can evil exist without good? can good exist without evil?

[HyveMynd]

didn't really know where to stick this thread, but since it came up while i was exploring a setting idea i figured i'd post it here.

[ic=the million dollar question]can good or evil really exist without it's polar opposite?[/ic]

i'll give this some context to help, and to see where this whole thing came from. i hit upon an idea for a futuristic/horror campaign set on a huge orbital station where a freak accident (is there any other kind?) has opened a rent in the fabric of space into (what is essentially) hell. the tear is small though, localized around one point of the station, and the "hell-things" lose power and direct influence over the universe the farther they get from it. but they can still indirectly influence people (promising them power if they do certain things for them and so on), and so the station is quanantined anyway, trapping lots of people onboard. generations live and die on the station (it's that big), the rent is impossible to close (because nobody can get close enough), and everntually the inhabitants just come to accept that all kinds of weird and dangerous stuff goes on around this one area and simply stay away from it. this was influenced by the movie "event horizon" (which was a cool idea but scared the HELL out of me as a kid), the chaos gods of the warhammer and warhammer 40k universe, and my desire to depart from "realistic fantasy" for a change.

the "things that came through the rent" are always looking to expand their influence, trick people into giving up their souls, that sort of thing. but they're not stupid. they know that if they just kill everone on the station they have NO hope of expanding that influence. like a virus that kills it's host before it can spread to other hosts. so the two sides exist in "relative" harmony, sort of. anyway, i was trying to avoid including a definatly good person, place, or thing to counteract them. there's no rent at the other side of the station that lets "heaven" leak in, there are no station churches that can protect people with "divine magic" or anything like that. i imagined it rather like a Lovecraft story. i wouldn't call the "heros" of lovecraft's tales good, but the "villans" are definately evil.

but is that really true? i mean, the outer gods and such were supposed to be so alien that humans could never hope to fathom their thoughts. does that mean they were evil? i'd like to hear people's thought on this one.

[Polycarp]

My short take on the subject is that good as a concept must be present, but not neccessarily present in characters or in representative deities.  One does not need to have truly "good" people on a space station in order for them to comprehend the moral nature of the evil presence.

Basically, the answer to your question is "yes," simply because evil is defined as "not good," and vice versa.  This, however, does not mean that there must be paragons of good or evil - though the real world is a better instructor of this than I am!

[Captain Obvious]

First off i would just like to say that Event Horison was awesome, but scared the crap out of me since the only 2 times i saw it were when i was like 8 or something and it was late at night.

Now,
In my opinion, in this case there would still be the concepts and actions that you think of and call evil/good even were their opposites to not exist, but without the opposite to polarize them and provide an alternative, they would no longer be named as such. As Mithrades said,

Basically, the answer to your question is "yes," simply because evil is defined as "not good," and vice versa.

Ths would be the basic reason for the naming problems, but i beleive there would be another result you'd maybe be less likely to think of.

The thing is, humans love to put lables on thing and even on intangible concepts such as good and evil, which is really, when you think of it, just a naming convention made to help define someone's personal line between "this i will do" and "this i won't," and to make it easier for them to impose those moral restrictions on others. Were Evil to not exist, then the line of the defenition would simply shift much closer to what we call good. Extreme altruism and saving a life would still be considered good, but perhaps being rude or arguing would become the new high pinnacle of evil. One of the deadly sins would be not helping with house chores. People would be condemmed to hell (which would be only mildly unpleasant by our standards) for the act of calling someone a doodie-head or for haggling over a price.

Similarily, if good were eliminated, then the line where an action counts as good would shift into the area we call "evil" . Perhaps a good action would then be to maim or emotionally scar someone, cause "at least i didn't kill or rape you, seriously you got off so easy, quit whining". Or maybe even the line between good and evil would come down to whether or not you torture someone/kill their loved ones before you kill them.

Obviously these are not stble societies since the evil one would rapidly deteriorate, whereas the good society would function until an evil person (by our standards) is born/caused (i don't want to get into the nature vs nurture argument. or at least not yet), who would immediately have an immense advantage and his/her type would slowly begin to take over. Either way, polarized soceties, like all things, will tend to return to a state of balance. This basically is just an extrapolation of predator/prey population growth mechanics.

I will possibly add more later, but currently i have class to go to.

[Lmns Crn]

As far as concepts go, they come in pairs. You can't think for very long about X without thinking about the existence of opposite-of-X.

