POV-Ray : Newsgroups : povray.off-topic : The most insightful rebuttal to the argument from evil rebuttals I have seen in a while : Re: The most insightful rebuttal to the argument from evil rebuttals I have seen in a while Server Time
5 Sep 2024 05:24:15 EDT (-0400)
  Re: The most insightful rebuttal to the argument from evil rebuttals I have seen in a while  
From: somebody
Date: 2 Nov 2009 23:52:50
Message: <4aefb722@news.povray.org>
"Darren New" <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote in message
news:4aef073a$1@news.povray.org...
somebody wrote:

>> In fact, even as an atheist, I don't think the argument from evil is a
>> particularly strong one. For evil is a sliding scale.

>So you're making exactly the argument of "well, the world doesn't really
>contain evil after all," which is exactly the phrasing I found interesting
>in the article.

I'm rather claiming that the world/universe contains neither good, nor evil.
All is in our minds.

>You're doing the Descartes bit here. "In order to know good, we must know
>evil first."  I think the fact that we *can* imagine things like Event
>Horizon means we have a pretty good idea of a sliding scale of evil. What
if
>the "bad smell objectors" imagined Event Horizon and our world too.
Wouldn't
>they conclude the evil isn't all that bad?

Good point. But does that we can imagine Event Horizon mean that we can
imagine anything and everything worse? Maybe the bad smell objectors can
imagine us but not Event Horizon. And yet, imagination may not be the key. I
can imagine an 824 billion light years tall man - or rather, I may think, or
claim, that I can imagine such a thing. You can very well doubt the
legitimacy of such imagination. I can similarly doubt that
bad-smell-objectors can legitimately imagine Even Horizon, let alone us.

It's also not a matter of outwitting the system. That I have a pet model of
the character of evil doesn't mean that I should give up the concept, and
more than figuring out how pheromones works prevents scientists from falling
in love. Introspection is not, in other words, sufficient to override one's
nature.

>> I would counter that what we perceive as evil are simply foul
>> smells.

>"bulk of the discussion then becomes a matter of theists arguing that
>actually, the world's pretty great, the evil things in it are perfectly
>justified and necessary,"

Necessity of evil is a theistic angle. I don't find evil necessary - that
would be like finding gravity necessary. Gravity is not necessary, it just
is. However, I find it pretty much necessary that there will be things that
sentient beings will find evil, for senses have to differentiate between
inputs.


Post a reply to this message

Copyright 2003-2023 Persistence of Vision Raytracer Pty. Ltd.