Question re Aquinas' Origin of Evil

[Benadam]

define “good”
we might have different interpretations :-]

no matter how we define good we inherently seek it.
Even if we decide there is no such thing we have found it good to do so.

 

[WindyHair]

no matter how we define good we inherently seek it.
Even if we decide there is no such thing we have found it good to do so.

say what?..
if you can’t define good, how do you know it’s
not evil that you are seeking?

if you find an apple in a beautiful garden,
is it good or evil?

if it is evil, why did you seek it if it’s good that we
inherently seek?

 

[Contarini]

Evil is a creation of freedom of choice and action. To say that God created eveil indirectly is the equivalent of saying that God created the internet.

And indirectly, God did create the Internet. I would have thought that was obvious!

Certainly we say that God creates individual human beings, even though the conception of a new human being is also the result of free human choice.

Edwin

 

[Joyousguard]

define “good”
we might have different interpretations :-]

First and foremost, before making comments in a thread it helps to read all the posts. Your first comment of the good being an illusion was negated before you even posted it.

If we can first agree that all human beings seek the good as I dilligently went through in several of my previous posts we can move on to what “is the good”. Do you agree that all human beings seek the good or the percieved good as I explained earlier?

 

[Joyousguard]

And indirectly, God did create the Internet. I would have thought that was obvious!

Certainly we say that God creates individual human beings, even though the conception of a new human being is also the result of free human choice.

Edwin

Then God created War, KIlling, Abortion, Murder. And if God created all these things, then these things must be a part of God. Then that would even mean that God created sin, hell and practically everything else, when in fact hell is the state of existence after we have rejected God and his presence. Sin is the rejection of God’s presence. God can not have anything to do with an action that rejects His presence.

 

[Contarini]

Then God created War, KIlling, Abortion, Murder. And if God created all these things, then these things must be a part of God. Then that would even mean that God created sin, hell and practically everything else, when in fact hell is the state of existence after we have rejected God and his presence. Sin is the rejection of God’s presence. God can not have anything to do with an action that rejects His presence.

Well, that’s the problem. And please note that I said “indirectly.”

It’s best to face the problem head-on instead of dodging it. “Free will” is not a magic formula that makes the problem of evil go away. It raises at least as many questions as it solves.

Edwin

 

[jimmy]

First and foremost, before making comments in a thread it helps to read all the posts. Your first comment of the good being an illusion was negated before you even posted it.

If we can first agree that all human beings seek the good as I dilligently went through in several of my previous posts we can move on to what “is the good”. Do you agree that all human beings seek the good or the percieved good as I explained earlier?

I wouldn’t necessarily agree with this. Does a Satanist seek the good? No. Does a mass murderer seek the good? No. Many times people know what they do is absolutely evil and they do it any ways. In many other cases they are relativists and believe that there is no good and they simply seek their own desire and consequently do evil. Did Augustine seek the good when he stole the pear for no reason but to steal it? I would say not. You might be able to examine the intentions of say a mass murderer and think ‘well, he only wanted to purify the world of what he percieved to be evil and therefore he was seeking the good as he saw it’. But I think this takes a little bit of sophistry and forcing of the facts.

I certainly agree with your opposition to windyhair as you can see from the threads he has started.

 

[Joyousguard]

Well, that’s the problem. And please note that I said “indirectly.”

It’s best to face the problem head-on instead of dodging it. “Free will” is not a magic formula that makes the problem of evil go away. It raises at least as many questions as it solves.

Edwin

Free will can actual cause evil and by no means makes it go away. Please elaborate on your “questions raised” and we can discuss it further.

 

[Contarini]

I wouldn’t necessarily agree with this. Does a Satanist seek the good? No. Does a mass murderer seek the good? No.

They seek some good, however twisted.

Many times people know what they do is absolutely evil

There is no such thing as absolute evil. It is Manichean heresy to say that there is.

and they do it any ways. In many other cases they are relativists and believe that there is no good and they simply seek their own desire and consequently do evil. Did Augustine seek the good when he stole the pear for no reason but to steal it? I would say not.