As far as forces in a fantasy setting go, you can indeed use one without using its opposite. Bear in mind however that "a world without Good" in the cosmic sense of the word can still feature mortals who, from time to time, are brave and kind and compassionate... in a word, good. These examples of virtue may even be all the more poignant and striking because of the lack of angelic role models.

[snakefing]

<pedant>
The title of your post commits the fallacy of reification. The re- here is that same as in real, derived from the Latin res which refers to a concrete, physical thing. Good and evil are not concrete things in this sense, hence they don't exist in this sense.)
</pedant>

To say a thing, person, or action is evil is to make a moral judgment about it. Can you make that judgment, without being prepared (hypothetically at least) to make the opposite statement about other things? I'd say not.

However, it is certainly conceivable that there might be some things that you'd judge as evil, but nothing you'd judge to be actually good. Often goodness is held up as an ideal that things might be close to or far from, but nothing ever actually achieves.

[Polycarp]

The thing is, humans love to put lables on thing and even on intangible concepts such as good and evil, which is really, when you think of it, just a naming convention made to help define someone's personal line between "this i will do" and "this i won't," and to make it easier for them to impose those moral restrictions on others. Were Evil to not exist, then the line of the defenition would simply shift much closer to what we call good.

But this doesn't seem to be the case; evil cannot "cease to exist."  The fact that "Extreme altruism and saving a life" would be considered good means that extreme miserliness and disrespect for life would be thought of as evil, even if actual instances of miserliness or wanton killing never actually occured.  Evil is a concept, not a thing, and does not need to be present in actions to be conceived of.  Even if you consider, say, bad grammar to be evil, the fact that you conceive of respect for life as good means that the evil of disrespecting life has not actually disappeared from conceptual thought.

[beejazz]

Evil is selfish and destructive. Left alone, it will inevitably consume itself (though it might take a really, really, REALLY long time).

Good is selfless and creative (or whatever opposite of destructive you choose to insert). Left alone, it will thrive.

But these things aren't left alone. Evil exists alongside good, forcing good to choose between selfish or destructive action (self-preservation) or annihalation. Hence evil survives on conversion from good.

Also, in an intermingled society with both creative and destructive impulses being acted on, a sort of status quo can be maintained.

[beejazz]

The thing is, humans love to put lables on thing and even on intangible concepts such as good and evil, which is really, when you think of it, just a naming convention made to help define someone's personal line between "this i will do" and "this i won't," and to make it easier for them to impose those moral restrictions on others. Were Evil to not exist, then the line of the defenition would simply shift much closer to what we call good.

Ima paraphrase (I think) Lincoln on this one. If I call a dog's tail a leg, how many legs does it have? Four. Because a tail is not a leg no matter what I call it.

That said, we're not debating whether the concept can exist. We're debating whether the thing can exist. In this case, selfish destruction in the absence of selfless altruism, or visa versa.

[brainface]

I'm, personally, just going to call "semantics" and be done.

I would say that having absolute good (angels) in a Event Horizon-inspired horror setting would likely miss the point.

The "good" guy in the story was just the captain(?) who didn't turn nasty insane when confronted with the hell-hallucinations. That was pretty much the extent and sum of his goodness. No halo, no prayers, etc.

[DeeL]

You have to make some decisions about the nature of this world before the question can be answered.  Assuming there are Evil creatures (note my use of the capital), are there Good creatures as well?  Even if they never appear, their existence will have drastic implications about the Evil beings.  Did one 'team' arise from the other, or is their existence fundamentally dualistic, with each side having been around as long as the other?  If the latter, is there any way that humanity can be or become Good, or are we stuck in opposition to the Evil forces merely out of self-defence?  If one of the 'teams' came first, which one, and are they actually in control of the game or is there some kind of war still going on in Heaven (or Hell?)  If Evil is all that exists, then that puts before humanity a daunting but marvelous challange - to build Goodness within itself.

As for the real world, I'm with C. S. Lewis on this one - I believe that dualism has a fundamental flaw.  Take any evil act or concept.  At its core, the impulse from which it arises, you will find something good.  Anything motivated by pleasure has a good beginning, because pleasure itself is good.  Cruelty arises from a twisted form of the play instinct, and play itself is good.  Everything evil is something good, but twisted.    Evil can only be truly Evil by using good as it's structure and substance.  If you were to take everything good away from the evil side - intelligence, will, energy, strength, even existence itself - there would be nothing left.

