Whence Then is Evil?

Re: # 17

bj,

......... i cannot even pretend to understand hindooism - i have always maintained it is a cerebral religion meant for intellectuals, brahmins and people who can read ............but i disagree that evil needs a cover and co-exists with `good` .......... there are some people who are rotten to the core : masadi, jeffrey dahmer, osama, hillary clinton, pete rose, oj simpson and the dixie chix .......

you just haven`t met true evil - as dr evil said : ``Well it`s true! You`re semi-evil. You`re quasi-evil. You`re the margarine of evil. You`re the Diet Coke of evil. Just one calorie, not evil enough.``

#19 Hamidm2

Well said!

---

#18 ``klpd``

Godot, your continued presence and antics on this web-site are further proof (if such proof be needed) that evil always accompanies the good! :)

Re: # 18

klpd,

...... i am sorry that you feel that way - nothing i can do about it

hamidm2 - you are a first rate chutya who does not know his ass from his mouth.

Farzana - everytime you interact at this sewer site you degrade yourself. Have some will power, woman.

#9 Hamidm2

[......... the fact that echoboom and masadi have been effectively stopped from spreading fitna on chowk shows that evil can be stopped if one wants to - it proves that chowk editors have a better moral character than god ..........]

Mian, leaving aside the freedom of speech issue, need I point out to you that even Ms. Sadna has been gagged. Since you have yourself objected to that kind of dictatorship earlier, it only goes to show that the chowk editors also have an evil side ....

Proving the duality of human nature - the simultaneous existence of evil WITH good, as pointed out in #6.

Evil does not exist in a vacuum!! It needs a cover, a shelter, a place to hide in! Sometimes, the cover is the ``good``.

Re: # 13

hamid

(((((``Can evil transform into goodness at some point in time?`` ......... of course - haven`t you heard the saying ``she is so bad, she is good ))))

yaar khairiat hai...kiya ho giya bhai....where is bhandastic ability???

you said
``she is so bad, she is good`` incorrect

i say

``she is so bad, she is better``

oos ko hasil hai ikhtiaar dau aalim ki tabahi ka

Husn ke saath jawani jisey bharpoor milay

Aadaab

Re: # 12

Hamid Maskharay

Yaar....You are funny and i enjoy reading your ``bhaand`astic`` posts when i get tired of reading too much philosophy of some sick philosophers....

But...yaar...i am always ready to learn....let me learn.....there is serious discussion going on here....i know you are omniscient...but man let me learn....i have a long way to go...i am almost half of your age....the youngest chowky on board.....let me become `bada aadmi` and lemme have my bright near future....i am begging here...have mercy please...

I am drinking at the moment and i cannot type such rubbish anymore...

hamid....yaar...you are amazing....hahahah

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Re: # 5

fv,

``Can evil transform into goodness at some point in time?`` ......... of course - haven`t you heard the saying ``she is so bad, she is good !``

regards

Re: # 11

philosopher,

....... please stop bothering gill sahib - he has better things to do than read your sophomoric philosophy 101 essays ......... as gill sahib`s assistant, i give your gibberish in #2 a C- ........ now go and rewrite it .......... if you keep this up you will remain a phd candidate for ever and end up on the dole or drive a car into heathrow airport after a night of partying with the boys at the finsbury park mosque .............

Gill sahib

One of the things that have surprised me about you is,your taking seriously the article`God is metaphore` of respected Dr Sohail `(sorry no disrespect intended..i hope you will take it as a postive criticism from a student). Despite being a believer and an ex-athiest I don`t have beef against any agnostic.But that article is so technicaly poor and superficial to the extent that its almost impossible to refute it with serious intellectual discourse. If i go on to refute that article, i will have to start from the fundamentals of philosophy.That article looks a load of rubbish to any student of philosophy on such objective and obvious technical grounds without which it is impossible to get the intermediate certificate in philosophy from sargodha board let alone a phd degree in philosophy from London.

Anyhow sir....you havent mentioned the problems of formal logic and its authenticity as a yardstick to determine the validity of Knowledge. you seem to be sticking to the traditional concept that philosophy is all about `logical` (formal) thinking...i hope you know this is not the case....

sir please do correct me if i have mentioned something incorrect in my #2.

Regards

Well written article. The basic problem is with the definition of God. Its has inherent contradiction. A God who is ``less than all powerful`` fits in better than the all powerful God.
At present humans have no way to deal with metaphysical statements. Logical positivist like A.J.Ayer described them as meaningless statements as there is no way of proving them either wrong or right. It seems as God is a need rather than objective reality.

......... the fact that echoboom and masadi have been effectively stopped from spreading fitna on chowk shows that evil can be stopped if one wants to - it proves that chowk editors have a better moral character than god ..........

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Farzana: #5

A mother is a creator but is different from God, the creator of everything. She is not ``omni-anything,`` as you have stated and that makes all the difference. If she had the power to avoid giving birth to an evil person, she would do it.

The conclusion of my essay is that the God the theists have defined and continue defining cannot exist. He cannot both be good and evil at the same time if He is ominpotent as well. ``You cannot both eat the cake and have it,`` as I wrote in the essay. I agree with your conclusion which is the conclusion (though worded differently) of my essay also.

Mohammad Gill

It is a mistake to expect God to come in and solve the problems created by evil. The problem with that line of thinking is the assumption that God (if He exists) thinks like us men or his purpose for creation (if indeed He created and if indeed He had a purpose) is rooted in the same, petty objectives we men entertain. In this model, evil is there by design – by God’s design – and even though it is evil, it still serves a purpose and God leaves it alone sometimes, by design.

Of course, an alternative argument can be made that man created “God” for his own convenience – perhaps to shirk his/her own roles and responsibilities – to shift blame for the acts done by the evil that is an intrinsic part of him (as is the good).

At this point, I would like to quote the following portion of Tulsidas’ Of the Saints and the Wicked…, translated by yours sincerely. :)

As life and death - turn round and round
So signs of saints - of wicked ones, found
True virtue - see not just one, true
As vice - and as those virtues, too
In body same - do both survive
Ignorant ones - see just one thrive