What is the atheist response to this discussion with an atheistic college professor?

Question

Does evil exist?

The university professor challenged his students with this question. Did God create everything that exists? A student bravely replied, "Yes, he did!"

"God created everything? The professor asked.

"Yes sir", the student replied.

The professor answered, "If God created everything, then God created evil since evil exists, and according to the principal that our works define who we are then God is evil". The student became quiet before such an answer. The professor was quite pleased with himself and boasted to the students that he had proven once more that the Christian faith was a myth.

Another student raised his hand and said, "Can I ask you a question professor?"

"Of course", replied the professor.

The student stood up and asked, "Professor, does cold exist?"

(continued)

"What kind of question is this? Of course it exists. Have you never been cold?" The students snickered at the young man's question.

The young man replied, "In fact sir, cold does not exist. According to the laws of physics, what we consider cold is in reality the absence of heat. Every body or object is susceptible to study when it has or transmits energy, and heat is what makes a body or matter have or transmit energy. Absolute zero (-460 degrees F) is the total absence of heat; all matter becomes inert and incapable of reaction at that temperature. Cold does not exist. We have created this word to describe how we feel if we have no heat."

The student continued, "Professor, does darkness exist?"

The professor responded, "Of course it does."

The student replied, "Once again you are wrong sir, darkness does not exist either. Darkness is in reality the absence of light. Light we can study, but not darkness. In fact we can use Newton's prism to break white light into many colors and study the various wavelengths of each color. You cannot measure darkness. A simple ray of light can break into a world of darkness and illuminate it. How can you know how dark a certain space is? You measure the amount of light present. Isn't this correct? Darkness is a term used by man to describe what happens when there is no light present."

Finally the young man asked the professor, "Sir, does evil exist?"

Now uncertain, the professor responded, "Of course as I have already said. We see it every day. It is in the daily example of man's inhumanity to man. It is in the multitude of crime and violence everywhere in the world. These manifestations are nothing else but evil."

To this the student replied, "Evil does not exist sir, or at least it does not exist unto itself. Evil is simply the absence of God. It is just like darkness and cold, a word that man has created to describe the absence of God. God did not create evil. Evil is not like faith, or love that exist just as does light and heat. Evil is the result of what happens when man does not have God's love present in his heart. It's like the cold that comes when there is no heat or the darkness that comes when there is no light."

The professor sat down.

The young man's name: Albert Einstein.

Answer 1

It wasn't Einstein.

[edit] Damn, I caught the name late. Glad I didn't go off!

Answer 2

Well, my first response is to *drink*.

Once that's out of the way, I'll tackle the actual issue. The "proof" provided by "Einstein" is actually a simple redefinition. One can consider the terms good and evil as descriptions of a continuum, as the student says. One can also consider evil to be the absence of good, as the student says.

However, the problem comes with defining "that which is good" as "God." There is no reason to suppose that "that which is good" possesses any of the other properties commonly associated with God. For example, "that which is good" likely did not create the universe, and "that which is good" probably doesn't care about people. "That which is good" also is incapable of violating physical laws (performing miracles) and probably couldn't have a son, much less have a son who saved mankind's souls.

So, my response is that "Einstein" has just proven the existence of good, but needs a further argument to demonstrate that "that which is good" is also "God".

Answer 3

There is no such thing as evil. Evil is a concept humans created to describe everything that appears to be morally reprehensible, such as murder, stealing, etc. Without the moral component, these acts are simply illegal. The reason these acts are illegal is because they create more burdens on society than benefits. Therefore, we as a society have determined that some acts will be banned for the benefit of all of the members of our society. The problem is that certain leaders of a religious persuasion have appointed themselves as moral authorities, and taken it upon themselves to tell people what to do by labeling everything as "good" or "evil".

Accordingly, "good" and "evil" are abstract concepts without substance or any capacity for measurement. For example, I can measure with great accuracy how hot it is in the room, or how much light is emanating from the fluorescent bulbs above me, but I cannot measure how much "good" was generated when I obeyed traffic signals this morning, or how "evil" the war in Iraq may or may not be.

The dialogue you described above, regardless of which physicist you attribute it to, presumes the existence of "evil" as a quantifiable element, and thereby uses that presumption to refute an argument that denies the existence of a god. The professor, labeled as the atheist, admits that evil must exist. In my opinion, the professor's cosmological model that admits good and evil but denies any source or deity associated with those concepts is flawed and illogical.

Light and heat cannot be likened to "good," unless you recommend that we go back to sun-worship.

Answer 4

M. Scott Peck in his classic study of evil and the nature of it concluded that: what he had come up against was sentient (of a sort) and 'more than' the absence of good or anything else). In other words, when evil was manifest in the room, there was a palpable sense of its reality, its malevolent intents and its incorrigible hatreds.

When I think of sentient (of a kind) I think of the white shark. A predator, constantly on the move, cannot rest or sleep, always searching, seeking, hunting -- in order to kill and render flesh into small pieces. THIS should become our image of evil. I doubt that it will, but it would be a quantum leap of understanding of this fact of our reality.

Maranantha

Answer 5

For me, it is a matter of probability. For a start we know life exists on this planet. The building blocks for life are scattered around the universe. If conditions are suitable, I see no reason why some form of life could not develop amongst the countless galaxies, star systems and planets. The same cannot be said of an imaginary being, not one of which is there any evidence for. Therefore I am atheistic towards gods but agnostic towards alien life.

Answer 6

Or is good the absence of evil? These words are things that humans give meaning to. Other animals see light and darkness, feel cold and heat, but they do not know of good and evil. God created satan who is the creator of evil. God created evil, he knew satan would turn on him.

Answer 7

Ok.
the discussion is about privatives,
so?

You have made no other point than to point out that a negation of something is not a thing!

Next step demonstrate the natural state of what ever concept you wish to use as a model for good and evil.

Which by the by are not privatives, neither one of them!

Fewer words more thought are required!
Good effort though.

Answer 8

Just another poorly written analogy trying to explain the contradictions in the christian faith.

First off, no atheist prof is going to do any of the above. Snickering at his students, wasting time disproving christianity, and with such a ridiculous premise as using one definition of "proof"...I could go on, but I digress.

I know you found this to be amusing and somehow profound...but it's not funny nor insightful to those of us who are atheists.

Answer 9

Typical theist driven dribble, created by someone that got tired of losing the argument of a deities existence in person and decided to use the scenario backwards so that they had an opportunity to finally look clever.

Answer 10

Wow, that's kinda cool. It's not insightful, though. I mean, you don't learn anything from this because the story both introduced a question that you would rarely, if ever, think of then says it's not worth thinking about. It doesn't leave anything useful. This isn't an atheist response it's just that I'm taking a brake from writing literary essays for my English class. (BTW someone said that no prof would waste time on anything like this, they should hear the stuff my English and Philosophy profs babble about.)

I suppose for an atheist there wouldn't be much to say. If the first part was correct and that was the whole story, then there would be a moment to ponder before deciding that there must be a mistake somewhere. My candidate was the idea of being defined by what you create, I mean, everyone goes to the bathroom from time to time so....anyways!

Answer 11

Sounds like an Urban Legend to me.

The atheist professor is a stock character in many urban legends.

And this has been posted several times on this board.

I don't think one atheist has read this, and instantly become a theist.


Thanks eleventy for posting the Urban Legend links. Notice how two of the many fables advocate violence against the so called atheist professor. Thanks for that wonderful demonstration that some religious people resort to lies and violence to try & propogate their faith.