On Evil (Part 3)

The existence and abuse of choice, and the nature of the world

 

This is quite an easy one.  If there is an option for us to do good, then by definition, there must also be the option not to do good.  As has been said by someone once, often that is enough for evil to triumph.  As well as a simple lack of action, there is often the option to do something actively evil.

So why would God give us the option of doing evil, or even of not doing good?  If God desires good, why would He even allow the option of evil?

This comes down to the issue of Free Will, which to me is one of the most important theological and philosophical concepts (Can you tell that I have Arminian inclinations?).  Humans have been given the faculty of choice.  We have been told multiple times, and through various different channels which choice God wants us to take, but ultimately, the choice is ours.  Thus, if we choose Good, it truly is Good.  If there was no choice, it wouldn’t be good.  There is no merit in an automaton following its programming.  I don't think anyone has ever praised a train-driver for his navigation.

And when it comes to evil in the sense of pain, of suffering caused not by people directly, but by natural disaster, it seems to me that there is something similar.  As far as I can tell, these diseases, floods, famines etc are just consequences of the way the world is formed.  The possibility of harvests neccesitates the possibilty of famines.  The existence of life-sustaining water results in the possibility of life-destroying floods.  Could God have created a universe in which you can't drown, or in which crops can't fail?  Of course.  It would require a complete reworking of the laws by which the universe operates, but God could quite easily create a world without the possibility of suffering.  But then, it would not be this world, and we would probably be complaining about someting else instead.

As was pointed out by the villain in the horrendous Hellblazer film they made with Keannu Reaves, what we think of as virtues are really reactions to some form of adversity.  Courage can only exist when we are afraid, and thus when there is something to be afraid of.  Fortitude can only exist when there is suffering to deal with.  Strength can only exist when there are burdens.  For there to be hope, there must be despair.  For compassion, others must be suffering too.  This is not to say that God causes others to suffer just so that you could win some brownie points by being compassionate, but without that suffering, there could be no compassion at all.



So those were my thoughts on evil.  Something a bit more fun for the next one I think!

On Evil (Part 2)

Pain and suffering as necessary biological mechanisms

As I said in Part 1, if you're considering evil, you have to consider pain as well, since evil is most readily identified through the suffering it causes.

The question 'Why does pain exist?' is basically a biological one.  Pain is a necessary biological mechanism that warns an organism that it is being damaged.  Without pain, there would be nothing to stop a creature from headbutting a wall or walking across sharp rocks.  The damage sustained would severely risk its ability to mate and pass on its genes.  Thus pain is an essential system born of evolutionary necessity.

This can be applied to other forms of pain as well.  Grief could well be an evolutionary spur to keep your loved ones (especially offspring) safe.  Shame is a mechanism by which we are taught not to do wrong.

I think that often when people discuss 'evil', they are thinking of natural disasters, such as the recent hurricane in the Philipines, or of famines and droughts.  Why would God allow people to suffer is these ways?

Again though, it seems to me that this 'suffering' is merely a biological mechanism.  Hunger is that system that tells an organism that it needs food.  If there is no food around, that message becomes stronger and more unbearable, until the creature is suffering from it, but if it didn't, the drive to find food, the drive to survive would be that much less.  Exactly the same is true of thirst, or cold.

To deliberately hurt someone, or to deprive them of food or drink, is definitely evil.  The fact that pain exists can't really be said to be evil in and of itself.

Righ then.  'But then,' we are asked, 'isn't God directly or indirectly depriving people of food, water and shelter by allowing disasters to occur to innocent people, and by allowing evil people to exist?'

Evil as the absence of Good

This isn't a new point of view, but as far as my thinking on evil goes, there is no such thing.  That's not to say that there isn't a condition that we call evil, but rather than being a thing in its own right, the word 'evil' denotes the absence of something else, in the same way that ‘hole’ denote a place where the ground isn’t, or ‘gap’ is what we call the part of a wall where the wall is not.  It is also true of coldness and darkness.  They are not things in and of themselves, as heat and light are forms of radiation.  They are the words we use to describe the situation in which there is no (or comparatively little) heat or light.

