There is No Logical Requirement for Evil

Theologans and religious philosophers tie themselves up in knots over the existence of evil. The reason is simple, (almost) all religions posit the existence of a God or Gods which are good. Many times the God or Gods are the ultimate good or the source of all good and many times they are omnipotent and/or omniscient. It is easy to see the problem for those religions which posit a God that is good and all powerful and/or all knowing. Why would such a God permit, or if all powerful, be responsible for creating, evil? It is a fascinating question that can never be answered for many reasons. It is greatly complicated by the lack of agreement on the properties of God (all good or not, omnipotent/omniscient or not, one or many, etc.). It must be said that one thing all arguments for the existence of evil share, and it is a thing I think with which most people would agree, is the belief that evil does in fact exist. Certain things/people/acts are evil and we have a way of knowing what these are though exactly how that is to be known varies considerably from religion to religion and ethical system to ethical system. It is possible to argue that evil is an illusion or that there is no evil or that we can never know what is good or what is evil. The arguments for each of those positions are generally weak and few share thsoe beliefs so I will ignore them for purposes of the discussion below.

There is a way to approach the problem of the existence of/need for evil without the complicating God factor. That way is through logical arguments which do not require nor deny the existence of a God or Gods with whatever properties we could care to bestow upon her/him/them. Below I try to tackle some of the most common arguments for the existence of evil using logical arguments that leave God totally (mostly) out of the discussion.

1. Evil is necessary because without it we wold not know what good is

Perhaps that is true but to that I say so what? Why does it matter if we know or do not know what good is? If evil did not exist everything we did would be good and that would be a good thing, right? Why would it not be? Our knowledge one way or the other would have no bearing on it. Unless we believe that we as humans define what is good and what is evil, that we totally define it, then our state of knowledge of that fact is inconsequential. We are either good or not, acting in good ways or not. Knowledge of good and evil is not a requirement for good or evil. What those requirements actually are and from whence they come is a matter for much debate. However, our knowledge of those requirements will not change the fact of their existence. One could use an argument along these lines as an argument for the existence of a God or Gods that does set those requirements. However, just because one could do this, it is not required, and, since I am striving to use only logical arguments here, I obviously will not suggest this, and do not believe it to be the case. What is my alternative you ask? Great question I respond, and then do not provide an answer but rather move on to my next point which is.

2. Evil gives us (people) something to stand/fight against and informs us of what we should stand/fight for (i.e. its opposite, good)

Much like point number 1, I will argue against this with a question. Why must there be a fight? Why do we have to fight for something in order for it to be important or real? There are plenty of things which we accept and are absolutely real without any need to fight for them or stand for them or with them or against them. They simply are the case, we accept that, and move on. The universe or world could be all good and we would simply move on with our lives, living in peace and happiness with no need to fight anything or anyone. We would have no idea that there was any other way even possible. All of our actions would be good because there would be no other possibility. What exactly is the problem with that? The logical problem I mean. There is none.

3. Evil is required for balance

It is obvious that we need balance in the universe and in our lives. Balance is good. Moderation in all things. Balance in all things. Some of this and some of that. Too much of a good thing, etc. and so on. There are as many truisms, adages, wives tales, and biblical yarns, related to the importance of balance and moderation as stars in the night sky it seems. These are applied to morals and ethics, diet and health, work and life, and just about every other area of interest humankind has yet to explore. When something is as universally accepted as this, it must be true, right? Wrong. In fact in many more cases than we realize what is universally accepted as correct, is in fact, not the case, or is correct in some areas, but is then applied to others where it is not accurate, misleading, or in some cases totally wrong. The requirement for evil to balance good is just one of many such examples. See here for more on this. It should be obvious that there is no logical requirement for balance, as, in fact, many things are highly unbalanced, and so are many people. To suggest that good things need to be balanced by bad things to bring "order to the universe" or some such silly Yodaism is ridiculous on its face. The universe is not in the least bit ordered to begin with and, because of the law of entropy, is, in fact, moving to a higher and higher state of disorder every Plank's moment of time (the shortest possible measurable unit of time. Note to any physicists reading this. I know there is no such thing as a Plank's moment of time. I am using the idea of Plank's length in a different manner then it is correctly applied to illustrate my point) of each and every day. If balance in the universe were required this would not be the case. It could be argued that balance is strongly disfavored by the universe as it seems to be running away from it as quickly as possible, and it is written in to the very laws which govern its behavior and which it defines.