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