The "function" of evil in the Epicurus dilemma is its use to establish an evidence of absence or not. It's a criteria of analysis.
No that's why variable exists in mathematical equation. You don't need a set value. You only need a set function or a set definition.
Yes, if all you're interested in are hypothetical solutions. That is: an equation where the solution itself has no set value.
In this equation, or actually the three equations of the PoE, a set value is assigned to each solution:
God is either :
limited,
malebolemt,
or not-God.
The point I'm trying to make is that unless or until we establish the existence of objective evil, then we're dealing with a subjective variable, one with no such value.
Therefore claiming a set value for any of the solutions for an equation including this variable is incorrect.
It is "bad" under all circumstances to make humans of the same community suffer outside of a situation of self-defense and defense of others. That's a universal rule of all moral codes.
I did say all circumstances
and from all perspectives.
There have always been and still are people who hold perspectives that run counter to this Idea.
What you're talking about is a common moral code shared by most civilized societies, but it's hardly universal.
Vikings, Monguls, and several people in several places today would laugh at you if you suggested such a thing.
It's impossible for human to flourish, prosper and be happy, etc. without that rule. Is that the sort of "objective evil" you were searching for?
No, this is still subjective.
From the perspective of every other creature on the planet, human beings flourishing and prospering has been anything but good.
It's a universal rule. It's always true.
No, it's an opinion.
It can be observed and measure (as in we can make the difference between alive and dead people and quantify both groups). It's broken as it happens.
"Things that we don't prefer" is a definition of "evil" that's consistent, can be observed and measured and for which a omnipotent and omnibenevolent God would have to be accounted for (for that matter this definition of evil/good is consistent with a school of ethics and morality called emotivism). The question then becomes why is there stuff we don't prefer if God is omnibenevolent and omnipotent? The universe could be nothing but pleasure if He wanted to.
So you consider pleasure the ultimate good?
That sounds pretty subjective.
That it's ego centric doesn't make it less observable and measurable.
No but it doesn't make it objective either.
That something is subjective doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
No, it means it exists subjectively. It only exists within the perception of the person experiencing it, ie.,the subject.
That you find the definition of evil egocentric is purely subjective too
Not at all. The PoE is obviously an objection raised based completely on subjective human values. How could it be anything else?
and has no impact on the capacity to observe, quantify and qualify phenomenons according to its definition.
And all those qualifications are going to be subjective.
Which takes us back to my original point: that it isn't reasonable to try and judge what's presumed to be an omnipotent, omnifiesent being by subjective standards.
Here:
Good Luck, Bad Luck: Who Can Tell?
Point of that story being thst since we can't see the ultimate consequence of any action or circumstance, there's no way for human beings to make any determinatins about good or evil in the absolute sense. All we can do is make those determinations in accordance with our personal preferences, and is it reasonable to hold and omnipotent being responsible for those?
Let's try this:
“Is God willing to prevent things from happening that I don't like, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh things that I don't like?
Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?
Basically, to me, it sounds like Epicurious is firing God because sometimes things happen that he doesn't like.
I don't think this proves anything about God so much as it proves something about us.
The same goes for good too as well as all other feelings or state of being (like chaos, order, harmony, peace, etc). They are all relative and egocentric.
Absolutely.
