The problem of evil

[nemos]

Do you believe that human has free will?

I believe because it is convenient and comfortable for me.

As for your "natural evil", as far as I understand there is no evil action without evil intent ?! In which place did the earthquake have an evil intention that was aimed directly at your family? The fact that you built a house in a seismically active area actually makes you the culprit in your family's tragedy.

[Sculptor]

It does not matter even if that is true. Have you ever seen a person who lost all his family members and properties to a flood? Can such a person feel good?

Yes they can.
But even if not that does not verify the existence of evil in any meaningful sense.
People say it's "unfortuneate", but there is not force in the universe; FORTUNE either.
Good, evil, and Fortuna are just ancient mythical ideas.

Good and evil are ideas that explain the quality of a situation, action, etc. They are not things.

Yes they are not things
BUT. Good and evil are DESCRIPTIVE. they explain nothing.

[Sculptor]

Earthquake. I think that would be a problem for you. Isn't it?

An earthquake here is a settlement of the earth's crush there. One mans fallen building is another man's stable land.

Earthquakes are just what happens. There is no evil intended.

Good and evil are ideas that explain the quality of a situation, action, etc.

No.
These words do not explain. They only describe your personal reaction to a situation.
Can you see the difference?
For example.
You might call poison eveil but if I was poisoning Hitler. It would be evil for him and good for the rest of humanity.
So it is not that poison is good or evil it just descibes subjectively the effects.

[bahman]

Yes they can.
But even if not that does not verify the existence of evil in any meaningful sense.
People say it's "unfortuneate", but there is not force in the universe; FORTUNE either.
Good, evil, and Fortuna are just ancient mythical ideas.

Good and evil are ideas that explain the quality of a situation, action, etc. They are not things.

Yes they are not things
BUT. Good and evil are DESCRIPTIVE. they explain nothing.

Of course, they explain something.

[Sculptor]

Good and evil are ideas that explain the quality of a situation, action, etc. They are not things.

Yes they are not things
BUT. Good and evil are DESCRIPTIVE. they explain nothing.

Of course, they explain something.

wot?

[bahman]

Yes they are not things
BUT. Good and evil are DESCRIPTIVE. they explain nothing.

Of course, they explain something.

wot?

What what?

[Walker]

Yes they can.
But even if not that does not verify the existence of evil in any meaningful sense.
People say it's "unfortuneate", but there is not force in the universe; FORTUNE either.
Good, evil, and Fortuna are just ancient mythical ideas.

Good and evil are ideas that explain the quality of a situation, action, etc. They are not things.

Yes they are not things
BUT. Good and evil are DESCRIPTIVE. they explain nothing.

Evil appears as action that intends to harm, for the sole purpose of harming. Action is doing. Harm is caused by the action done by evil. People who do evil actions that are done only to harm, are called evil.

Other descriptions of evil, wrong and right, can likely be found, but that doesn't negate this description of evil.

If you want a tidy, one word explanation for all that, without any qualifiers, then you already have it. Evil.
So you can rest easy. That explains it.

Wolves that instinctively slaughter 40 sheep, then leave them to rot, are probably doing that to establish dominance in territory, rather than harm for the sake of harming, harming which we now know to call evil after all these years on the earf, even though there are other causes of harm.

*

Humans are not wolves, obviously.

- Old ladies punched out by strong, unprovoked, young men?
- Unlike wolves, sure sounds like evil done for the purpose of doing evil.
- If those men want to act like wolves ... then release them into the wild with the wolves, and with just the clothes on their two backs.
- See if they can punch out a wolf to establish their animal dominance.

- Do any reasons the thugs might offer for doing this, even matter? Nay, I say.


Elderly Christmas Carolers Attacked By Teens
https://iotwreport.com/elderly-christma ... -by-teens/

[Ansiktsburk]

The problem of evil refers to natural evils that are caused by God. God is assumed to be good though so there is a tension between the existence of a good God and natural evils. People use this problem as an argument against the existence of God. God however could be good and evil, so His creation is as well good and evil. So the problem of evil is resolved.

He will probably roast us all forever anyways.

[Ansiktsburk]

Good and evil are ideas that explain the quality of a situation, action, etc. They are not things.

Yes they are not things
BUT. Good and evil are DESCRIPTIVE. they explain nothing.

Of course, they explain something.

Since, reading through this thread, good and evil seems to be something different for different people some definitions seem to be needed to make them super describing.

[bahman]

Yes they are not things
BUT. Good and evil are DESCRIPTIVE. they explain nothing.

Of course, they explain something.

Since, reading through this thread, good and evil seems to be something different for different people some definitions seem to be needed to make them super describing.

Good is the state of pleasure and clarity and evil is the state of suffering and confusion.

[Ansiktsburk]

Of course, they explain something.

Since, reading through this thread, good and evil seems to be something different for different people some definitions seem to be needed to make them super describing.

Good is the state of pleasure and clarity and evil is the state of suffering and confusion.

That explains a lot more than just the words.

[Age]

Of course, they explain something.

Since, reading through this thread, good and evil seems to be something different for different people some definitions seem to be needed to make them super describing.

Good is the state of pleasure and clarity and evil is the state of suffering and confusion.

So, BECAUSE 'you', "bahman", ARE IN A STATE OF CONFUSION here, then 'this' IS so-called 'evil'.

Now, would 'you' like to EXPLAIN HOW there IS 'evil' here, EXACTLY, WHERE, EXACTLY, is the 'evil' here, in other words who and/or what HAS the 'evil' here, and what the word 'evil' even MEANS, or IS REFERRING TO, TO 'you?

If no, then WHY NOT?

[puto]

Laughing, than having searched for the problem of evil. Finding, forty four pages with reference in the search engine to the problem of evil. All you people can do is put each other down by saying, you do not know what the other is writing about. Knowing, that knowledge is not cheap because you have to pay attention. First, give yourself some experience; then answer in a paraphrase. "Philosophy is not about sitting around quoting dead philosophers, but about believing why you believe in what." Ken Taylor Oxford educated philosopher and a professor from Stanford University. Buy the magazine and then if you have to quote it. Just give a cited work page.

[bahman]

Laughing, than having searched for the problem of evil. Finding, forty four pages with reference in the search engine to the problem of evil. All you people can do is put each other down by saying, you do not know what the other is writing about. Knowing, that knowledge is not cheap because you have to pay attention. First, give yourself some experience; then answer in a paraphrase. "Philosophy is not about sitting around quoting dead philosophers, but about believing why you believe in what." Ken Taylor Oxford educated philosopher and a professor from Stanford University. Buy the magazine and then if you have to quote it. Just give a cited work page.

What are you looking for?

[bahman]

Since, reading through this thread, good and evil seems to be something different for different people some definitions seem to be needed to make them super describing.

Good is the state of pleasure and clarity and evil is the state of suffering and confusion.

So, BECAUSE 'you', "bahman", ARE IN A STATE OF CONFUSION here, then 'this' IS so-called 'evil'.

I am not confused about the problem of evil.

Now, would 'you' like to EXPLAIN HOW there IS 'evil' here, EXACTLY, WHERE, EXACTLY, is the 'evil' here, in other words who and/or what HAS the 'evil' here, and what the word 'evil' even MEANS, or IS REFERRING TO, TO 'you?

I already defined the word evil.