dr_who@umcp-cs.UUCP (07/06/83)
From: rh@mit-eddi Say you're walking down the beach, and you cut your foot on some glass. You can't, however, in a "perfect" world feel pain, so you bleed to death. In a perfect world, you don't cut your foot in the first place! Also, [the Stoics] (sort of) held that without pain, you would have nothing against which you could compare pleasure Then the Stoics were wrong. You could compare it to indifferent states (no pain, no pleasure or joy), or even to states of less pleasure. Admittedly, if we felt no pain then we would use concepts very similar to "bad" and "evil" to refer to indifferent states, but that doesn't mean that we would not be better off. A good life (and likewise, a better life) and a known- to-be-good life (known-to-be-better life) are two different things. ... without the presence of EVIL, how do we know what is GOOD? *With* the presence of evil, how do we know what is good? I don't see how the how-we-know question is any easier or harder to answer either way. The best short answer I can give is "reason and experience," but a better reply is needed and that would lead down a side track. From: laura@utcsstat If you want to define EVIL and GOOD it makes a big difference whether they exist as absolutes or not. It also makes a difference whether they are 2 qualities or 1. I don't want to argue with this (at least not yet), just to understand it. Laura uses the terms "fast" and "slow" for comparison and clarification. The point seems to be that fast and slow are relative, and are not two qualities but one -- speed. Now, my question is, is there any distinction between the relativity of fast and slow and the fact that both terms refer to one property? My parallel question regarding good and evil is, are the "absolutes or not" question and the "2 qualities or 1" question really any different, given Laura's terminology? I guess the reason I want to make distinctions here is that the question of whether good and evil are comparative (like fast and slow) seems to me separate from the question of whether good and evil have an existence beyond people's beliefs about what is good and evil. The (non-)comparitivity of good and evil relates to whether one can exist w/o the other. The other question is what I usually take to be the "absolute value" issue. Finally, I think one can believe that value has an existence beyond what we believe w/o assuming that value is "engraven in stone and unchanging" because somehow embodied in God. -- Paul Torek, U of MD College Park (dr_who@umcp-cs)
laura@utcsstat.UUCP (07/08/83)
re: are good and evil 1 property or 2 or is there such a thing at all. (this would have been mail except that dr_who doesnt have a mailing address.) Speed is a quality which exists independantly of the existance of humans. If there were no humans, but there were dolphins, some would swim faster than others. Whether dolphins actually think about "fast" or "slow" is not the point (although it seems that they do, from watching them) SPEED is a real physical reality which exists whether you believe in it or not. (Unless you solipcists are right in which case all of you may be figments of my deranged imagination but enough of this..). Speed is 1 property which is commonly thought of as 2 (fastness and slowness) by humans. You cannot necesarily say the same thing about GOOD and EVIL. They may be 2 names which we can call one property of something, or 2 distinct properties of something, but then they may be "meaningless noise". Here is pure supposition but which illustrates what I mean by "meaningless noise": Suppose "feeling guilty" is a natural human feeling intrinsic to the race as a whole and to all individuals in it. Suppose that it is actually a natural reaction to having the universe not work the way you had expected it. Suppose that what is now called "guilt" is actually a normal feeling which one gets when one reviews one's past actions and looks for an error. Note that it does not necesarily imply that errors are EVIL, merely that in intelligent creatures like humans there is the possibility of learning from mistakes and that to learn from one you must notice that a mistake has occurred. "Feeling guilty" could be a biological signal of "pay attention", which makes sense as creatures who make too many mistakes often end up paying for them with their lives. Now suppose that when our ancestors first discovered language and first bagan talking about things someone asked "Why do I feel in such and such a way when i do X" (naming a situation where the emotion produced was guilt) and suppose that one of the others said: "Oh.. God doesnt like you to do X so he makes you feel bad so that you will know that you are in his disfavour". Suppose this idea catches on like wild and religions use it for ever more so that people will THROUGH GUILT be tied to their religions. Give the religions a lot of time... Then what do you get? A culture which is based on an absolute value system (there is GOOD and there is EVIL and those in power can arbitrarily decide which is which) even if it is distinct from any religion. Good and evil will have become so well engrained in human history that it would be hard to say - "Well, that first guy who mentioned evil -- he was wrong." Too many people believe in Good and Evil for this. I am not saying that this is actually what has happened, but GOOD and EVIL loose their mystical properties under this light and become "good" and "evil", 2 ordinary adjectives which I and anyone else can use as they please. (Of course, if there is no arbitrary standard than confusion may result, but if I say "that machine is fast" without knowing something about my personal beliefs of speed and the context of the statement you will be equally confused.) If one is defining Good and Evil it is best to let others know whether you believe they exist distinct from the minds of humans. I have built a case for the existance of "speed", but it is harder to do the same thing for the existance of good/evil. Nonetheless, most people do believe in "good" and "evil", although when you actually begin discussing it you may find that others' beliefs differ remarkably from your own. laura creighton utzoo!utcsstat!laura