Subj : Knowledge of Good & Evil To : Lee Lofaso From : Kevin Gibson Date : Sun Jul 22 2001 12:20 am - Hello Lee, LL> Without a point of reference, there can be no "good" or "evil". Yes, yes, I understand. LL> In other words, in order to do "good" one must have knowledge of both LL> "good" and "evil", otherwise whatever one does cannot be known by LL> him or her as being either "good" or "evil". Yes, but... what do you mean by "have knowledge?" LL> Since one cannot make a good choice if there is no bad choice LL> available, it is not possible for one to do good. We would therefore LL> become victims of a nanny state, not having the need or desire LL> to think for ourselves. I'd like to disagree with this. If a state restricts your choices, you have the choice to disregard the restrictions. That, in itself, can be a bad choice. One often needs only one example of a bad choice as a reference in order to narrow the options. LL> What is a "good" act, and what is an "evil" act? How is one able to LL> know the difference? Can you make this a multiple choice test? LL> It cannot be said that the forbidden fruit was "evil", or even a LL> temptation. The forbidden fruit has something to do with knowledge. It *is* a temptation. If we define "evil" as inferior, we might look at mortality as inferior to immortality. Mortality resulted from the choice. LL> If that were so, then God Himself would be "evil", creating "evil" LL> creatures for His own "evil" purposes. That depends on who defines God, evil, and does the assessing. Can we define God? LL> Given that morality is a convention of man, any definition of what LL> constitutes a morally good act would be subjective, in light of LL> absolute truth. And what is absolute truth, if such truth cannot LL> be ascertained by man as absolutely true? All evidence is subjective in part because of the way we perceive. LL> How then, can we come up with a definition of "good" and "evil", and LL> how such good and evil can be measured by man? This is much more of a response than I expected. Where are you going? LL> That brings us to what constitutes a moral evil. If there is a good LL> and an evil, both good and evil must have an origin. By making LL> a premise that God is the source of all good, then what is the LL> origin of evil? Is God the author of all things? LL> Can good come from evil? Yes. But did you mean can evil come from good? LL> If so, that would seem to contradict the original premise that God LL> is the source of all good. But yet, we know that evil exists. You've lost me. LL> To answer those questions, and more, one can look to philosophers LL> such as Hobbes, Rousseau, Descartes, Carneades, and Nietzche. Each LL> of those philosophers had a different way of viewing good and evil LL> (reserving comment until next message...). Ah, you'd be welcome as a member of the "Dead Philosophers Society." - -+- QuikEdit 2.41R+ --- Maximus 3.01 * Origin: Sursum Corda! BBS-New Orleans 1-504-897-6006 USR33k6 (1:396/45) .