This is a jumping-off point for Augustine’s examination of sin precisely because it poses a problem to his anti-Manichean position. As I read Augustine, he would say that sin such as the theft of the pears is motivated by a will that has turned in on itself and so seeks self-assertion as the supreme good.

You might be able to examine the intentions of say a mass murderer and think ‘well, he only wanted to purify the world of what he percieved to be evil and therefore he was seeking the good as he saw it’.

I agree with you that we can’t reduce all evil to ignorance. Evil, as Augustine said, stems from a twisted will. But the will always seeks what the intellect perceives to be good–the problem is that the perverted will darkens the intellect and conversely the darkened intellect twists the will.

Edwin

 

[Joyousguard]

I wouldn’t necessarily agree with this. Does a Satanist seek the good? No. Does a mass murderer seek the good? No. Many times people know what they do is absolutely evil and they do it any ways. In many other cases they are relativists and believe that there is no good and they simply seek their own desire and consequently do evil. Did Augustine seek the good when he stole the pear for no reason but to steal it? I would say not. You might be able to examine the intentions of say a mass murderer and think ‘well, he only wanted to purify the world of what he percieved to be evil and therefore he was seeking the good as he saw it’. But I think this takes a little bit of sophistry and forcing of the facts.

I certainly agree with your opposition to windyhair as you can see from the threads he has started.

Humans all seek the good. Satanists however are an exception and it should be noted. If human being consciously and deliberately reject God then they might be considered evil but that would be an extreme. Even mass murders desire the good or the percieved good. Even Hitler desired the good. Its a question of being able to see what is really a “true good”.

However, even a Satanist who rejects God does it because it seems like it may be good for him. Evene if he knows what he desire may be bad he may choose it because it is enjoyable to him and thus good.

If you want find the previous post I quoted from another thread and read through them and cite anything you question or disagree with and we can discuss it further:thumbsup:

 

[Joyousguard]

In regards to Windyhair, I welcome any well thought out serious posts he may contributed to this thread. I think we all were wrong about something in our lives and hopefully someone wiser and more knowledgeable set us on the correct path.

 

[jimmy]

There is no such thing as absolute evil. It is Manichean heresy to say that there is.

You know that I am not positing some substantial existence of evil.

I agree with you that we can’t reduce all evil to ignorance. Evil, as Augustine said, stems from a twisted will. But the will always seeks what the intellect perceives to be good–the problem is that the perverted will darkens the intellect and conversely the darkened intellect twists the will.

This takes defining the good in such a general way that ‘the good’ becomes a meaningless term. Of course people do what they percieve to be good for them when they sin. But then again, when Paul says I do what I hate can he be said to be doing the good as he percieves it? A person can hate what they do yet do it and know it is evil. Fir example a drug addict. He might find no happiness in the next hit and he might realize that it will not make him feel better but he does it anyway.

 

[jimmy]

Humans all seek the good. Satanists however are an exception and it should be noted. If human being consciously and deliberately reject God then they might be considered evil but that would be an extreme. Even mass murders desire the good or the percieved good. Even Hitler desired the good. Its a question of being able to see what is really a “true good”.

However, even a Satanist who rejects God does it because it seems like it may be good for him. Evene if he knows what he desire may be bad he may choose it because it is enjoyable to him and thus good.

If you want find the previous post I quoted from another thread and read through them and cite anything you question or disagree with and we can discuss it further:thumbsup:

So in other words the good is simply my own happiness. I think that saying they seek the good forces us to define the good in such a general way that it loses its meaning. What does it mean that Hitler sought the good? He sought what he desired. What does it mean that a drug addict seeks the good? They are seeking their own pleasure.

 

[Joyousguard]

So in other words the good is simply my own happiness. I think that saying they seek the good forces us to define the good in such a general way that it loses its meaning. What does it mean that Hitler sought the good? He sought what he desired. What does it mean that a drug addict seeks the good? They are seeking their own pleasure.

