The Scope and Definition of Evil Essay Example for Free

The Scope and Definition of Evil Essay The Chinese symbol, Yin Yang, have always amazed me. It has been believed to be a symbol of the balance of the forces of good and evil in the world. It speaks of the coexistence of good and evil; that each cannot overthrow the other or that one cannot subsist without the other. Thus, in the concept of evil and its meaning, it is only proper that good should come with it. But then, if we speak of evil, we are already implicitly speaking of goodness. Consequently, what then is the definition of evil? To what extent does the concept of evil grasp? In the first place, is there really such a thing as evil? Evil has so many definitions in the different contexts that it can invade. In Christian theology, evil is simply that which should not exist at all (Sharpe, 1909). Evil is the summation of all the opposition and negative events and situations that can render suffering to mankind. In popular Christian discussions, evil amounts to one thing, that is, the absence of good. This is somewhat in contrary to the concept that lies within the Yin Yang symbol. In relation to Christianity, other traditional religions claim that evil is an active force that drives anyone into doing acts of violence and any other deed that can jeopardize human life or life itself. Thus, terrorist attacks, torture and murder are some examples of the different forms of evil. In general terms, evil is intentional behavior or stimulation of others resulting to events that demean, dehumanize, harm, destroy or kill innocent people (Zimbardo, 2003, p. 3). It does not only include the very action of violence but also evil is something that urges one to do immoral acts that defame people. Furthermore, evil cannot only reside tangibly; it can also exist in the mind. Thus, evil can be regarded as a group of thoughts in one’s mind that plan to or wish to inflict harm or death to certain people. The nature of evil can be classified into three types. The first of which is physical evil that can cause bodily harm or harm to man’s properties (Sharpe, 1909). It is therefore physically evil to rob someone. It is consequently the same evil to shot someone. One very famous example of this type of evil is the September 11 terrorist attack on World Trade Center twin towers. Another type of evil is called moral evil. As its name implies, it concerns the principles that a person has or a particular society possesses. Moral evil encompasses the deviations and violations from the accepted set of beliefs that a person or an event causes. Such evil is observed in the tradition of cannibalism which is one of the many ancient practices that is condemned by the major religions of the world. In the modern times, an example of moral evil is the view of Christians against contraception. To the Roman Catholic Church, the use of contraception is moral evil. It violates the moral belief that only God can decide when or how one will have a baby. It violates the belief that though there is still is no physical evidence of a life in the tummy of a woman, life can already exist. The third type of evil is known as the metaphysical evil. This evil is very complicated since it does not speak of physical or conceptual evil in the sense that the two former types exist. Metaphysical evil does not involve human beings but rather the environment they live in and the things found in it (Sharpe, 1909). It is related to nature, plants, animals the elements of the world. Surprising as it may seem, we surely have encountered such. Pain, harm or damage inflicted to animals or anything comprising the things found in nature is evil. But it is not the same evil which can be regarded to human since no one can actually define the emotions and feelings, if such exist, of the things and creatures in the environment. Thus, metaphysical evil is only a representation of the evil that can exist in nature. Looking at the different types of evil, we would certainly perceive the relativity of its concept. The evil that a group of persons may consider can be considered good by another society. An act of violence condemned by others may be an act or heroism to some. Hence, there is no real line that separates the good and evil of the world. Who then has the right set of limitations regarding evil? Spinoza pointed out that due to this complication, evil can be judged by everyone according to what his or her conscience dictates (2005, p. 135). If so, then, there is no exact and distinguishing rule between what is evil and what is good. This may sound confusing. In extreme cases, it actually may be simple. If one is choosing between two things in extremes, such as life and death, surely, it will be easy to decide that death is evil and life is good. Nevertheless, if we look into more complex situations wherein the two choices are both good and still have to decide which is better and which one is not, it can be very difficult. In the same manner is when a person is confronted with two evil things where he has to judge the lesser evil. It is thus proper to state that evil is that which is the lesser good. In another explanation of evil, it is discussed as â€Å"knowing better but doing worse† (Zimbardo, 2003, p. 3). This may somehow simplify the issue of judgment. What is evil is what is deemed to be evil by one’s conscience. If a person’s mind speaks of an action as harmful, and yet the person continues to execute such endeavor, it is then considered evil. On the other hand, this opens the possibility that not all violence can be viewed as evil. If the person performing the act is not aware that what he is doing is a form of violence, then it is not evil at all. To be guilty of evil is to deliberately do an act of cruelty knowing it causes pain to other beings. Furthermore, deliberately doing a perceived evil and taking pleasure in it is far worse. Yet, can anyone be considered innocent of evil because of ignorance of it? In a different context, ignorance itself is evil since the idea of evil is that which opposes or negates. Another aspect that can be broadened in the concept of evil is the source from whence it came. In the book, â€Å"Augustine on Evil† by Gillian Evans, evil is asserted to come completely from a person’s will (1994, p. 98). In Christian theology, evil can be the product of Satan, also known as Lucifer, who somehow resolved to build his own empire. It is also believed that Satan’s kingdom is the world. It is therefore justifiable to state that evil can come from man’s will since man is of the world. Nevertheless, evil can also be due to the presence of good. How can one come into such a conclusion? In the earlier discussions, we have defined that evil is the absence of good. It is the counterpart of goodness. Thus, the existence of good can account for the existence of evil. Categorically, one can also say that evil thrive in society because pain and violence is visible. But then, violence and terror are products of evil. In sum, evil can ironically come out of good. Without goodness, evil cannot subsist. To further explain this point, let us take for example the existence of good people. The existence of good persons can attract what we consider evil since unconsciously, by being good, people become prone to abuse which can be a ground for evil actions. According to Alford, evil is an encounter with dread (1997, p. 3). But then, let’s get back to the Chinese symbol, yin yang. Observing it intently, we will see the equal line that differentiates the white from the black. It speaks of balance and justice between the two forces, if there is such a thing as justice between evil and good. For every evil that can transpire there is corresponding equal good that can come out of the situation. Further examination of the symbol will affirm that good cannot be intertwined with evil in a way of blending. There is no such thing as a grey idea of good and evil. If a thing is evil, it will remain evil though much of the modern people claim it to be otherwise. If it is good, then it will forever remain good. No evil can be completely evil because in the process, good will always sprout out. It is true, many of us have experienced evil in our lives but it is seldom realized that the hurts evil can bring to us is countered. With every evil experience, lessons are learned. Without evil, we will never understand and enjoy goodness, just as we won’t understand a smile if we don’t recognized a frown in the first place.