Live data from Hacker News

The Problem of Evil (2015)

plato.stanford.edu

1–10 of 84 posts

Re: The Problem of Evil (2015)

#2
Just relative to the world that we live in now, I'm much less interested in traditional concepts of 'good and evil' and much more interested in fanaticism. While there are certainly genuinely evil human beings out there, in my (maybe totally naive, I dunno) view, they are generally not very effective- more like low-level street criminals. Psychopathy is a real thing, but I think most of them lack the foresight and patience to achieve real positions of power.

On the other hand, fanaticism where the fanatic believes they're good and their (political, racial/ethnic or religious) opponents are evil seems like approximately one billion times more of a problem in modern human society. These are the people who hold actual positions of power at every level, in every country

Re: The Problem of Evil (2015)

#3
If you can get to the understanding that all of the outcomes in human thought and behavior are based on inputs of some level, be they genetic, or nurture, or through interaction with others or impacts from the natural environment, then it seem truly odd to believe in a concept like evil.

Re: The Problem of Evil (2015)

#4
post #2

Just relative to the world that we live in now, I'm much less interested in traditional concepts of 'good and evil' and much more interested in fanaticism. While there are certainly genuinely evil human beings out there, in my (maybe totally naive, I dunno) view, they are generally not very effective- more like low-level street criminals. Psychopathy is a real thing, but I think most of them lack the foresight and pa…

The Problem of Evil is not really about "evil" people doing "evil" things... or at least only tangentially so.

It's about why there is suffering (or imperfection even) in a world created by an ostensibly omnipotent, omniscient, and benevolent god.

Terrorism would qualify as being one of the causes of suffering, as would completely impersonal forces such as earthquakes, hurricanes, and diseases.

If god exists and really is omnipotent (ie. of limitless power), omniscient (knows everything), and perfectly good, why does he/she/it allow suffering?

That's the problem of evil.

Re: The Problem of Evil (2015)

#5
It seems kind of presumptuous to think that God's conception of morality would bear any similarity with ours. Presumably God created what It considers to be the perfect world and therefore everything that happens in it is good according to God's own definition of goodness, including torturing babies (if and when it happens -- and when it doesn't happen, then it is good that it doesn't). Perhaps God never had any intention of telling any of Its creatures about the true nature of good and evil (what would be the point of that), so we're just completely off base, with no way of knowing besides the evidence that evil can't be what we think it is, because if it was, it wouldn't exist.

Re: The Problem of Evil (2015)

#6

If you can get to the understanding that all of the outcomes in human thought and behavior are based on inputs of some level, be they genetic, or nurture, or through interaction with others or impacts from the natural environment, then it seem truly odd to believe in a concept like evil.

Following this argument, nobody is culpable for any crime they may commit, because their behavior is fully determined by their biology and environment. Try that in a court.

Evil is a perfectly straightforward concept. It may have many definitions but it's easy to conceive of one, e.g.: willingly making others suffer unjustly.

The concept of evil is quite different from what is being argued in the source material. There, we are questioning whether the environment created by a proposed god systematically leads to situations that indicates that the creator is not benign.

Re: The Problem of Evil (2015)

#7
post #5

It seems kind of presumptuous to think that God's conception of morality would bear any similarity with ours. Presumably God created what It considers to be the perfect world and therefore everything that happens in it is good according to God's own definition of goodness, including torturing babies (if and when it happens -- and when it doesn't happen, then it is good that it doesn't). Perhaps God never had any inte…

If we limit god to any god worth worshiping, i.e. one that prescribes a set of morals on their followers and answers the prayers of those who follow the god's morals, you would expect that the god has the same set of morals as their followers.

Unless the god is playing games with their creation, maybe studying them to see how they would respond. But even then, this would tell us something about the nature of a god. That they are not worth worshiping from a moral standpoint, since they aren't benevolent.

Re: The Problem of Evil (2015)

#8
post #6

If you can get to the understanding that all of the outcomes in human thought and behavior are based on inputs of some level, be they genetic, or nurture, or through interaction with others or impacts from the natural environment, then it seem truly odd to believe in a concept like evil.

Following this argument, nobody is culpable for any crime they may commit, because their behavior is fully determined by their biology and environment. Try that in a court. Evil is a perfectly straightforward concept. It may have many definitions but it's easy to conceive of one, e.g.: willingly making others suffer unjustly. The concept of evil is quite different from what is being argued in the source material. The…

> Following this argument, nobody is culpable for any crime they may commit, because their behavior is fully determined by their biology and environment. Try that in a court.

I’m not sure I understand the contradiction there. Are you saying that a court doesn’t care enough about any mental disorder which may have led one to commit a crime to completely absolve them? That’s does indeed seem to be the case in many areas, and for good reason: one important function of our legal system is to prevent future harm.

Re: The Problem of Evil (2015)

#9
post #2

Just relative to the world that we live in now, I'm much less interested in traditional concepts of 'good and evil' and much more interested in fanaticism. While there are certainly genuinely evil human beings out there, in my (maybe totally naive, I dunno) view, they are generally not very effective- more like low-level street criminals. Psychopathy is a real thing, but I think most of them lack the foresight and pa…

The Problem of Evil is not really about "evil" people doing "evil" things... or at least only tangentially so. It's about why there is suffering (or imperfection even) in a world created by an ostensibly omnipotent, omniscient, and benevolent god. Terrorism would qualify as being one of the causes of suffering, as would completely impersonal forces such as earthquakes, hurricanes, and diseases. If god exists and real…

This sort of discussion usually gets trapped in discussions about God allowing Evil in order to allow free will; but that is an evasion; especially since the universe is probably deterministic; and consciousness is probably an illusion.

The problem of evil; is logically caused by the existence of life that strives and competes within an environment of finite resources.

Give us a universe where all the beings are powered by an infinite source of energy so they don't need to chase, catch, kill and eat each other.

Problem solved; would have expected God could figure this out.

Re: The Problem of Evil (2015)

#10
post #2

Just relative to the world that we live in now, I'm much less interested in traditional concepts of 'good and evil' and much more interested in fanaticism. While there are certainly genuinely evil human beings out there, in my (maybe totally naive, I dunno) view, they are generally not very effective- more like low-level street criminals. Psychopathy is a real thing, but I think most of them lack the foresight and pa…

The Problem of Evil is not really about "evil" people doing "evil" things... or at least only tangentially so. It's about why there is suffering (or imperfection even) in a world created by an ostensibly omnipotent, omniscient, and benevolent god. Terrorism would qualify as being one of the causes of suffering, as would completely impersonal forces such as earthquakes, hurricanes, and diseases. If god exists and real…

I don't know much about theology but couldn't this be justified as punishment for the original sin, at least in the Christian/Catholic worldview? From what I understand, the real perfect world is in paradise, after you die. But during your life you have to """prove your worth""" in a world where evil exists. Maybe the problem is on the "benevolent" part.
Post reply on HN