Evil is a Privation of Good

The idea that evil is the absence of goodness has been shared and discussed by various authors, in various places.

Therefore, I cannot cite one person as being "the one" who arrived at this thought. 

However, who came up with it isn't as important as the idea itself, because I believe that this definition of evil as being the absence of something is the only definition of evil that even comes close to making any sense, or perhaps more appropriately, explains why "bad" things happen to "good" people, or why negative states of being can exist at all. 

Norm Geisler looks to Aquinas to formulate a conception of evil:

"Aquinas is quick to note that privation is not the same as absence. Sight is absent in a stone as well as a blind person. But absence in a stone is not privation. Privation is the lack of something that ought to be there. Since the stone by nature ought not to see, it is not deprived of sight as is a blind person. Evil then is the deprivation of some good that ought to be there." Norm Geisler

Author Keith Ogorek, in his book, A Clear View, expounds on the above:

"Evil is not something, but is rather a privation of a good thing that God has made."

He goes on to show how the following conclusion--drawn by many and used often in their opposition to God--is flawed:

1. God is the creator of everything.
2. Evil is something.
3. Therefore, God is the author of evil.

This is incorrect, according to Ogorek, in that evil is not a thing and therefore God did not create it.

"It is vital to have a right definition of good (because) it clarifies our understanding of evil. Recall that we said evil is a privation of good. Therefore, if we are unclear as to what is good, we will be unsure of what is evil." 

He goes on to make a great point about pantheism:

"This is the idea that the universe taken or conceived of as a whole, is God. So God is not an independent being. Rather the combined materials and forces that make up the world constitute God. In this view, God's nature is diminished while material nature is elevated, for we and everything around us possess some degree of 'goodness.' This view also suggests that God is not immutable or unchanging, for as matter decays, so does God." 

Jesus makes clear that all goodness derives from God--that nothing in and of itself is good (Mark 10:18). 

And if pantheism were true, that the world and people in it are inherently good, then logically speaking, why would evil even have a chance? This innate goodness would win the day, wouldn't you think? But when posed with this question, people don't have an answer because they can't comprehend a lack of goodness in anything, including themselves.

Scripture supports the view of evil as presented here by Geisler and Ogorek:

"Abhor what is evil; cling to what is good." Romans 12:9b

Because just as evil is the privation of goodness, goodness is the privation of evil. When we cling to goodness, we deprive evil a foothold.

"Never pay back evil for evil to anyone." Romans 12:17a

Because the only way to curtail or to end evil, is to stop it in its tracks. 

Evil as a lack of goodness directed at us ends when we do not retaliate. To lack goodness for the express purpose of creating evil, even when directed at a person who would legitimately seem to deserve it, only circulates more evil.

And I will say, justice (one of God's attributes) is not the dishing out of evil. A prison sentence, monetary fine, or a divorce granted due to the abuse (evil) perpetrated by a spouse are righteous consequences for a lack of living out goodness--in other words, for the living out of evil by choice. 

"Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good." Romans 12:21

Do not be overcome by a lack of goodness, but overcome a lack of goodness with good.



copyright Barb Harwood