Something that I thought was neat · 3:52am Feb 9th, 2014
The professor of a university challenged his students with this question. "Did God create everything that exists?" A student answered bravely, "Yes, he did".
The professor then asked, "If God created everything, then he created evil. Since evil exists (as noticed by our own actions), so God is evil. The student couldn't respond to that statement causing the professor to conclude that he had "proved" that "belief in God" was a fairy tale, and therefore worthless.
Another student raised his hand and asked the professor, "May I pose a question? " "Of course" answered the professor.
The young student stood up and asked : "Professor does Cold exists?"
The professor answered, "What kind of question is that? ...Of course the cold exists... haven't you ever been cold?"
The young student answered, "In fact sir, Cold does not exist. According to the laws of Physics, what we consider cold, in fact is the absence of heat. Anything is able to be studied as long as it transmits energy (heat). Absolute Zero is the total absence of heat, but cold does not exist. What we have done is create a term to describe how we feel if we don't have body heat or we are not hot."
"And, does Dark exist?", he continued. The professor answered "Of course". This time the student responded, "Again you're wrong, Sir. Darkness does not exist either. Darkness is in fact simply the absence of light. Light can be studied, darkness can not. Darkness cannot be broken down. A simple ray of light tears the darkness and illuminates the surface where the light beam finishes. Dark is a term that we humans have created to describe what happens when there's lack of light."
Finally, the student asked the professor, "Sir, does evil exist?" The professor replied, "Of course it exists, as I mentioned at the beginning, we see violations, crimes and violence anywhere in the world, and those things are evil."
The student responded, "Sir, Evil does not exist. Just as in the previous cases, Evil is a term which man has created to describe the result of the absence of God's presence in the hearts of man."
After this, the professor bowed down his head, and didn't answer back.
The young man's name was ALBERT EINSTEIN.
Thank you. that made my day a good bit better.
Oh, and if anyone's asking, I happen to worship our lord and savior the great spaghetti monster, so.....
img.pandawhale.com/36243-slow-clap-citizen-kane-orson-w-bJkI.gif
not to make claims either way, but that infers a dichotomy where things are measured in terms of how good they are(neutral actions have a nonzero value). this would make evil just a absence of good. alternately you could look at evil as a negative position on a axis where neutral actions are not measured as a positive value, but as a 0 point.
just thought that this is a problem involved with definition.
And then the professor smacked the upstart student that made him look bad in the mouth because this was the old days when they were allowed to do that kind of shit.
...Okay, I don't know if that actually happened (I don't know if this entire story is true, either; it could easily be an example of the Matthew effect) but it could have.
1813460
The problem is that "good" and "evil" are completely subjective qualities to begin with, so we can't assign meaningful numbers to them as though they were quantities: because they're purely qualities, not quantities..
I fucking love you right now.
1813462 i totally agree that actions can not, and should not be assigned a number value for how good they are. it was merely a method of demonstrating the differences between systems...
another thing i want to revisit, is that using the evil is just less good model, is that there is a definable maximum level of evil possible, which would be entirely subjective to define
Damn, that's pretty amazing.
This situation, Einstein arguing the existence of god with a professor, does not seem to have actually happened. Agree with the message or not, Albert Einstein did not take that stance.
Source: snopes.com/religion/einstein.asp
Agree with the message or not, just don't use innaccurate sources to make your point. The message can be lost if it can be counterd with a simple, "that never actually happened."
Is cool and all... but what's the point of this? Are we talking about religion?
That's actually pretty badass.
I've always enjoyed this take on it.
I'll take rotting in the ground and nothingness after I die, thank you. I don't need to fear death, becasue living is so much worse.
my feels, you monster.
Eh, still doesnt make me believe. Im agnostic, but really i dont care about this kind of stuff