Talk:Surd Evil
"surd evil" philosophically understood
[edit]I hold a Ph.D. in Religious Studies from the University of Virginia and am presently Adjunct Professor of Philosophy and Religious Studies at Tarleton State University in Stephenville, Texas. The former "surd evil" article was in serious error philosophically, and lacked even a basic understanding of philosophical terminology and concepts. I have therefore replaced it. "Surd evil" is evil that stands in contradistinction to moral evil. Moral evil has a perpetrator, someone who intentionally inflicts the evil. Surd evil has only victims, and is generally taken to be the result of natural processes. The "evil" thus identified is evil only from the perspective of those affected and who perceive it as an affliction. Examples include cancer, tornadoes, earthquakes, tsunamis, hurricanes, and other phenomena which inflict suffering with apparently no accompanying mitigating good. Such phenomena inflict "evil" on victims, but with no human perpetrator to blame for it. The only "blame" would lie with a mindless Nature or, for the religious, with God, which raises the whole issue of theodicy, or the so-called "problem of evil": Why would an omnipotent, good God allow surd evil? Surd evil is a particular problem for religion because, unlike moral evil, it cannot be blamed on the Fall and humanity's sinful misuse of the free will God has given it.
--Dr_Odom, 23 Mar 06
"surd evil" article unsourced
[edit]Per Haukurth before me, I dispute this terminology. The article is unsourced, a Google search reveals mostly Wikipedia mirrors, and the article doesn't explain the etymology of term supposedly derived from Greek. I suspect this is a neologistic truncation of "absurd evil", but I wish to give others more knowledgeable a chance to source this (which has been here for nine months now) before AfDing it. Xoloz 06:07, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
"surd evil" is valid, but the article isn't
[edit]There are lots of theological examples of "surd evil" on google.
As for etymology, the Oxford English Dictionary defines "surd" as: "Irrational, senseless, stupid".
The concept isn't invalid.
However, the article reads like a sermon ("One should understand that God allows our suffering, but He never imposes it.") and is definitely not NPOV.
--kwud 01:50, 22 March 2006 (UTC)