How would an atheist explain the probelm of evil?

Brandon9000,

The older I get, the less inclined I am to make absolute judgments. Sure, I make the rough judgments that are necessary for navigating my daily life, but I'll leave the absolutes to someone better qualified.

Miklos said that not being a god he cannot assign the value of "intrinsic" evil to an act. I agree and would like to apply the principle as well to the application of "intrinsic", or absolute, virtue.
There have been some very intelligent responses to the widely accepted inanity expressed by Real Life. I particularly appreciate that of the newcomer, Thoke--whom we should welcome to A2K most enthusiastically.

But how would they explain the problem of evil?

*The Problem of Evil works better reformulated as the Problem of Suffering, since we all agree that there is suffering in the world, and some of it cannot be explained away with reference to the free will of humans (e.g. natural disasters... why would a good God have allowed the tsunami?).

Miklos7 wrote:

Brandon9000,

The older I get, the less inclined I am to make absolute judgments. Sure, I make the rough judgments that are necessary for navigating my daily life, but I'll leave the absolutes to someone better qualified.

How is labelling a person's behavior evil an absolute any more than labelling it selfish or kind? You simply don't like the idea that evil people exist in the world, so you try to pretend that you're too enlightened to believe in it. That would be fine except for the fact that some people do exhibit frequent evil behavior.

Brandon9000 wrote:

Miklos7 wrote:

Brandon9000,

The older I get, the less inclined I am to make absolute judgments. Sure, I make the rough judgments that are necessary for navigating my daily life, but I'll leave the absolutes to someone better qualified.

How is labelling a person's behavior evil an absolute any more than labelling it selfish or kind? You simply don't like the idea that evil people exist in the world, so you try to pretend that you're too enlightened to believe in it. That would be fine except for the fact that some people do exhibit frequent evil behavior.

I agree with brandon, except for the terminology. As I said, I consider the word 'evil' to be a religious concept. but rejecting it in no way means to say morality has no foundation. Persons who kill with no remorse, Hitlers, etc., still must face justice.

Chumly, With your "Justice=Societal retribution=Revenge=evil" calculation
You conclude that justice is evil, but how can that be?

So what came first, an act of evil of an act of justice?

edgarblythe wrote:

Brandon9000 wrote:

Miklos7 wrote:

Brandon9000,

The older I get, the less inclined I am to make absolute judgments. Sure, I make the rough judgments that are necessary for navigating my daily life, but I'll leave the absolutes to someone better qualified.

How is labelling a person's behavior evil an absolute any more than labelling it selfish or kind? You simply don't like the idea that evil people exist in the world, so you try to pretend that you're too enlightened to believe in it. That would be fine except for the fact that some people do exhibit frequent evil behavior.

I agree with brandon, except for the terminology. As I said, I consider the word 'evil' to be a religious concept. but rejecting it in no way means to say morality has no foundation. Persons who kill with no remorse, Hitlers, etc., still must face justice.

And what is justice if not society's retribution (if the questionable arguments of deterrence and rehabilitation are exempted) which is by many people's beliefs evil; as it then connotes revenge and not equity.

Or so it might go, should I take the devil's advocate

Justice = Societal Retribution = Revenge = Evil

Edgarbly, it might appear you advocate the 'ol time religious view of "an eye for an eye" , AKA evil deserves evil, or in your connotation: immoral acts deserve immoral acts.

OK I won't poke any more fun........

Chumly wrote:

edgarblythe wrote:

Brandon9000 wrote:

Miklos7 wrote:

Brandon9000,

The older I get, the less inclined I am to make absolute judgments. Sure, I make the rough judgments that are necessary for navigating my daily life, but I'll leave the absolutes to someone better qualified.

How is labelling a person's behavior evil an absolute any more than labelling it selfish or kind? You simply don't like the idea that evil people exist in the world, so you try to pretend that you're too enlightened to believe in it. That would be fine except for the fact that some people do exhibit frequent evil behavior.

I agree with brandon, except for the terminology. As I said, I consider the word 'evil' to be a religious concept. but rejecting it in no way means to say morality has no foundation. Persons who kill with no remorse, Hitlers, etc., still must face justice.

And what is justice if not society's retribution (if the questionable arguments of deterrence and rehabilitation are exempted) which is by many people's beliefs evil; as it then connotes revenge and not equity.

Or so it might go, should I take the devil's advocate

Justice = Societal Retribution = Revenge = Evil

Edgarbly, it might appear you advocate the 'ol time religious view of "an eye for an eye" , AKA evil deserves evil, or in your connotation: immoral acts deserve immoral acts.

OK I won't poke any more fun........

The statue of justice is blind, holding a scale. If justice to you is an eye for an eye, you and I have differing word definitions also.

edgarblythe wrote:

Brandon9000 wrote:

Miklos7 wrote:

Brandon9000,

The older I get, the less inclined I am to make absolute judgments. Sure, I make the rough judgments that are necessary for navigating my daily life, but I'll leave the absolutes to someone better qualified.

How is labelling a person's behavior evil an absolute any more than labelling it selfish or kind? You simply don't like the idea that evil people exist in the world, so you try to pretend that you're too enlightened to believe in it. That would be fine except for the fact that some people do exhibit frequent evil behavior.

I agree with brandon, except for the terminology. As I said, I consider the word 'evil' to be a religious concept. but rejecting it in no way means to say morality has no foundation. Persons who kill with no remorse, Hitlers, etc., still must face justice.

And what is justice if not society's retribution (if the questionable arguments of deterrence and rehabilitation are exempted) which is by many people's beliefs evil; as it then connotes revenge and not equity.........

Chumly wrote:

edgarblythe wrote:

Brandon9000 wrote:

Miklos7 wrote:

Brandon9000,

The older I get, the less inclined I am to make absolute judgments. Sure, I make the rough judgments that are necessary for navigating my daily life, but I'll leave the absolutes to someone better qualified.

How is labelling a person's behavior evil an absolute any more than labelling it selfish or kind? You simply don't like the idea that evil people exist in the world, so you try to pretend that you're too enlightened to believe in it. That would be fine except for the fact that some people do exhibit frequent evil behavior.

I agree with brandon, except for the terminology. As I said, I consider the word 'evil' to be a religious concept. but rejecting it in no way means to say morality has no foundation. Persons who kill with no remorse, Hitlers, etc., still must face justice.

And what is justice if not society's retribution (if the questionable arguments of deterrence and rehabilitation are exempted) which is by many people's beliefs evil; as it then connotes revenge and not equity.........

I know you're joking, at least I hope you are, but it's nonsense to imply that putting a bank robber in jail is evil.

thoke wrote:

*The Problem of Evil works better reformulated as the Problem of Suffering, since we all agree that there is suffering in the world, and some of it cannot be explained away with reference to the free will of humans (e.g. natural disasters... why would a good God have allowed the tsunami?).

Only if you are willing to totally refine the word, as evil means expressed through man. If you want to make a tsunami "evil" you can only do it by bastardizing the word. I suggest that you go get another word instead.