But this view may simply be irrelevant.  Lovecraft didn't believe in Good or Evil, in a supernatural sense.  His Great Old Ones were simply so alien to human thought - and indeed, to terrestrial life - that contact with them was sufficient to render a human delusional and unstable.  Indeed, most of the evil in Lovecraft's work wasn't performed by non-humans, but by the cultists who believed that there was some benefit to be derived from serving alien masters.  The Great Old Ones themselves barely noticed their followers existence.  Indeed, one theory holds that although the time when the stars are right was anticipated as concurrent with the destruction of humanity, in truth once the mighty aliens were fully awake they would not feel any impulse to destroy humans or their habitat, because such creatures as humans would be too insignificant.  And that, perhaps, would be the final insult.

[HyveMynd]

wow  :o i didn't really think that i would get this many responses. cool. i have to leave for work soon, so this will be quick.

[ic=brainface]I would say that having absolute good (angels) in a Event Horizon-inspired horror setting would likely miss the point. [/ic]
i absolutely agree. one of the staples of lovecraftian horror (in my opinion) is that the characters are completly alone. they have no one to rely on but themselves. there are no angels, no gods, no people who can weild powerful "good" magic, etc. even if those things existed but were incredibly far away, and the characters would NEVER come into contact with them, they have an important effect... they give the characters hope. they are no longer alone. there is something just as powerful as the evil out there. it kills the mood of horror in my opinion.

[ic=DeeL]His Great Old Ones were simply so alien to human thought - and indeed, to terrestrial life - that contact with them was sufficient to render a human delusional and unstable.[/ic]
that's exactly what i was thinking too. however even though they aren't really evil in that sense, i would argue that they are seen as such in our world because the things that they do or cause to happen fall into the category of what we define as "evil".

oops. more later.

[limetom]

can good or evil really exist without it's polar opposite?

*Christianity - In the form of God .
*Judaism - In the form of G-d.
*Islam - In the form of Allah.
*Hinduism - In the form of the Brahman.
*Jainism - In the removal of "bad" karma to achieve Siddha.
*Sikhism - In the form of God and the removal of "bad" karma to achieve sac khand.
*Buddhism - In the removal of "bad" karma to achieve nirvana.[/list]
Therefore it is possible that since Good can exist without Evil, Evil might also exist without Good.  It should be noted that these are mainly Monotheistic religions, with the exception of 2 Nontheistic religions, Jainism and some sects of Buddhism, and 1 (technically) Polytheistic religion, Hinduism.

Furthermore, a few religions go so far as to support Good without Evil and Evil without Good:

*

Gnosticism - Varying degrees of dualism between God (Good) and the Demiurge (Evil).
*Zoroastrianism - Absolute dualism between Ahura Mazda (Good) and Angra Mainyu (Evil).[/list]
It should be noted tat both of these religions are Dualistic to some extent.

[Xeviat]

I believe that good and evil as cosmic principals, and moral outlooks, can exist without each other, they would just lack definition without the other. If the world was filled with goodness, that would be the norm, and no one would feel rightious and mighty in their goodness (you wouldn't have Paladins and what not; they'd have nothing to fight). If the world was filled with evil, and it was the norm, life would be a constant struggle, and I'm not sure people would wonder if there was something better (because we're talking about a world where everyone is evil, and thus everyone would be preoccupied with gaining power over their fellows).

I don't think that, if good won over evil, good would cease to exist. Interestingly, though, I have to keep these notions out of my own world to an extent, because it opperates on fundamentals of dualism. Interesting eh?

[SDragon]

can good or evil really exist without it's polar opposite?

*Christianity - In the form of God .
*Judaism - In the form of G-d.
*Islam - In the form of Allah.
*snip*

while the religions may be seperate, the dieties- Lord God, JHVH (yahweh), and allah- are one and the same. i cannot speak for islam, not knowing for sure, but both judaism and christianity do believe in evil, in the form of Sin. at this point, i must stop talking about judaism (for the same reason i left islam alone), but christianity even has a diety (used here to refer to beings of ultimate- even if specialized- power) of evil: Satan, or the Devil.

i cant speak for the rest of the religions, but i think there are some religions that make the distinction between Good and Evil synonymous with the disctinction between Divine and Mortal (respectively)

[brainface]

Being, you know, pedantic, i feel the need to point out that there approximately as many beliefs about God, the devil, good, evil, and sin as their are christians--often beliefs quite contrary to the church an individual visits. I've got a good idea the situation is similiar for other religions, as well as atheism and agnosticism if we wanna get all particular and stuff. :)