Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utcsrgv.UUCP Path: utzoo!utcsrgv!phyllis From: phyllis@utcsrgv.UUCP (Phyllis Eve Bregman) Newsgroups: net.philosophy Subject: Re: What evil is Message-ID: <1601@utcsrgv.UUCP> Date: Thu, 23-Jun-83 20:15:42 EDT Article-I.D.: utcsrgv.1601 Posted: Thu Jun 23 20:15:42 1983 Date-Received: Thu, 23-Jun-83 23:07:10 EDT Organization: CSRG, University of Toronto Lines: 20 Tom Litant is correct in citing Aristotle. As well as what Tom mentioned about Plato's "Republic", it is also the case that Plato would not allow the workers to make decisions regarding what is evil. The final decision in all of his discussions regarding abstract absolutes fell to the Philospher Kings. According to the Allegory of the Cave in the "Republic", ordinary people can only see illusions (shadows on the wall), and can talk "around" good, evil and the like, but can never answer the questions of what they are. Modern philosophy mostly disagrees with Plato's Absolutes, and certainly with his notion of Philosopher Kings, but considering some of the discussions found here and in net.religion, I agree with him that, for the most part, people can give examples, but very few can actually define abstract concepts. Phyllis Eve Bregman CSRG, University of Toronto