The choice in Middle Earth

[inked]

littleadanel,

That's because evil is not self-existent but derivative! (And Tolkien as a good, practicing Catholic certainly knew that in his bones so it could not have escaped getting into his work.)

And since evil is derivative, it follows that it has its origins in disordered desire. That is, evil must consist in taking a positive good in such a fashion as inconsistent with the nature of the desirer and/or the nature of the object desired. Hence, one can love some(one)(thing) more than Eru or one can take a created object in wrong time or degree or one can pervert the proper use of one's self or the created (one) (thing).

Hence, Melkor's and Morgoth's and Maeglin's rebellions evidence those characteristics! It's not really boy wants girl or vice versa for every story, , Melkor wanted to be Eru! And those Numenoreans! They wanted it all in their way in their degree and to their liking!

[littleadanel]

Originally Posted by inked

littleadanel,

That's because evil is not self-existent but derivative! (And Tolkien as a good, practicing Catholic certainly knew that in his bones so it could not have escaped getting into his work.)

And since evil is derivative, it follows that it has its origins in disordered desire. That is, evil must consist in taking a positive good in such a fashion as inconsistent with the nature of the desirer and/or the nature of the object desired. Hence, one can love some(one)(thing) more than Eru or one can take a created object in wrong time or degree or one can pervert the proper use of one's self or the created (one) (thing).

Hence, Melkor's and Morgoth's and Maeglin's rebellions evidence those characteristics! It's not really boy wants girl or vice versa for every story, , Melkor wanted to be Eru! And those Numenoreans! They wanted it all in their way in their degree and to their liking![/

Indeed. Each and everybody according to their own nature. You put down exactly what I wanted to, and maybe even could've done it if I had the time to put my thoughts properly into words... so thank you for that.

Ooh, I had to look up 'derivative' to know exactly what you mean... (not a native English speaker and sometimes I really don't want to risk misunderstanding.) So, it's "derive = 1. To obtain or receive from a source", isn't it?

P.S. That "boy meets girl" was just a silly thing I've read elsewhere and popped into my mind... of course in many cases it doesn't make sense.

[Valandil]

littleadanel - I'm not sure, but I think that in this case, inked's usage of 'derivative' indicates the following:

Evil is not a thing in and of itself. It cannot exist by itself, without good. Good however, can exist without evil. Good and Evil are not polar opposites: Evil is merely 'Good with a twist', so to speak. Evil is Good that is bent or broken. This is the Christian view of Good and Evil. It starts with the notion that Creation was initially all Good and Perfect (Good existing without Evil) - until Sin / Evil entered into Creation through Disobedience.

Other viewpoints do see Good and Evil as polar opposites - and the idea of Good existing without Evil would be hard for some with those viewpoints to imagine. I am less familiar with these though, but I know a little.

Tolkien having been a Christian, and having written what he wrote about his writings ( ), I am pretty confident in agreeing with inked that this was Tolkien's view of Evil.

[littleadanel]

Thank you for making it clearer, Valandil and all I can do is agreeing.

Coming to think of it, in one of my seminars we talked about the same thing this week. I mean, that Evil cannot exist on its own. (Not in connection with Christianity, not in connection with Tolkien... actually I don't remember how it came up... but we ended up exactly here. )

[Elanor]

There must be opposition in all things.
If you never knew pain and sickness, you'd never realize what health and comfort are.
If you only ate chocolate cake, you wouldn't realize it was delicious until you ate lima beans. You'd never know a rose smells sweet until you smelled garbage.
If there were no evil, you'd never have to make a choice between good and evil. If you can't make choices, you might as well be dead.

That's my perspective on it, anyway.

I do think it's extremely interesting to note that evil can't create. Melkor and Sauron could never create their own creatures. They always had to pervert the creations of Iluvatar and the Valar (Though I do wonder where the dragons and the fell beasts came from).

[Telcontar_Dunedain]

That's a good example but as I see it you would still have to make the choice, yet you would do it almost automatically, knowing nothing else, yet the choice would still be being made.

[inked]

Originally Posted by Elanor

There must be opposition in all things.
If you never knew pain and sickness, you'd never realize what health and comfort are.
If you only ate chocolate cake, you wouldn't realize it was delicious until you ate lima beans. You'd never know a rose smells sweet until you smelled garbage.
If there were no evil, you'd never have to make a choice between good and evil. If you can't make choices, you might as well be dead.

That's my perspective on it, anyway.

I do think it's extremely interesting to note that evil can't create. Melkor and Sauron could never create their own creatures. They always had to pervert the creations of Iluvatar and the Valar (Though I do wonder where the dragons and the fell beasts came from).

