Quote:
Originally Posted by skip spence
Personally I don't think there's such a thing as Evil or Good in any absolute sense; these concepts are defined by a certain society in a certain time, place and context and are ever changing.
|
How typical 7th age liberal & educated view that is! And I do completely agree on it.
But as was dicussed earlier in this thread, we need to keep in mind that the way we educated people of the 21st century think of things may not be the only criteria with which we should interpret fictional worlds... Looking at Tolkien's own worldview it's quite plausible his world could be "metaphysically absolutist". But there are problems even there.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Skip
Tolkien appeared to have belived in these absloute values however but he also understood that in order to be Evil, or do what is Evil rather, you would need to have a choice, there would need to be a fall. If you are born irredeemably Evil you have no choice in the matter and are not in fact Evil either. In Tolkien's world Eru, who is Good, created the world, and not even Melkor (or Nerwen  ) was evil in the beginning. |
The interesting question here to me is, can something merely just "fallen from grace" be absolutely evil? Wouldn't absolute evil require an autonomous evil principle from where it stems just like the absolut Good emanates from Eru? It's easy to see where the fascination towards Manichean thought comes from be it in the context of the early church or today's power politics...
But if Eru is the sole absolute power there is in the universe then he is in the last stance responsible also of the evil of Melkor and all the other evil...
Btw. did Eru make a choice to be good in the first place? Did Eru have a choice or is his goodness based on his nature or necessity? If Eru made a choice it's not absolute Good he represents but if his godness is necessary then he's not actually Good...
