The problem of evil lies in how it is defined. Many people may try to explain evil in concrete terms as a categorical imperative. However, most people agree that what is good and what is evil is relative to the situation; thus, good and evil acts are hypothetical imperatives in which the end goal determine the goodness or evil nature of the actions taken. For instance, a young mother decides to steal money from a convenience store where the owner has been known to rip customers off, the mother giving the stolen money to her friend.
Her friend has a sick son who is dire need of some medical treatment that requires a down payment before the treatment can be started. The friend’s insurance company has refused to pay for the treatment until some money is paid up front. The woman does not have the funds for this down payment and knows that the son will probably die without the treatment. In this case, the end goal of the child hopefully healing from the illness makes the action good not evil. Most people would probably not fault the mother for stealing.
Use your promo and get a custom paper on
"What is the Problem with Evil?".
On the other hand, if the mother had stolen money from the store owner because she wants to buy some illegal drugs for herself, then these actions would probably be considered evil by most people, the end goal of buying drugs a decision that mirrors an evil nature. However, not all actions taken by human beings are easy to categorize as good or evil, some falling into middle ground. Because evil is difficult to define in concrete terms, in the end, what does and does not constitute evil is left to one’s subjective judgment.
One of the most well-known works to explore this concept is that of “Beyond Good and Evil” by Friedrich Nietzsche. Nietzsche’s basic premise is that there is no universal law of morality; instead, what is moral or good and what is immoral or evil is dependent on one’s relative position in society. The master class defines evil in a way that benefits their class and the slave or servant class is obligated to follow the definitions of good and evil that the master class has given. Therefore, a significant problem with evil that becomes apparent when reading Nietzsche’s work is that the concept of evil can vary significantly depending on who has the power to define it.
Unfortunately, Nietzsche’s concept of evil takes the power out of the lower classes and places the majority of control into the hands of the higher classes. As the master class can makes decisions based on what benefits them, this make the likelihood of evil more probable, evil occurring through instances of emotional, physical, and even sexual abuse. For example, a male in the master class may feel that he would benefit by having sex with slaves in the servant class. As the sex would be for his enjoyment and would not require any emotional commitment, he and some other men decide that this is a good idea, not an evil action. When this new rule is relayed to the slaves, many of the women protest. When these women reject these men physically, many of the men resort to raping these women. Obviously, sexual assault is immoral, the act of rape also evil. If the female slaves had power to make these rules, rape would have been less likely to happen, non-consensual sex considered evil by these women
One explanation for the problem of evil which may be sufficient for the believer in God is that evil is a test for the believer and whether he goes to Heaven or Hell is dependent on whether he chooses good or evil. This reply is unsatisfactory to the non-believer because the foundation of the explanation rest on the presumption that God exists and it is possible to go to Heaven or Hell for the way one lives his or her life. For the non-believer, there is no Heaven and no Hell, therefore, there is no reason to abstain from choosing evil in the eyes of the non-believer based on this particular reply. Yet, many believers choose to engage in evil anyway, the choices of Heaven and Hell not enough to keep God’s followers from committing acts of evil. Obviously, when a believer commits evil, other priorities have taken place, either mentally, physically, or emotionally. A person who decides to steal car may now have the transportation to drive across the country, the key to freedom stronger than one’s worry about Heaven or Hell. Hence, this gives some hope to non-believers that they can do the right thing versus engaging in evil.
Non-believers, also known as atheists or agnostics, may have different reasons for not engaging in evil. Non-believers may feel that are being tested, too, this test not based on where they will end up after the die, but on other things. Perhaps, the non-believer, who is presented with the choice to steal $400 out of wallet he found on the beach or give the wallet to the police, the owner’s license still in the wallet, decides to turn the wallet in because he wants good karma to come back to him. He does not want bad karma to follow him in this life and feels that stealing the $400 would make his present life miserable. Down the line, the laws of karma may cause him to lose money in some way or maybe even experience something much worse. Hence, the choice to pick the good act, without a thought of Heaven and Hell, is possible.
The concept of what constitutes evil can be defined in many different ways, dependent on many factors such as individual interpretation, one’s spirituality, and/or rank in society. In the end, the individual must make ultimately decide to engage or not engage in evil.
