Interestingly, my mother sent me the following email back on 1/12/08, and I just received it yesterday from a former high school chemistry student of mine. I changed a few things around, but largely used the text below to send this response to her.
It can be found in different forms online, and there are some who have taken the time to respond to it at length. Even though it reads like a bad Jack Chick tract, I think one thing in it is worth responding to: the proposed "contrast theodicy", aka the Augustinian privatio boni theodicy, to the problem of evil.
Interestingly, this part of the email is lifted from another email chain in which Albert Einstein was supposed to be the student; snopes.com debunked that a long time ago. Since I think there are a few things fallacious about the email, and since I think a lot of people read emails like these and hold misconceptions that this email affirms, I want to respond to it.
This is about a college freshman. I would not have had the maturity to do this.I hope you feel as dirty at the end of reading that as I did. The reason I say "dirty" is because this whole thing is such a caricature of reality and makes the atheistic position rude and mean in the form of the professor, while the theistic position is humble and polite in the form of the student. It is such a cheesy setup: the atheist is abusing his position to belittle a student while the student is showing great humility and courage in his manner of interaction and defense of his faith. Also, the dialog presents straw man arguments for atheism by presenting only a logical empiricist/positivist approach.
God vs. Science (long but worth reading)
A science professor begins his school year with a lecture to the students, "Let me explain the problem science has with religion." The atheist professor of philosophy pauses before his class and then asks one of his new students to stand.
"You're a Christian, aren't you, son?"
"Yes sir," the student says.
"So you believe in God?"
"Absolutely."
"Is God good?"
"Sure! God's good."
"Is God all-powerful? Can God do anything?"
"Yes."
"Are you good or evil?"
"The Bible says I'm evil."
The professor grins knowingly. "Aha! The Bible!" He considers for a moment. "Here's one for you. Let's say there's a sick person over here and you can cure him. You can do it. Would you help him? Would you try?"
"Yes sir, I would."
"So you're good...!"
"I wouldn't say that."
"But why not say that? You'd help a sick and maimed person if you could. Most of us would if we could. But God doesn't."
The student does not answer, so the professor continues. "He doesn't, does he? My brother was a Christian who died of cancer, even though he prayed to Jesus to heal him. How is this Jesus good? Hmmm? Can you answer that one?"
The student remains silent.
"No, you can't, can you?" the professor says. He takes a sip of water from a glass on his desk to give the student time to relax.
"Let's start again, young fella. Is God good?"
"Er...yes," the student says.
"Is Satan good?"
The student doesn't hesitate on this one. "No."
"Then where does Satan come from?"
The student falters. "From God"
"That's right. God made Satan, didn't he? Tell me, son. Is there evil in this world?"
"Yes, sir."
"Evil's everywhere, isn't it? And God did make everything, correct?"
"Yes."
"So who created evil?" The professor continued, "If God created everything, then God created evil, since evil exists, and according to the principle that our works define who we are, then God is evil."
Again, the student has no answer.
"Is there sickness? Immorality? Hatred? Ugliness? All these terrible things, do they exist in this world?"
The student squirms on his feet. "Yes."
"So who created them?"
The student does not answer again, so the professor repeats his question. "Who created them?" There is still no answer. Suddenly the lecturer breaks away to pace in front of the classroom. The class is mesmerized. "Tell me," he continues onto another student. "Do you believe in Jesus Christ, son?"
The student's voice betrays him and cracks. "Yes, professor, I do."
The old man stops pacing. "Science says you have five senses you use to identify and observe the world around you. Have you ever seen Jesus?"
"No sir. I've never seen Him."
"Then tell us if you've ever heard your Jesus?"
"No, sir, I have not."
"Have you ever felt your Jesus, tasted your Jesus or smelt your Jesus? Have you ever had any sensory perception of Jesus Christ, or God for that matter?"
"No, sir, I'm afraid I haven't."
"Yet you still believe in him?"
"Yes."
"According to the rules of empirical, testable, demonstrable protocol, science says your God doesn't exist. What do you say to that, son?"
"Nothing," the student replies. "I only have my faith."
"Yes, faith," the professor repeats. "And that is the problem science has with God. There is no evidence, only faith."
The student stands quietly for a moment, before asking a question of His own. "Professor, is there such thing as heat?"
"Yes," the professor replies. "There's heat."
"And is there such a thing as cold?"
"Yes, son, there's cold too."
"No sir, there isn't."
The professor turns to face the student, obviously interested. The room suddenly becomes very quiet. The student begins to explain. "You can have lots of heat, even more heat, super-heat, mega-heat, unlimited heat, white heat, a little heat or no heat, but we don't have anything called 'cold'. We can hit up to 458 degrees below zero, which is no heat, but we can't go any further after that. There is no such thing as cold; otherwise we would be able to go colder than the lowest -458 degrees."
"Every body or object is susceptible to study when it has or transmits energy, and heat is what makes a body or matter have or transmit energy. Absolute zero (-458 F) is the total absence of heat. You see, sir, cold is only a word we use to describe the absence of heat. We cannot measure cold. Heat we can measure in thermal units because heat is energy. Cold is not the opposite of heat, sir, just the absence of it."
Silence across the room. A pen drops somewhere in the classroom, sounding like a hammer.
"What about darkness, professor. Is there such a thing as darkness?"
