Evil is the absence of God
| Part of the series on |
| Key articles |
| General logic |
| Bad logic |
Evil is the absence of God is a supposedly logical argument that attempts to solve the problem of evil by explaining that "evil" does not exist as a positive, but is simply the lack of God.
The "argument" itself basically follows like this.
Question: Does evil exist?
- Darkness is not a thing, in and of itself. Darkness is simply what we call a lack of light.
- In the same way, cold does not exist. It is simply an area that lacks heat (energy).
- Equally, we can say the same about evil. Evil itself does not exist, it is simply a lack of God.
This argument has been used by Jehovah's Witnesses to explain why the world is falling apart[citation needed], by Ray Comfort to address the fact that God would not actually be a bad dude[citation needed]- but if you reject him, you cannot do Good, and by other feel-good Christians[citation needed] who want their "all good God", but still look at a world where evil clearly exists.
Contents |
[edit] Einstein
Perhaps the most famous rendition of this argument is in the urban legend that circulates in e-mail and social networks which tells of a young Albert Einstein in rapt debate with his professor.[1]
The professor asks, "Did God make everything?" One eager student happily yells out a yes. The mean atheist teacher, hoping to trick his faithful students into a quandary, smirks, says:
"What about...[2] EVIL?!?!?!!?!!!1" The eager student explains about darkness being the absence of light, and cold being the absence of heat, and evil being just the absence of God. Of course, the professor was dumbstruck. The student's name? Albert Einstein.
Why is the story very unlikely to be true?
- The dear Albert, not unlike Hitler for other uses, is always being dragged into urban legends when a generically smart person is used, even more so when this "smart person" is so often associated with atheists - which can be quite a blow to Christians.
- The telling of the tale, the "atheist professor", and the build-up to the grand conclusion, all form a Gestalt resembling an urban legend.
- It's still just a really bad argument to boot. Appealing to authority is also a bad argument, so using a doubly-bad argument to save a bad argument is just lacking good.
[edit] Criticism of the argument
The argument relies on a fallacy known as mistaking the map for the territory. The principal error is that even though at the microscopic level cold is indeed an absence of heat, it means only that cold does not exist as a physical quantity - the sensation of cold as perceived by humans clearly does exist. Similarly, regardless of the dubious definition offered in the argument, the perception of evil does exist. Moreover, there is no fundamental physical quantity one could identify with good - both good and evil are human perceptions, and so the analogy does not apply at all.
Applying this argument to actual instances of evil results in really bizarre statements. If someone murders a man's wife, the apologists would tell him that his wife did not experience evil, she just experienced a temporary lack of God while the killer was stabbing her with a knife. However, the man still experiences suffering and his wife is dead, regardless of how the apologists describe this event. An omnibenevolent God would not absent himself/herself/whatever in ways that cause or allow suffering.
One doesn't even need examples to show the oddity. Applying this argument at a conceptual level is sufficient: If evil is the comparative lack of God's inclusion in a situation, then what is the baseline? How much light do we need to see? How much heat do we need to feel warm? How much God do we need to be good?
Other possible criticisms: How would we know or prove that it is not "evil" that "exists as a quantity", with "Good" being merely the absence of evil, as well as the "absence of a hypothetical malevolent being"? Not only that, but an Omni-benevolent being wouldn't just content themselves with "erasing what is bad", but also filling the world (At least plane Earth) with elements that are widely seen as good. After all, what isn't "bad" isn't automatically or necessarily "good", it can be a neutral state of a varying nature. Finally, if the one making this claim declares that it is only the biblical deity which erases evil, then how could we explain high rates of violence, vice and the such in many regions that fundamentally embrace the Abrahamic religions (the bible belt, Saudi Arabia...)? A convincing rational explanation would also be required to justify why some non-religious or secular countries seem to be doing relatively fine (a few Northern European countries for instance).
[edit] Similar examples of stunningly amazing logic
Widespread poverty isn't systemic dysfunction but is a lack of well funded social programs and a lack of money in people's hands: You see, people aren't poor because the state doesn't have social programs, there's simply a lack of funding and poverty isn't really poverty but a lack of means to support yourself. So poverty doesn't exist but is just a lack of money. The state in the end is a kind, caring compassionate perfect government that sometimes goes a little over budget.
Systemic homophobia isn't abuse but is in fact a lack of humanity and tolerance: You see people need to educate themselves about sexual differences and so their psychopathic behaviour isn't really assholetry but a lack of human decency. So when a group of jocks go up to a gay teenager in school and punch his face in and dunk his head in the toilet, it isn't an actual act of assault, bullying and ignorance but is really just a lack of kindness and understanding.
Constipation isn't a blockage in your bowels but is a lack of good bodily regulation: You see, when you are constipated it isn't an inflated organ you are dealing with (that's just an illusion) it's really an absence of well regulated and consistent bolidy function. So eat some more fibre and get an enema if it gets really bad and that illusion of constipation will go away and you'll get more of that good bodily regulation you were temporarily lacking.
[edit] Footnotes
- ↑ http://www.snopes.com/religion/einstein.asp
- ↑ Dun dun dunnn...