if there is no evil then how do know good?

this brings up the important subject without evil can there be good?

Originally posted by powder005
this brings up the important subject without evil can there be good?

Why not?

Originally posted by powder005
this brings up the important subject without evil can there be good?

Can there be white without black?
Can there be cold without hot?
Can there be darkness without light?

Before God created anything -- when it was just Him -- was there evil?

Nemesio

I look at it this way,

There is no such thing as "cold", its just a absence of heat,

There is no such thing as "darkness" Its a absence of light

Therefore, Evil is an absence of good?

Originally posted by flyUnity
I look at it this way,

There is no such thing as "cold", its just a absence of heat,

There is no such thing as "darkness" Its a absence of light

Therefore, Evil is an absence of good?

By the same logic, "good" is just the absence of "evil".

Originally posted by powder005
this brings up the important subject without evil can there be good?

The view that good cannot exist in the absence of evil entails that good is relative and not absolute.

Suppose there has always been justice in some universe. Is this good, or does an injustive have to occur in that universe to confer goodness upon the justice? Would you prefer to live in a completely just universe whose goodness would never be conferred by an evil injustice, or in a universe in which justice's goodness is repeatedly conferred by the presence of evil injustice? I would prefer to live in the former - but I don't hold the view that goodness requires the existence of evil, so I have no obstacle to finding that that is the better universe.

Is there any good in heaven?
Is there any evil in heaven?

Nemesio presents the best dilemma: under the proposed view, God is either not good, or an evil counterpart existed with him before the creation of our world. Further, it entails that God is only good in a relative sense, if he is good at all.

Originally posted by powder005
this brings up the important subject without evil can there be good?

That depends on one's definition of "good".

Originally posted by no1marauder
By the same logic, "good" is just the absence of "evil".

Therefore a glass of water is simply the absence of an empty glass?
The logic does not exactly work both ways. It is the issue of a substance and the lack of substance.

Of course, in the case of good and evil the question would be which of these is the substance and which is simply the lack of substance. Is this what you meant?

The analogy with heat, light, etc., is misleading.

Moral goodness is a quality of a person or act. It is probably fair to say it cannot exist without at least the possibility that someone will choose to act in a way that is not good.

That could be a morally neutral act or an evil act.

Moral goodness in no way requires the "existence of evil".

Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
The view that good cannot exist in the absence of evil entails that good is relative and not absolute.

Suppose there has always been justice in some universe. Is this good, or does an injustive have to occur in that universe to confer goodness upon the justice? Would you prefer to live in a completely just universe whose goodness would never be ...[text shortened]... r world. Further, it entails that God is only good in a relative sense, if he is good at all.

I share the view that good is not merely relative. I don't need to know what starvation is to enjoy a Goan pompret Rechado.

But is good a little bit relative? In particular, is what is good made better by the creation of evil? Could that be a premise of a viable theodicy?

Originally posted by no1marauder
By the same logic, "good" is just the absence of "evil".

No. Light is measurable using Newtons prism to break white light into many colors and study the various wavelengths of each color. Darkness we cannot study, therefore, darkness does not exist. It is only a term to describe the absence of light. Likewise, heat transmits energy and therefore can be studied. Coldness in reality does not exist and is only a term to denote an absence of heat. In fact, absolute zero is the total absence of heat and all matter becomes inert and incapable of reaction at such a temperature. Goodness and evil are thus comparible. Goodness exists as where evil does not. The term evil is used to denote the absence of God's love in ones heart.

if there is no evil then how do know good?

When it comes up and bites you on the hindside.

Originally posted by aspviper666
if there is no evil then how do know good?

When it comes up and bites you on the hindside.

As I said before, evil is a term to describe the absence of good. It is comparible to saying that you are getting cold even though coldness does not exist. Nevertheless, you know when you are getting cold. God created heat and light. He did not create darkness and cold or evil. Therefore those items do not exist. These terms simply denote the absence of what is present.

Originally posted by whodey
As I said before, evil is a term to describe the absence of good. It is comparible to saying that you are getting cold even though coldness does not exist. Nevertheless, you know when you are getting cold. God created heat and light. He did not create darkness and cold or evil. Therefore those items do not exist. These terms simply denote the absence of what is present.

But just neutrality can be considered evil if the world was filled with
good. Its like a voltage on a wire. If good = a large postitive
voltage, and evil= a large negative voltage, then anything in the
middle would be considered the opposite, from the evil viewpoint,
neutrality is good and from the good viewpoint, neutrality is evil.
So therefore there can be gradients of good where somewhat less
good can be also considered evil. Like if a hungry man is given
enough food to avoid starvation by one person but another person
gives him enough food to make him healthy, in the absence of
real evil, wouldn't the first person be considered evil?

Originally posted by sonhouse
But just neutrality can be considered evil if the world was filled with
good. Its like a voltage on a wire. If good = a large postitive
voltage, and evil= a large negative voltage, then anything in the
middle would be considered the opposite, from the evil viewpoint,
neutrality is good and from the good viewpoint, neutrality is evil.
So therefore there ...[text shortened]... o make him healthy, in the absence of
real evil, wouldn't the first person be considered evil?

the largest voltage would cause the neutral to tend towards the opposite....if predominantly good...those neutral would tend towards bad.vice-versa.