuitously evil, AND some of those things which appear to be gratuitously evil were in fact gratuitously evil, AND God is powerful enough to stop more of them than He currently does



Note: if you believe the reason he doesn't stop more of them is not lack of power, but because he gave his word and it wouldn't be perfect, or just, or against His nature, or some other adjective to break his word, it is up to you whether you wish to classify that as F or G. It boils down to a semantic issue of what you mean by "power" or "ability", neither of which are particularly precisely defined in this context. If you believe that not breaking his word is a higher good, or the reason he doesn't stop certain actions is for some higher cause, such as preserving free will, then that might fall under category E, depending upon whether you view evil actions He allows to happen for a higher purpose to be gratuitous or not.
Momto2boys973
Princess
Princess
Posts: 20107
Joined: Wed May 23, 2018 5:32 pm

Unread post

I’m more inclined towards E.
I think G-d created a universe of balance, where both good and evil have a part to play. Just as you need darkness to appreciate light, you need evil to appreciate goodness.
I also believe that we tend to define “good” and “bad”, according to our own limitations. I was saying that just yesterday on another thread. In this physical world, where we’re limited by time and space and our physical aspect (unlike G-d), we define these terms in a very limited way. “Good” is what’s pleasant, comfortable and happy. “Bad” is what’s painful, uncomfortable and sad. But I’m sure we can all think of things that make us feel happy, give us pleasure and happiness that are ultimately not for our own good. And viceversa. There are things that are painful and uncomfortable, but ultimately it’s what we need at the moment for a greater good. When you look deeper into a definition of “good” and “bad”, “good” means anything that brings me closer to my goal, to an ultimate benefit. And “bad” is anything that puts me farther from them.
So having said that, I believe that G-d is 100% good. Because everything he gives us, the seemingly “good” and the seemingly “bad” are for our ultimate benefit, are the challenges and tools we need to fulfill our life mission. And since evil does exist as part of the grand design, it’s something that we’ll encounter sometimes as a way to learn and work on becoming better.
❤️🇮🇱 עמ׳ ישראל חי 🇮🇱❤️
Deleted User 172

Unread post

You can't have good without evil.
It's about balance.
Also. God gave us free will. He doesn't control our actions.

I choose W. People are people and we are all capable of evil actions just as we are capable of good actions. The motive behind an evil action might be pure, or the motive behind a good action might be evil.
God has very little to do with this.
User avatar
Aletheia
Regent
Regent
Posts: 2176
Joined: Mon May 21, 2018 8:44 pm
Location: England

Unread post

Dylexsmommy wrote: Tue Feb 19, 2019 6:22 pm You can't have good without evil.
It's about balance.
Also. God gave us free will. He doesn't control our actions.

I choose W. People are people and we are all capable of evil actions just as we are capable of good actions. The motive behind an evil action might be pure, or the motive behind a good action might be evil.
God has very little to do with this.
So apparently gratuitously evil things do happen, and God could choose to do more to stop them than He currently does, but he chooses not to in order that he can give us free will. Correct?

The question for you, then, is why that is so.

Is it because it is logically impossible for God to do more to stop these actions without infringing a greater good (free will), so although they are evil, they are not gratuitously evil.

Or is it that God is less than 100% good? He could have set things up so allowing free will didn't create as much torture, rape, etc as it currently does, but he chose not to. (Because, for example, He created the universe not for our benefit, but just as an arena to make manifest his abilities - having the evil stuff makes for more dramatic tension - he's a storyteller at heart - it is more entertaining this way).

Or is it one of the other options?

Your answer can be fitted into the original framework. It is a matter of picking which consequences you hate least.
Deleted User 670

Unread post

A. God does not exist and evil does exist.
Spunky
Duchess
Duchess
Posts: 1733
Joined: Wed May 23, 2018 9:11 am

Unread post

Wtf.....did I just start to read?

Lord....I rebuke evil🙏
Locked Previous topicNext topic