Good can not be if Evil is used to get to it*

The essay here is Good can not be if Evil is used to get to it* with that * of note, because this does not apply to humans, for we humans are rather limited creatures. We have some ability to do somethings, and we know somethings, but we can't do everything and do not know everything. So this stance really only applies to something that we can only imagine in our minds: a super powered human, or perhaps even, beyond that: A GOD.

First, the super human. Superman comes to mind. A non-human but looks human, acts human eats like a human... falls in love, can breed with a human... but... with magical powers. Like it or not, the `solar power' of Superman is magic. 

Starting out, Superman was just VERY strong. Then more and more powers were added until you get the unstoppable force we know. I remember watching on Nick at Night the classic black & white superman where his powers were so unstoppable that they had to come up with things that he had to outwit using more powers he would just... make up! One time he passed though a solid object to get at some bad guys who were waiting out the clock for the statute of limitations. Rather then getting the bad guy in the box, halfway though he hears how the clock inside is powered, and goes back. He simply messes with the cord to speed up time and the crook comes out himself, and gets promptly arrested. Pwnd.

Anyway, lets get with the thought experiment shall we? (Yes we shall!)

An armed gunman has several hostages in a bank and says in ten seconds he is going to kill them all unless he has all the money given to him and is pardoned by the president. Superman doesn't want to hurt anyone, not even the bad guy, so he zooms in with super speed, ties up the bad guy in a way that will not cause him harm, and all the people are free. Yay!

Now lets rewind that... this time the same issue but without Superman.

Ten seconds. Gunman. Hostages. The police have limited options. They have every reason to believe that the man will kill the hostages. The snippers are ready. They have him in sight. They must kill the man. The order is given. The man dies shot in the head. He might suffer a bit, its hard to know. But what is known is he is dead. Although the rest go free, as before, the people that cared about that gunman, friends, family, are all going to be sad. Maybe he was a good man until that day. Maybe he had a mental breakdown. It doesn't matter, he is gone. Its hard to say yay. Gloom hangs overhead, a victory, but with a cost.

Evil was done, in a sense. Killing. If only we had had some other option. If only there had been some other way.

Lets pretend that a scientist has invented a way to hit someone from a distance, knocking them out.

This invention is safe and effective. The police have access to the device and are trained on it.

A robber has hostages.

Should the robber be shot with a gun or should the device be used upon them?

The device is to me, the clear choice. Shooting him is the evil choice in this case, because we have a greater power.

So then, we turn to doing and/or allowing evil to happen because it will do a greater good later on.

We, as limited humans might do this. But lets say Superman knows the future, and knows that if several people die now, that thousands will be saved latter and lead to a wonderful world. Should Superman kill them? Well, is there some other way to get that wonderful future? Is that really the only way forward?

I submit, that even if it is the case that the ONLY way to get to that wonderful place is by doing evil... that the good is NOT good.

That NO GOOD can come from evil... that justifying the ends can not be. An all knowing and all powerful superman is not allowed to kill just because it will result in a paradise.

All of this is featured in this tale "The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas" (click)

I suggest, strongly that evil to get to good... is not good. It is in fact, still evil.

The only way to get to a good that is in fact good... is to use good. Perhaps it takes years, perhaps its hard, perhaps it costs much, but a good outcome in the end, that is only real if only good is used to get it.

Else... its just pure evil.

So then... what of God?

A God that allows harm, bad, suffering, evil... even if it ends in good.

IS NOT GOOD.

IT IS EVIL.

Disprove God!

The call of the theist who does not understand logic or words is "disprove god" they insist, no matter how much we atheists tell them, that atheism means "There is no god" nah, we don't I did a small poll awhile back and everyone that responded pretty much all agreed that the word atheist means "I don't believe in god" this seems wide spread. This seems to align with things online now, as many webpages defining the word have slowly adopted the way we view the word. BUT, nah the theist wants, perhaps needs it to be this. "disprove god!" they say.

SIGH.

Problem 1: We don't even know what "God" means.

The word has a number of meanings, although of course the theist only cares about the version they think is real. They ignore all the other possible meanings of this word... but I don't. I have no idea what it is, only what people THINK it is.

Words can have more then one meaning, but this makes the word hard to respond to. Hey, do you think FLARGERALSAUSE is real?! NO?! WHAT WHY NOT?! Because, most likely, you've never encountered this wonky word until now. You don't know what it means, so you can't say its real, unreal or other. "I don't know." Do you believe in it" The only answer would be "No." I've told theists this many times. It feels like they just don't get it. They don't understand or don't want to. "God is DIFFERENT then that made up word!" they will say... I shake my head and sigh.

Problem 2: We don't have any empirical evidence of any "God".

Empirical evidence. I need to see it somehow. Visualize it in some way. Thermal devices, Ultraviolet cameras, Radio telescope, Microwave receiver/imager, X-ray machine, Gamma-ray telescope, Terahertz camera, Ultrasound imager... and the list goes on and on. Lots of ways to see things we can't see normally, but for "god" nope. Not a single thing.

"BUT! God is not a physical object!" They say.

How the bleep do you know!? I ask. "Because... that's what god is!" ... And I sigh.

Problem 3: We have no way to test for a god. We have no way to falsify a god claim, no predictions that matter can be made for god, nothing. Diddly squat. Theists just say ya can't test god... how do they know? Good question. Answer: They believe.

Problem 4: No sound argument as far as I know.

I've looked. I've heard and read a bunch of theist arguments, so far, not a single one has been SOUND.

Theists just shrug at that and claim the argument is sound as they never answer if they even know or understand or have studied informal logic. 

So it kinda looks like there isn't anything to disprove is there? Given there isn't anything there. No anything for it. Just faith. Just ideas. That's it.

So... uh. I guess I disproved it? 

But I'm sure theists will reject it anyway.