To say that there is no such thing as evil might seem to trivialise it, and be rather wishy-washy.  It could be seen as an excuse to do nothing about it.  However, just because I know that technically there's no such thing as cold doesn’t mean I don’t turn on the radiator, or try and steal my wife's hot water bottle.  Humans can only exist within an incredibly tiny band of heat.  Too cold, or too hot and it could kill us in seconds, or less.  I believe that there are flames of goodness, and a burning, scorching Sun.  There may also be absolute zeroes of goodness, but I do not think any human has ever achieved that.

My point then is that I believe that God has not created evil, but He has created a world in which we may not always be as good as He might like, and that is what I will try and ponder next.

On Evil (Part 1)

Warning- I have never formally studied theology or ethics, the following are purely the thoughts and speculations of an amateur, an 'armchair theologian' if you will.

 

One of the most common arguments I tend to see against the existence of God, or at least of an interested, omnipotent and benevolent God is the existence of evil, or the existence of pain.  They seem to think that this is a pretty good one, but the more I think about it, the weaker it seems.  There are three or four separate answers to this, which I plan to try over the next few posts, probably interspersed with other, lighter stuff.

Part 1.  The existence of evil from an atheistic perspective

To start off, we need to figure out what atheists mean by 'evil'.  A common theist argument is the existence of certain core universal moral values, implying an objective morality, and therefore a source for that morality.  The reply is that these are merely the natural result of budding, burgeoning societies, and that these ‘universal morals’ are actually just behavioural adaptations to living in increasingly large and complex social groups, and which aid cooperation between individuals and groups of individuals, helping ensure the survival of these groups and individuals in the best Darwinian traditions.

Well okay, but in that case what the atheists are telling us is that those things which we label as ‘evil’ aren’t really.  They are merely things that impede social cohesion and cooperation.  We call murder ‘evil’ because if everyone went around killing people when they felt like it, your society would swiftly collapse.  Likewise stealing, or lying, or random destruction of property.   However, these things are not in reality ‘evil’.  There are no evil things; there are no good things.  There are just things, which are either beneficial or harmful for one group or individual than other things, and what is beneficial for one individual or group may be harmful to another.  After all, the tribe in the next valley may not be so keen on your social cohesion and cooperation when your well-organised army invades their village!

By appealing to evolutionary science, atheists have intentionally removed the concept of objective morality from the equation.  They say that if God is good, He wouldn’t allow evil, while at the same time claiming that there’s no such thing.

A possible answer to this may be that although the atheist does not believe in evil, as a believer in objective morality themselves, the theist does, and so needs to explain it.  Fair enough.  That's what I'll be trying to deal with next.

National Novel Writing Month

Well, once again I'm taking part in the National Novel Writing Month.  The aim is to write 50,000 words in 30 days.  Quality is not an issue.  All that matters at this stage is quantity.  This is the fifth time I've participated, and so far I've succeeded three times.

This year I'm working on a contemporary fantasy that's been knocking around my head for a while, partly based on the plot of a roleplay game I ran for friends last year.  Most of the novels I've done for NaNoWriMo have been based on plots I originally came up with for RPGs.  They tend to be fairly action-heavy, fast-paced adventure stories, that are light on deeper meaning but are relatively easy to throw out.  I've found that sword fights are excellent for soaking up wordcount if you describe them well enough.

Over the years, I've noticed a pattern.  Early on, I build up a reasonable headstart in wordcount terms, then around the middle, something goes wrong and I fall behind, and scrabble to catch up in the last week or so.  I've followed this pattern again this year, and I've fallen about a day behind, although actually this year it's because something is going right, but I've been busy with that rather than throwing out the words.  In fact, right now I should be writing, not blogging, but never mind.

The website for the National Novel Writing Month can be found here:  http://nanowrimo.org
My user-name is Dr Magister, if you want to have a look at how I'm getting on.

Hopefully in 18 day's time, I will bragging about my glorious victory!

On Religion as a Source of Evil

It is often claimed that religion is a cause of great evil, or even the cause of all evil, that all it does is divide people and cause wars, or that it exists, and was created, solely as a tool for the wicked to control the ignorant and the weak.  These opinions frequently come up in on-line forums whenever religion is mentioned.  Only a couple of days ago, a friend of a friend of Facebook commented on a post, saying that "religion is all about control".  I cannot, and do not disagree that great evil has been done in the name of religion.  However, to use this as an argument against the existence of religion doesn’t seem very sensible.

