Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site umcp-cs.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!seismo!rlgvax!cvl!umcp-cs!dr_who From: dr_who@umcp-cs.UUCP Newsgroups: net.philosophy Subject: good w/o evil Message-ID: <490@umcp-cs.UUCP> Date: Tue, 5-Jul-83 20:54:01 EDT Article-I.D.: umcp-cs.490 Posted: Tue Jul 5 20:54:01 1983 Date-Received: Thu, 7-Jul-83 03:56:16 EDT Organization: Univ. of Maryland, Computer Science Dept. Lines: 52 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)