Good Vs Evil Argument example essay topic

In book of The Consolation of Philosophy, Boethius establishes the fact that God is the world's helmsman, the divine reason, the supreme good, the origin of all things. He demonstrates that God is omnipotent and omniscient. Nothing more superior can even be conceived of. Through the concept of unity, through which things basically become good, Boethius shows that God and happiness are one, the divine goodness. He concludes, 'God is the essence of happiness. ' (70) Book IV is the turning point in the theodicy, in the first chapter Boethius is truly puzzled by the presence of evil in the world.

'But the greatest cause of my sadness is really this - the fact that in spite of a good helmsman to guide the world, evil can still exist and even pass unpunished... That this can happen in the realm of an omniscient and omnipotent God who wills only good, is beyond perplexity and complaint. ' (85) At this point the argument of good vs. evil begins. Philosophy starts the explanation by saying that since good and evil are opposites, they cannot coexist.

She claims that evil is simply a lack of goodness. Since God is omnipotent and can only do good, evil is nothing. In The Consolation of Philosophy, Boethius uses good vs. evil argument in an objective, metaphysical view, on an abstract level. Good being the all-powerful God and evil being nothing. Parallel to that view, there is good vs. bad, which is presented from a human viewpoint.

While the good has similar meaning in both arguments, Boethius makes a clear distinction between evil and bad. What might be perceived to be a bad thing from a human point of view is actually turning a bad experience into something good, therefore it is not evil. Since he does not believe in the existence of evil, that really only leaves the bad, which he uses interchangeably with wicked. He acknowledges the fact that there are good and bad people in the world, and agrees with Plato, that the wise (the good) will ultimately achieve their objectives, they will reach happiness.

While the wicked, since they believe that they can reach happiness through fulfilling their sensual pleasures, will never grasp it, because evil can never acquire happiness. (92) Boethius claims that 'happiness is the very same good which motivates all activity; so that goodness itself is set as a kind of common reward of human activity. ' (93) Therefore, goodness can never go without reward, it is a reward in itself and evil can never take that away. In regard to the wicked, 'just as goodness is its own reward, so the punishment of the wicked is their very wickedness. ' (93-94) Therefore, the bad actually never escapes punishment, the same way as the good never goes without reward. Boethius associates wicked people with animals, even though they take on a physical appearance of a human, their state of mind becomes animal-like.

Boethius claims that bad things do happen, and they happen to both good and bad people. However, in both cases they occur in order to ultimately achieve a greater good. Is it just that people that are otherwise virtuous, receive bad things? According to Boethius, the answer would be yes, it is just, because the function of bad things is to make one stronger. 'What does not kill me, makes me stronger. ' When bad things happen to righteous people, it is to teach them, to remind them what good is (change) to make sure they remember the most important concepts in life.

When bad things happen to bad people it is to punish them. God governs bad things in order to bring about good. That leads Boethius to question the fact that criminals often escape punishment, consequently being rewarded for their wrongdoing. To further explain the idea that vice is often rewarded is only an appearance, Philosophy begins discussing punishment. She states that when criminals get punished, they receive something good. Punishment is rehabilitation, it turns someone bad to see the light of goodness, because punishment in itself is justice.

It is when the perpetrators are not caught and brought to justice they endure the biggest punishment of all. Wickedness, is punishment for evil, therefore it is everlasting. 'So the wicked are much more unhappy when they are unjustly allowed to go scot free, than when a just punishment is imposed on them. ' (98) She even goes a bit further, as to say that kindness and sympathy is usually placed with the victim, where as it should be placed with the guilty.

(100) Boethius views wickedness as sickness, '... like sick men being brought to the doctor, so that their guilt could be cut back by punishment like a malignant growth. ' (100) In another instance Boethius writes, '... evil is not so much an infliction as a deep set infection. ' (94) (may be cut one quote out?) As Boethius continues to deliberate upon the problem of good and evil, they come to the discussion of Providence and Fate. Philosophy begins by defining both and underlining the difference between them.

She defines Providence as God's ultimate, unchanging plan, which is divine and eternal. Where as, Fate is the way things play out. Unlike Providence, Fate is subject to change and effected by fortune. 'Providence is the divine reason itself. It is set at the head of all things.

Fate, on the other hand, is the planned order inherent in things subject to change through the medium of which Providence binds everything in its own allotted place... They are different, but the one depends on the other. The order of Fate is derived from the simplicity of Providence. ' (104) This argument is correlated to the idea of revolving, orbital circles, with a common center. Just like all the circles are connected to the center, Providence and Fate are connected to a mutual middle, that being God, therefore like circles, all three are interconnected and Fate cannot escape Providence, because of omniscience and omnipotence of God..