This is only one portion of the argument. Once you establish that human beings desire the good it leads you to ask the same questions you just asked. “What about murders, what about Hitler?” “If these people desire the good, why did they create so much eveil and do such bad things?” “Did the seek the true good or an allusion of good?”

We’ll move on from there.

 

[TOME]

From what I remember of Thomas’ writings evil is not a thing of itself. Simply put evil is a lack of good.

Good is the state of perfection - something is good in its relationship to its nature. Since God is the only “Thing” that is perfect then Only the good in God is perfect.

We say something is good because of the way it tends towards the perfection of the nature of a thing. I say something is good for me because of how that thing with tend towards the perfection of my human nature. On the other hand something is considered evil because of the lack of good found in it.

Hitler as a created being, created by God, was in his human nature good (not perfect). However Hitlers choices and actions lack the good and due to the complete lack of his actions tending towards the perfection of his human nature (as God created us - to Love) we say his actions were evil.

So “Good” is the measure of how close a created thing exist in the relationship to its perfection.

Something is “Good” (act) in relationship to how it tends towards the perfection of the particular being.

Evil is the “Lack” of good.

 

[Mr.Ex_Nihilo]

Well, that’s the problem. And please note that I said “indirectly.”

It’s best to face the problem head-on instead of dodging it. “Free will” is not a magic formula that makes the problem of evil go away. It raises at least as many questions as it solves.

Edwin

I think it’s more easy to say that sin is a participation in the nothingness that preceeded creation, something that God did not actually create– a kind of anti-creation that seeks to return to the void.
Jeremiah 4:23:

I looked at the earth,
and it was formless and empty;
and at the heavens,
and their light was gone.

In this sense, God did not even indirectly create evil. He only created the infiinite range of good choices which humanity failed to select from. The reason they failed to select the infininte good is because they instead selected the infinite void-- something which God himself did not give them a choice to do, which is why he sent Christ, in his inifinite mercy, to rescue us from from that infinite void.

Consequently, I would hypthesize that hell actually is an infinite regression into the void. The soul is indeed being destroyed-- but the destruction of the soul lasts forever and simply never ends.

 

[Benadam]

say what?..
if you can’t define good, how do you know it’s
not evil that you are seeking?

if you find an apple in a beautiful garden,
is it good or evil?

if it is evil, why did you seek it if it’s good that we
inherently seek?

Windy, the apple that God revealed as evil was given a different value in the light of deception that Satan cast upon it. In that light it appeared good.

In the light of deception we hear like a mantra ’ If it feels good do it". This is animal morality, appropriate for animals and a revealing sign of satan’s proper place.

It can be said that all living matter seeks the good in that all living matter seems driven to cling to life. For animals it’s not a decision of intellect but a response to their senses that determines for them what is good and they inherently seek it as well.

As I see you would agree for us seeking out good involves the higher faculties which in a state of Original Innocense wasn’t hindered by desires for anything evil untill Eve entered into dialogue in the center of the garden.

Now, in our fallen state, your strong concern for discernment is the appropriate response because the world we see is cast in the light of deceit as well as truth which can’t be divorced from determining what is good and what is evil.

So, things being so, the sanctuary of God within our heartsn where God speaks to us became buried like an ancient archeological site with only a few people who knew it even existed let alone knowing what the voice inside it was saying.

For this, revelation from above has assisted our human reason in re-establishing that sanctuary by shedding light on it’s deepest decree’s about what is good and reforming it to it’s original state so as to make it able again to minister to us what really is good.

Finally, revelation from above became complete when the sanctuary decended from heaven in an eternal temple founded on incorruptible earth casting a light that will never grow dim or be extinguished again.

This sanctuary within man has in various degrees become heard with more or less increasing clarity and even though it’s light is still sometimes distorted by man because of the ancient deceptions cast on the meaning of the important things, it retains it’s dignity because of it’s fidelity to Truth and it’s demand of obedience that ultimately we cannot escape.

 

[ErikaA]

First, I just wanted to thank everyone who has posted here for helping me gain a little more understanding into this topic.

Now for my question. If free will were nonexistent, would evil exist? That is, if we had no “choices”, could anything be good or evil? In that case, there would simply be existence and value judgments would lose all meaning, would they not?

