Quote:
Originally Posted by Mightyboosh
This is a question from a specimen Religious Education paper (GCSE level). I was helping my daughter revise for the exam, but this question caused us a few problems. If this was the conclusion to an argument, wouldn't at least one of the premises have to assume some inherent human characteristic to do evil? Can it be supported just by looking at historical evidence that we've always done evil? Does it ignore or inadvertently leave out 'Natural' evil? Is it just a crap question?
Just interested to see what people think.
This is a very interesting question, and one that i've thought about frequently, particularly when i've hit upon a nice strain.
It would be useful for the question to specify which type of free will we're talking about.
I've tried to believe in free will, just like i've tried to believe in God, but i tend to think we're composed of genetic factors, environmental factors, and randomness. I don't see a place where free will or God exists. Having said that, i think that "evil" is just a word for "things aren't going the way i want them to". Is it evil for the wolf to eat the bunny? Or for the cat to 'torture' the mouse? They aren't generally considered evil because they lack free will. I honestly think that humans are the same. Just animals who do what we think is best for us at the moment.
Of course this position does nothing for finding a solution to world peace and hunger. That's the depressing part and why i rapidly shift my thought process to pretty colors.