Evil's Non-Existence in Mathematical Terms

This is an archived post from the old bulletin board. For new posts, see the forum.

Posted by BK ( on August 23, 2002 at 23:54:14:

In Reply to: The Non-Existence of Evil - The Ultimate Pure Argument posted by Anon on August 23, 2002 at 19:48:15:

Math is, crudely, the symbolic representation of values. We saw that there was a deer in the woods a long time ago and we said deer. We saw two deer, but they were still just deer. We needed something to distinguish the two and to give them each their own value, so we said this deer and that deer. Then, with the advent of writing we came up with symbols to express these values. Today we use 1 as the symbol for the value of a single deer and two if that deer is accompanied by another. I know this is all crude to you scientific purists so bare with me. If there are no deer then we use 0, or, perhaps we are oblivious to the presence or abcence of deer altogether. Now, you could say that the abcense of a deer can be represented as 1 deer missing, but, in terms of value it does not really exist even though it is symbolically represented as positive. Therefore we would use a negative 1 (-1) to express this lack of value. Thus, nothing at or below 0 can really exist. Evil, therefore is the lack of value and good is value in and of itself. For instance, 300 virtues is more valuble than 10, but 10 is still good. They are both positive, both real. It is only in relation to one another that evil can be considered ie. 300-290. That -290 is the evil, but it does not exist even though it is a distinguishing factor between the good and real 300 and 10. Even if you switched the equation to 10+290 you would just be confirming the goodness of the value in the 300 and the +290 would not exist apart from the 300.

this topic is closed - post at bahai-library.com/forum