If I have a hammer, I can use it to knock nails into a wall, or a piece of wood.  This is what it’s for.  However, the design that makes it an excellent tool for banging in nails also makes it an excellent tool for crushing skulls and breaking bones.  A car is a wonderful thing for getting from point A to point B.  It’s large enough to sit in, and moves very quickly.  These qualities of size and speed mean that cars are also extremely effective at killing or seriously injuring people.

 It would, presumably, be possible to take a hammer or a car, and modify them in such a way as to make it impossible to break heads or run people over, but in that case you would also remove the ability to hammer in nails, and travel swiftly from place to place.

We have been given religion for specific purposes.  To bind us together, to encourage moral behaviour, to teach us about, and bring us closer to God, to support us in times of trial, to guide us when we’re uncertain.  The aspects that allow it to do these things are the very aspects that also make it a fearsome tool for encouraging hatred and bigotry, for enforcing the control of the few over the many, for sowing discord, and disruption, and creating an environment of fanaticism and wilful ignorance.

These are serious problems, and no reasonable believer can or should try to deny or downplay them, but the fault for these things no more lies with religion, than the fault of the murder lies with the hammer, or the hit-and-run with the car.   These are the faults of human beings.  It would perhaps be possible to remove the potential for causing harm from religion, but by doing so, you would remove the (I believe greater) potential for doing good.

The fact (and I believe that it is a fact) that religion does a large amount of good is frequently ignored.  Opponents of religion focus on crusades, inquisitions, jihads, persecutions, pogroms and sectarian violence.  They, either intentionally, or out of ignorance, ignore the schools, hospices, hospitals, care-homes, homeless shelters and orphanges, they ignore the disaster relief charities, the children’s charities, the homeless charities, all set up and maintained as a result of religions teachings and religious sentiment.  It is bad that these are ignored, because they are, like the crusades and inquisitions, a matter of public record. 

However, it is what isn’t recorded that I consider to be more important.  What is not a matter of public record are the millions of tiny, personal acts of mercy, of love, of forgiveness, of grace, of charity, of generosity that occur every day, probably even every hour, which are inspired by the religious beliefs of those carrying them out.  What isn’t recorded is the flame of hope when all seems lost, of faith when the universe seems cold and uncaring, of strength when the weight seems too much, of perseverence when the obstacles seem too high.  And it can be pointed out, quite fairly, that such things can occur entirely without religious beliefs, but I think that there would be far fewer of them, and the flame would burn that much more dimly, and would gutter and go out far more often.

Have great evils been done in the name of religion?  Undeniably, but I believe, and will always believe, that the aggregation of tiny, unrecognised goods outweighs and overshadows those great evils many times over, if only you are willing to take them into consideration.

Fighting Vikings in my Head

I was talking to my wife online the other day, when a couple of lines suddenly popped into my head.  I wrote them down, and they unfolded into an entire poem, which I've now polished up a bit, and present to you now.  Again, this first surfaced on Facebook, but has been extended and refined.  That this came to me whilst talking to my wife is something no-one should speculate on...

Fighting Vikings in my Head

The world can be quite nasty,

It can leave you full of dread,

Don’t let it get you down though,

Just go to sleep instead.

I forget about my worries,

When I’m wrapped up warm in bed,

And I smile as I’m sleeping,

Fighting Vikings in my head!

I stagger home exhausted,

Having earned my daily bread,

And I feel stretched and see-through,

Like my soul is thinly spread.

But I'm taken when I dream to,

Where the heroes fought and bled,

And my cares are all forgotten,

Fighting Vikings in my head!

You might just think I’m snoring,

You might think I’m overfed.

The truth though’s very different,

And I stain the North Sea red,

As I wield sword and shield,

And my foemen’s blood is shed.

So you hear me chuckle softly,

Fighting Vikings in my head!

So when you’ve turned the light off,

And your last good nights are said,

Pulled the duvet all around you,
And your eyelids feel like lead,

Step aboard your longship,

And leave behind your bed,

Say farewell to all your worries,

And fight Vikings in your head!

Copyright Thomas Jones 2013