"Yes," the professor replies without hesitation. "What is night if it isn't darkness?"
"You're wrong again, sir. Darkness is not something; it is the absence of something. You can have low light, normal light, bright light, flashing light, but if you have no light constantly you have nothing and it's called darkness, isn't it? That's the meaning we use to define the word."
" In reality, darkness isn't. If it were, you would be able to make darkness darker, wouldn't you?"
The professor begins to smile at the student in front of him. This will be a good semester. "So what point are you making, young man?"
"Yes, professor. My point is, your philosophical premise is flawed to start with, and so your conclusion must also be flawed."
The professor' s face cannot hide his surprise this time. "Flawed? Can you explain how?"
"You are working on the premise of duality," the student explains. "You argue that there is life and then there's death; a good God and a bad God. You are viewing the concept of God as something finite, something we can measure. Sir, science can't even explain a thought."
"It uses electricity and magnetism, but has never seen, much less fully understood either one. To view death as the opposite of life is to be ignorant of the fact that death cannot exist as a substantive thing. Death is
not the opposite of life, just the absence of it."
"Now tell me, professor. Do you teach your students that they evolved from a monkey?"
"If you are referring to the natural evolutionary process, young man, yes, of course I do."
"Have you ever observed evolution with your own eyes, sir?"
The professor begins to shake his head, still smiling, as he realizes where the argument is going. A very good semester, indeed.
"Since no one has ever observed the process of evolution at work and cannot even prove that this process is an on-going endeavor, are you not teaching your opinion, sir? Are you now not a scientist, but a preacher?"
The class is in uproar. The student remains silent until the commotion has subsided. "To continue the point you were making earlier to the other student, let me give you an example of what I mean."
The student looks around the room. "Is there anyone in the class who has ever seen the professor's brain?" The class breaks out into laughter. "Is there anyone here who has ever heard the professor's brain, felt the professor's brain, touched or smelt the professor's brain? No one appears to have done so. So, according to the established rules of empirical, stable, demonstrable protocol, science says that you have no brain, with all due respect, sir."
"So if science says you have no brain, how can we trust your lectures, sir?"
Now the room is silent. The professor just stares at the student, his face unreadable. Finally, after what seems an eternity, the old man answers. "I guess you'll have to take them on faith."
"Now, you accept that there is faith, and, in fact, faith exists with life," the student continues. "Now, sir, is there such a thing as evil?"
Now uncertain, the professor responds, "Of course, there is. We see it everyday. It is in the daily example of man's inhumanity to man. It is in the multitude of crime and violence everywhere in the world. These
manifestations are nothing else but evil."
To this the student replied, "Evil does not exist sir, or at least it does not exist unto itself. Evil is simply the absence of God. It is just like darkness and cold, a word that man has created to describe the absence of God. God did not create evil. Evil is the result of what happens when man does not have God's love present in his heart. It's like the cold that comes when there is no heat or the darkness that comes when there is no light."
The professor sat down.
If you read it all the way through and had a smile on your face when you finished, mail to your friends and family with the title "God vs. Science".
Blessed is the man who does not walk in the counsel of the wicked or stand in the way of sinners or sit in the seat of mockers. But his delight is in the law of the LORD, and on his law he meditates day and night. (Psalm 1:1-2)
I also wanted to point out something else about the professor, besides his obvious meanness: he is an idiot. He begins the class by saying that science has a "problem with religion" but then goes on to make two separate arguments:
- Evolution renders creationism false
- The problem of evil renders theism false
The second reason that this professor is an idiot is that he is making an argument from logical positivism, but one completely distorted by needing to visually "see" anything that may be justified for belief. His criterion for warrant is absurd, and is completely unaware of how to respond when the kid asks him if he has "seen" evolution himself. Obviously, empiricism doesn't demand that we must ourselves visually see anything that warrants our belief, only that it be falsifiable and that someone (usually a scientist) has observed it, directly or indirectly, using any sort of instrumentation or test.
The third reason that this professor is an idiot is that he had no concept of how to respond to the claim that there "is no such thing as cold" or darkness or evil. Even using each of these as the absence of their dualist counterpart, one may and ought to respond that the words themselves serve as logical relations, or at least subjective perceptions: X is colder than Y, A is darker than B, Satan is more evil than an infant child...&c.
The fourth reason that this professor is an idiot is that he did not respond to the student's reiteration of the "contrast theodicy" in the way that I will:
The professor was quite "on the money" when he asked the student if he would cure others' sicknesses, and then pointed out that God does not do this, and so the student was "more good" than God in this way. This gets to the crux of the issue: does God have a moral duty and moral obligation to do good? (See here for more on that) Even if you grant that evil is "just" the absence of good, then any time and any where you point to an absence of good, then you are pointing to a dereliction of duty on God's part. So long story short, whether you call it "the problem of evil" or "the problem of absent goods" you still have a strong argument for atheism. When the student says "evil does not exist," after he has defined evil as Augustine's privatio boni (privation of good), he is, in effect, incoherent, because if this is true, then good should be everywhere in everything all the time. I sincerely doubt any thinking person, theist or otherwise, would assert such nonsense.
Those four things make the professor an idiot, and by extension, make the dialog a straw man argument for theists to present. Real arguments for atheism aren't presented here. If you are interested in more, there are some who have taken the time to respond to more of this dialog at greater length than I will.
