What is "Right" and/or "Good"?


In Plato's' Euthyphro, Plato asks, "Do the Gods love piety because it is pious, or is it pious because the Gods love it?" This can be restated by asking, "Is that which is good good independent of God's will, and that he loves it because it is good, or is that which is good good dependent on what God wishes to be good?"
The common perception of God is that He is (a) all-powerful, (b) all-knowing, (c) all-good, and (d) the creator of everything out of nothing. This definition of God is fine for the standard worshipper, because it creates an easy to understand, defined supreme being. It is a simple enough definition until one confronts the problem of evil.
Evil, according to traditional beliefs, is separated into two areas: moral evil, which is the evil one man does to another, and natural evil, bad events of nature which cause death, injury, and other things humans dislike.
Now, the problem comes when one compares the traditional beliefs of God to the traditional definition of evil. If God is all-powerful and all-knowing, then there should be no moral evil, because God would know what evil was going to take place, and then use his omnipotence to intervene and stop the evil from happening. Then, there would be no evil; however, there is still evil, so that does not work. Also, if God is all-powerful and the creator of everything ex nihilo, then God would have created evil, and since we state that God is also all-good, then God would be a hypocrite.
Many philosophers over the centuries have offered possible solutions to this problem. The first is to state that there is no evil. This concept reveals that evil is only a perception of the human mind, that evil things happen because we perceive them as evil. This philosophy would justify crimes against humanity, such as murder and rape, because it was never truly wrong to hurt the other person, just perceived as wrong. Fortunately, not many people outside of prison or asylum walls subscribe to this notion.
Second is the concept of Satan. As the tempter, Satan is the one who causes evil things to happen to people, and is as such blamed. However, a problem arises when we begin to blame all evil on the devil. Satan exists either as a (a) contingent, or created, being, or (b) a necessary being, such as God. As a contingent being, Satan had to have been created at some time. Most of the mono-theodic religions in the world subscribe to this belief. However, if God is the creator of everything out of nothing, then He would have created Satan, and being all-good, God could not have created something evil. Also, if he did create Satan, then while we are blaming Satan for all evil, we also curse He who created Satan, God.
As a necessary being, Satan would be God's dark twin, like Yang to Yin. As such, Satan would be (a) all powerful over evil, (b) all knowing of evil, (c) all evil, and (d) creator of all things evil out of nothing. This is incompatible with the traditional concept of God, because if the above about Satan were true, then God would be (a) all-powerful over only good, (b) all-knowing only of good, (c) all-good, and (d) the creator of everything good out of nothing, and as such would lose power and be limited. Since the two concepts of Satan both contradict the common beliefs of God, then Satan is not the solution of evil.
The third solution to the problem of evil, as proposed by Hick, is that everyone and everything is free. This being the case, everyone makes their own decisions and if one man does evil to another, it is by his own free will and choice. However, if God is all-knowing, then he is aware of what decisions we will make. Thus, he knows what we will do. Since we are bound by this knowledge of what we will do, we are not free to chose, because the choice has already been made. Because we will always make the same choice, given the same amount of experience and the same emotional status at the time of the decision, all the other options supposedly available to us are not, and we are not free to chose them, because we simply would not. Thus, we are not free, and this solution does not work.
Finally, there is Plato's solution. Long before physicist discovered that neither matter nor energy are ever created or destroyed, Plato argued that this world has always existed. Since it has always existed, the world is necessary. Plato also argued that people, mainly their souls, have always existed, and are therefore necessary. This now discounts the total absolute power of God, because now he is not the creator of everything ex nihilo, and since he cannot create anything out of nothing, is not all powerful, and since he does not know how to create anything from nothing, is not all knowing. This also answers the initial question poised by Plato, "Does God love piety because it is pious, or is it pious because God loves it?", because now we can say that piety, goodness, is independent of God, and he loves goodness because he is still "all-good".
This also solves the problem of evil. Since all that is good is independent of God, God is still all-good, and God did not create ex nihilo, then evil is independent of God. Since we are all necessary beings with free will (since God is no longer all-knowing), the evil which occurs in the world is done by individuals who are free who chose to do evil. Also with natural evil, if a tree falls on a man, killing him, it was the tree which killed the man. The earthquake is what destroyed the home, and is to blame for it.
It is this final solution of Plato's which I agree with. In the past few of years, mathematics have developed the new study of fratcal geometry, in which certain shapes are the same no matter what the size or scale is. To clarify, a head of cauliflower looks nearly the same as one tiny piece of the same cauliflower. Through this theory we learn that larger things are almost identical to their smaller counterpart, and vice-versa. In the Old-Testament, a book regarded as true by Christians, Jews and Muslims alike, there is a motif that we are the children of God. Now, to look at the development of our children, we conceive and bear them, protect them and nurture them until they are ready to go into the world to be tested, and eventually become like the adult which spawned them, and they in turn bear children, and the cycle continues. Perhaps, as children of God, we have the ability to grow into Gods ourselves, and that God indeed is a "Heavenly Father". Perhaps the commandments given by God are not rules made up by God, but merely eternal laws which are related to us, like earthly parents relate laws of the land to their children, and that by obeying these laws, we are able to succeed, both spiritually and temporally, respectively.

Back to Ethics Essays Main Page
Back to Corey's Written Stuff
Back to Corey's Home Page. 1