(If this has been addressed elsewhere, I apologize for repeating the question.)

 

[Contarini]

I think it’s more easy to say that sin is a participation in the nothingness that preceeded creation, something that God did not actually create– a kind of anti-creation that seeks to return to the void.

In this sense, God did not even indirectly create evil. He only created the infiinite range of good choices which humanity failed to select from.

But he also created a good-creature-that-would-fall-short, or to put it more strongly a good-creature-that-would-use-its-free-will-to-return-to-the-void.

That’s what I mean by indirectly “creating evil.” I agree that evil is not the sort of thing one can “create.”

The reason they failed to select the infininte good is because they instead selected the infinite void-- something which God himself did not give them a choice to do,

I fail to see that.

which is why he sent Christ, in his inifinite mercy, to rescue us from from that infinite void.

But if anyone is damned, then God obviously did give them a choice to be damned. Indeed, in Aquinas’s view God did not choose to move their wills in such a way as to prevent them from being damned.

I agree with what you are saying, but I don’t think it takes away the problem entirely.

Edwin

 

[Joyousguard]

A post I wrote in another thread, hope it helps shed some light:

First and foremeost, evil is the absence of good, not good is the absence of evil for good existed before evil and thus evil must be defined by good rather than good defined by evil. Before there was evil there was only good and good alone. Evil is the absence of good or evil is the absence of God because of tolerance not inaction.

There is a difference here and it is between inaction, tolerance, absence and allowing. (a little leadway on the definitions if I may have it) Inaction is doing nothing one way or the other. Tolerance is knowing that there is evil but realizing that it must be tolerated to a certain extent beacuse trying to confront and destroy it would cause more evil. Absence is not being involved in the action at all. Allowing is giving ones permission to do something or even offering help in an act. Allowing something to occur is being present in that action regardless of the culpability.

God is not a being of inaction or allwoance when it comes to evil but instead is one of tolerance. He is absent in His presence of an evil action because of tolerating the decision we have made using our own freedom of choice rather than Him allowing such actions or simple inaction on His part. God may observe all actions, even evil ones, but that does not mean mean He allows evil actions to happen nor does it mean He is present in those actions. God tolerates evil actions and allows for us to reject His presence in that action we know as sin. Again this does not mean that He allows evil to happen or even that He is present in that evil action but that He merely tolerates evil as the result of freedom of choice that He himself gave us. Evil is a creation that results when we succumb to temptation and choose to reject the presence of God in our actions.

This is a different understanding than how humans would judge the allowance, inaction or tolerance of the actions of other humans. We did not give humanity this freedom to choose and we are not all powerful and all knowing so it becomes a bit difficult in certain regards for comparrison. Since God Himself gave us freedom of choice, we have the freedom to accept or reject His presence in our actions. God’s action was to give us the freedom of choice, but we are allowed to choose if we want His presence or if we do not want His presence (sin) in our actions. God gave us the freedom to choose. Our choices can lead us to reject His presence, which in turn leads to His absence from our actions as a result of His tolerance for our God given right to choose, not His allowance of evil or any inaction on His part.

For humanity the choices are different. We can allow and choose evil like Hitler did the holocaust. We can tolerate evil like the Church did slavery The Church tolerated slavery for generations yet they had no presence in that action. We can choose inaction like Switzerland. Since we humans, or at least most of us , are not superman or divine in someway, we are not judged by the same criteria as God or the actions of God.

Well the key difference here is that although God created both those who cause good and evil only one action can be said to be a reflection of His nature. All men seek the good. A christian seeks to help others, a chef seeks his own restaurant etc. etc…you get the point. Now some seek the false good; money, sex, power the list becomes obvious, but the question is “why”. People seek wealth because they see it as a false good and perhaps a satiation of their desired happiness. People seek sex because it is pleasureable and offers them an escape. People seek power because they want control etc. etc. Murderers even seek the good when they murder. This is a false good but none the less they seek the good but are uable to distinguish between what is a false good and what is an actual good.