PHD Discussions Logo

Ask, Learn and Accelerate in your PhD Research

Question Icon Post Your Answer

Question Icon

How do major philosophical traditions distinguish between the concepts of "good" and "evil"?

I'm studying the problem of evil and need a solid grounding in how different frameworks conceive of the good/evil distinction itself. Is evil a positive force (as in some dualisms), or merely the absence of good (Augustine)? Is "good" defined by pleasure (hedonism), virtue (Aristotle), duty (Kant), or well-being (utilitarianism)? How do non-Western traditions, like Buddhism with its focus on suffering and ignorance, or Daoism with its non-dualistic yin-yang, frame this dichotomy? I need a comparative structural analysis.

All Answers (1 Answers In All)

By Samaira Answered 1 year ago

The distinctions are profound. In Western theology, Augustine's privation theory dominates: evil is not a substance but a lack of due good. Kantian deontology defines good as a will aligned with the moral law, and evil as a subordination of the law to self-love. Utilitarianism defines good as maximal happiness/well-being, evil as suffering. Eastern traditions often offer non-dualistic frameworks: In Daoism, good (yin) and evil (yang) are interdependent, dynamic phases, not absolute opposites. Buddhism sees "evil" as actions (karma) born from ignorance (avidya) that produce suffering (dukkha); the "good" is the Noble Eightfold Path leading to liberation. Manichaean dualism posits two co-eternal principles of light/good and darkness/evil. The fundamental divide is between views where evil is a positive force versus a derivative absence or misalignment.

Your Answer