Yes and No. All pain is not evil. You need to know to keep the hands out of the fire (and pity the poor lepers who have lost sensation and constantly injure themselves!) Hey, I like lima beans and cornbread and onions and ham as well as chocolate cake! Do you know what rotting anything smells like? - money! It's a paycheck for the sewage plant employees and papermill workers, and a warning to medical workers that a surgeon is needed. If there were no evil you would still have to make a choice between good, better, and best! Choice does not require the presence of evil - or didn't until the derivative was brought into actuality instead of potentiality because of the limitation of the nature of knowledge in humanity!

Meldor and Sauron are absolutely correct pictures of the nature of evil as derivative and destructive and twisting the good. (Goooooo, Valandil!! )

[Jon S.]

Originally Posted by Elanor

This is something that always bothers me about "epic fantasy", which has such very clear forces of good and evil. As if there's a difference between "evil" and "mean" or "good" and "nice". I have always seen the struggle between good and evil as something that takes place every day in the hearts of people all over the world. Epic fantasy is fun because the villains are so obvious, and it's satisfying to see them taken down. I am a Christian, so I do believe there is a sort of ultimate epic struggle between Satan and Jesus Christ, but that is also something that applies both in terms of the epic history of the world, and the epic struggle within each person, every day.

Interesting post.

Another perspective (Judaism) with similarities and differences.

God is the source of all good and evil. Period.

To be human is to be born with two inclinations, to do good and to do evil.

Free will means the ability to make that choice personally and to be 100% personally in charge of one's choices and responsibilities for the outcomes.

As for the inclination to do evil, it, too, can be turned to and used as an engine for good. It is only when it is allowed to control that the outcome is necessarily evil.

A wonderful exposition of this in the mass media is the episode from the original Star Trek series when the transporter beam splits Kirk into two Kirks, one all good, the other all evil. The good Kirk is paralyzed. He cannot decide, he cannot command.

All of those traits derive from the gestalt Kirk accessing and controlling his very real evil inclination for good (a textbook Jewish outlook on the issue and not surprising considering the author, Gene Rodenberry).

The reason I post this is that, of course the orcs aren't human, but neither are the elves, dwarves, or Ents. The latter, however, have the essential human ingredient of free will to choose to be good or evil.

But if the orcs truly lack the capacity to choose good and therefore can act only in ways we would label as evil, then it makes no more sense to characterize them as evil then it does to characterize an aggressive animal as such.

[inked]

Jon S,

Would that be pre-exilic or post-exilic Jewish thought that you are basing your statements upon?

And, are you confusing the concept of G-d as the source of all being with the absolute origination of evil in G-d's person or is evil still derivatively from the creature's free will?

I would say that G-d knows evil in potentiality whereas human's knowledge cannot be other than actualized.

[Jon S.]

Actually, with the exception of your first sentence, I don't believe I understand anything of what you've posted but thanks for sharing.

My point remains this:

If the orcs truly lack the capacity to choose good and therefore can act only in ways we would label as evil, it makes no more sense to characterize them as evil then it does to characterize an aggressive animal as such.

P.S. I also don't understand how my post count can remain at 49 when this post is 2 days after my prior one.

[inked]

Originally Posted by Jon S.

Actually, with the exception of your first sentence, I don't believe I understand anything of what you've posted but thanks for sharing.

Jon S,

Since you cited Judaism as the context for the ascription of evil to God, I was wondering if you took that from the theology of the Jews prior to the exile in Babylonia or Jewish thought after that event. There were significant differences that developed.

To create a entity with moral possibilities must inherently contain the possibiities of actualizing choices. That does not in my view make the Creator responsible for the choices made. This is issue of free will. The fact that the creature makes a choice which results in antagonism to the Creator rests in the creature.

What we see in the Orcs is NOT the inability to make choices but the CONSISTENT choice of antagonism to the Creator - a social mileu in which the individual is trained in the antagonistic choice and which is so ingrained as to never be questioned but accepted as the order of the universe. It is the dominant mold into which individuals are formed. It is applicable (NOT ALLEGORICAL) to the state of mind achieved in Nazi Germany, Stalinist Russia, Pol Pot, China etc.

Does that help?

[Jon S.]

I disagree completely with your opening statement as it applies to the specific core issues identified in my first post. In fact, I think I disagree with most if not all of the rest of your post, too. My gut tells me, however, that this just isn't one of those situations where further debate would be either helpful or fun, at least for me, so I'm done, the last words are yours if you want 'em.

[rohirrim TR]

hey jon.s don't give up now, your post count went 50!

i haven't read all of this stuff, correct me if i'm wrong, but jon.s says orcs are animals and inked say orcs are comparable to nazi soldiers "doing their jobs". right?

orcs are a race that basiacally hates everyone equally, each other, their master, the fellowship, everybody, their whole life is run by fear and hate, maybe you could befriend one if you caught it very young and raised it to be nice, but its kind of like trying to have a coyote as a pet, you got to get them before their eyes have opened and it will imprint you as one of them, i doubt trying to put an orc throught counseling would work either cause they just don't have the anger management skills that jack nicholson has