Noggy Posted September 6, 2011 Author Share Posted September 6, 2011 Because for someone to be able to do good, they have to have free will. Please logically support this assertion. Respectfully, Franciscan Monkey Because Good and Evil are only in the will? A hurricane isn't good or bad, it is indifferent. The only thing that can be truly "evil" would be maliciousness, which is inside the will. And just as cheesecake isn't "good", so is good only in the will as well. I thought this was a well accepted position? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Franciscan Monkey Posted September 6, 2011 Share Posted September 6, 2011 Because for someone to be able to do good, they have to have free will. Please logically support this assertion. Respectfully, Franciscan Monkey Because Good and Evil are only in the will? A hurricane isn't good or bad, it is indifferent. The only thing that can be truly "evil" would be maliciousness, which is inside the will. And just as cheesecake isn't "good", so is good only in the will as well. I thought this was a well accepted position? If good and evil are defined only by the intent behind the actions, then why are the actions themselves necessary? Could not a god prohibit the ability to do evil deeds, but still allow evil thoughts to occur? After all, if there is a god, he does limit the capacity to do evil deeds, thereby limiting free will. We cannot kill others just by blinking, for instance. And if free will is limited, could it not be limited to good deeds only? Respectfully, Franciscan Monkey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlphaToOmega Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 Because for someone to be able to do good, they have to have free will. Please logically support this assertion. Respectfully, Franciscan Monkey Because Good and Evil are only in the will? A hurricane isn't good or bad, it is indifferent. The only thing that can be truly "evil" would be maliciousness, which is inside the will. And just as cheesecake isn't "good", so is good only in the will as well. I thought this was a well accepted position? If good and evil are defined only by the intent behind the actions, then why are the actions themselves necessary? Could not a god prohibit the ability to do evil deeds, but still allow evil thoughts to occur? After all, if there is a god, he does limit the capacity to do evil deeds, thereby limiting free will. We cannot kill others just by blinking, for instance. And if free will is limited, could it not be limited to good deeds only? Respectfully, Franciscan Monkey Sociopaths are indifferent. So technically they cannot be guilty of any acts of hate since they are incapable of them. They can't tell that killing is bad any other way other than we as a society tell them so. On a different tangent... Sociopaths make up about 1% of the population and really have no concept of good vs evil, they are the true remnants of Adam and Eve if you believe the Bible. God made sociopaths and eating the forbidden fruit gave them the knowledge to tell good from evil. There's one for Christians to contemplate. God made all mankind sociopaths according to the Bible. The serpent gave us the knowledge to tell good from evil. Who would want to live in a society made totally of sociopaths? There is your garden of Evil...I mean Eden. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts