Good and Evil

The line dividing between good and evil has always been in debate; even the definition of good in its true form has never been adequately explained. During the Middle ages, the common belief of good and evil was called Manichean Dualism. Augustine of Hippo presented his own philosophical argument against Manichean Dualism and he is correct in doing so, however there are still some flaws within his argument.

! Manichean dualism presents a direct split between good and evil. The dualism defines good and evil as two separate forces which exist in contrast to each other. It is important to note that evil is an enhanced type of bad. Evil is defined as bad action done through the conscious exercise of an individualʼs will. Bad are negative occurrences in reality. So to simply Manichean Dualism, the concepts explains that there are two contrasting forces in perpetual conflict against each other, these two forces are called good and bad.

! Augustine, disagrees with this assessment of good and bad. Augustine proposes the thought that there is only one beginning for everything. According to him the point of creation for all existence in God, the Judeo-Christian god. Augustine asserts that God is perpetually good and cannot be bad, or evil. Augustine assumes that the bad, or the evil, is a privation, or lack, of some good that should exist by nature. To make sure of Augustineʼs theory consider this: all things that exist independently can be called substances; all substances have natures, or characteristics; therefore if something is lacking from the nature of a substance which prevents it from being constantly good it is bad. In other words, bad is a simple absence of a part from a whole, the have the whole would equal being in the state of constant good. God would be the best definition for the

whole, or the good, according to Augustine. ! This is Augustineʼs basic argument, God is the only perfectly good being, and is the creator of everything else in existence. All things that exist are meant to be good things, but due to the lack of some of the good, they become bad. Instead of constantly explaining the idea “lack of some good”, Augustine begins to call this privation a corruption. To explain this terms he goes back to the attribute of God being the perfect being and therefore incorruptible. The term incorruptible in this context implies that the substance has some good that can be lost, this begs the question of whether a substance which has no good at all is corruptible. Augustine answers by saying that if something has the nature of not being good in anyway it does not exist. Now it is possible to ask what things are corruptible, to this his reply is that everything that is good, but not the perfect good is corruptible. By this answer it is implied that everything can be corrupted and is corrupted, and God is the only substance, or being that is forever perfect. Augustineʼs reasoning in this is quite amazing. It is a fact that he simply states. According to his argument there should be no substance that can attain perfection. If any substance had the ability to attain perfection, would it already not be in its perfect state. Perfection ceases to exist as soon as privation enters. Substances can only be perfect from their conception to their end. If a perfect substance has room to be corrupted it is not perfect. In an indirect method, Augustine is telling us that perfection is impossible, but that we should still attempt to reach the level closest to it. ! Leaving Augustineʼs view on corruption aside there is still one flaw in his initial argument. According to the Manichaeans, there are two principles, good and bad, which are in conflict. Augustine refutes this by saying all things are inherently goos and that

bad is the simple lack of good. If this is so, then no one should willing commit a bad action. If the source of the action originates from the will of the individual it becomes evil, as mentioned previously. Following this process of thought would not the individual also be evil for exercising such an act, but then that would imply that evil exists as a separate nature. Augustineʼs argument does not account for the separate existence for nature, he says it is the lack of good within the individual that is the origin for evil. According to the Judeo-Christian tradition, God created all things. That would mean he is the creator for something that is lacking in good and therefore God would cease to be the perfect being. This begins to make the argument collapse upon itself. The main problem here would be that God allowed for imperfect being to decide on their actions; from this it can be inferred that God indirectly created evil.

The main objection here is that God is ultimately responsible for the existence of evil, or the bad. While this may be held to be fundamental flaw, Augustine is correct in saying that Manichean Dualism is not the correct theory needed to understand the existence of good and evil. However, even with Augustineʼs philosophical discourse defining good and evil, a proper, concrete and accepted explanation is still to be agreed upon by scholars.