The Metaphysical Impotence of Evil

Evil, left to its own devices, would collapse of its own weight. The problem is that throughout the history of the world, evil has not been left to its own devices. It has survived, although solely through the mistaken sanction from the good. It is this sanction that must be removed, and the only way to do that, is to recognize exactly what the evil consists of so that we can dispose of it.

In my previous post, I discussed the axioms of metaphysics, as well as some of the fundamental laws that are inherent in existence. As I explained in that post, metaphysics deals with the nature of the universe, and axioms are simply self-evident facts at the foundation of any and all knowledge or truth. In my RHE Introductory Course, I discuss how we establish man’s life as the standard of value (it is a lengthy discussion so I refer you to that as a basis for this topic first, if you have not already reviewed it). Ultimately what we find by reason is that all things that enhance, support, and sustain one’s life is the good, and all that negate and destroy it is the evil. What does it mean for something to “negate and destroy” one’s life? Let’s examine this more closely so we can pinpoint the root of evil, and be able to spot it in our everyday lives.

Evil as such can really only begin in one place, within a philosophical context: epistemology. It would be impossible for someone to challenge the axioms of metaphysics, for instance to claim that existence does NOT exist, or that they are NOT conscious. Clearly, this would be absurd and anyone who would say such things is ignoring blatantly observable facts. They would also be asserting a point that is self-refuting in these cases, because the axioms cannot be invalidated — they are what makes validation and proof possible. So it’s rare that evil begins with a false metaphysical view (although certainly, it is possible for people to hold contradictions). For a person to be evil, they must begin with an inherent contradiction in their epistemology. Epistemology deals with the study of knowledge and of how it’s acquired. A proper epistemology (and more broadly, a proper philosophy) is based exclusively on reason, on rational and logical thought. And it’s within the field of epistemology that evil is made possible. It can start with anything from an epistemological contradiction on the axioms (such as saying that some sensory data invalidates the senses), to a lack of integration within the field of ethics (such as holding that you should make sacrifices for others), to the dropping of context within the political realm (such as saying that everyone has a right to free education — paid for by whom?). These are all forms of evil, and ultimately, although the errors themselves relate to a specific field, they are all errors of epistemology, because they are errors within a person’s thinking.

Now, I also want to make the point clear that it is not evil to lack knowledge, within any context. No one is omniscient; that is an impossible concept. You cannot be judged as evil for failing to know all the responsibilities of a new job on day one, or to know the wishes and desires of your spouse. Those are errors of knowledge. It is when you DO know all the responsibilities of your job, and you choose to evade them so you can spend 3 hours on Facebook, that you should be judged as evil. It’s when you’ve had the conversation with your spouse, and you consciously choose to reject a principle within the relationship (assuming the principal is rational) that you should be judged as evil. In most basic terms, evil is simply the evasion of, or refusal to think (rationally and logically). And whether it’s the next door neighbor counting on your virtue, so that you will support him out of pity, or a dictator seizing your property on the grounds that it’s for the public good — the fundamental error is the same. It is an epistemological error, as I stated earlier. It is that you fail to live by and for your own purpose, and instead hold a moral double standard, wanting to be taken care of by others or be given some automatic advantage, rather than facing reality independently on your own. This is far from me saying that you should not value people; they can be of great value to you, but only within the proper context. You do not have a claim on anyone else’s life, nor do they have a claim on yours. Any dealings between people must always be a mutually voluntary trade. If you attempt to use force, you offer a gun in place of a reason. And a gun is not an argument; it is the negation of argument as such. Force is the anti-mind, and therefore the anti-life. Realize that by using force, you are counting on someone else’s ability to reason, but throwing out your own.

So how do we defeat evil in the world? We will not do it in a mass sense, as though suddenly everyone will start acting or behaving differently. It starts on an individual basis — it starts with YOU (and me). The first thing you must accept is a commitment to full rationality, to make your decisions based on logic and sound thinking, not on whims or emotional desires. Emotions are perfectly valid and are quite enjoyable; happiness, for instance, is an emotion. But emotions are not primaries. They are the result of your premises (beliefs) and the thinking you have done or failed to do. And rationality consists of being aware when you’re emotional, and choosing to act in accordance with reality, not with your feeling towards reality. Second, you must hold a morality of self-interest (egoism), as opposed to a morality of altruism. This does not mean taking advantage of others to get what you want; it means producing and creating the values required to sustain and fulfill your life. You cannot ask for anything you have not earned through your own efforts, or rely on others to take care of you. This type of independence is the exact definition of the value of self-sufficiency, as laid out in the RHE Introductory Course. Now, in fact, if you lived by these two principles (rationality & self-sufficiency), you would already be creating a more moral world. If everyone lived by those principles, evil could be reduced to zero. This is not and can never be automatic, because people have free will and can still always choose to evade, cheat, blank out, ignore reality. But it would change everything about how the world operates today. There would be no need for 80% of the government programs that exist, there would be benevolence and goodwill among people, and no one would ever try to gain a value by force or fraud (unless they evaded). Every individual gets exactly and ONLY what he or she earns, and would reject anyone who tried to make a claim on their lives, their ability, their thinking. That, is a moral world. Evil, would collapse into the nothingness and powerlessness from which it came.