28.4 - 1.5 2025
Pharos Dane Filozofije
Stari Grad Philosophy Days
foto: vilma matulic
"Nasuprot Zlu"
"The Opposite of Evil"
photos Vilma Matulic, Stan Coenders, click image
Petar Pavlovic
Institut za kozmologiju i filozofiju prirode / Institute for Cosmology and Philosophy of Nature / Križevci
dr. rer. nat. Petar Pavlović, Institute principal
Knowledge as the absence of evil
The main goal of this lecture will be to argue that a proper type of ontological knowledge can represent
the overcoming of the very notion of evil – that is, not just an opposition to evil, but its complete
absence, together with the overcoming of all other pairs of opposites.
In this lecture, I would first like to point out that every ethical position taken, for instance on the nature
of evil, assumes some metaphysical framework in which it (mostly implicitly) appears. Taking this into
account, the next logical question is to ask what is the minimal metaphysical framework we can take
without any additional assumptions apart from the: i) general experience of all people and ii) the
assumption that it is possible to have some kind of knowledge about this general experience (also
expressed, at least to some extent, through natural sciences).
It will be argued that the only consistent metaphysics based on such minimal assumptions is absolute
monism. In its simplest form, the absolute can be first understood as the absolute void - this is not
necessarily the proper and full understanding of the absolute, but it is sufficient as a first step for the
topic under discussion . Then it is easy to see that in the view of absolute monism there can be no evil,
nor any really existing difference on the fundamental level. The evil is then possible only as the
absence of the knowledge of the fundamental absolute unity of everything existing, which vanishes
with the dawning of such knowledge. However, although there are no actual causes for suffering, the
feeling of suffering coming from the ignorance of absolute unity is subjectively real. Because of this,
and because of the need to help the subjective realization of absolute monism which dispels all evils, I
will try to argue why such a position can not be labeled as nihilism and why it does not imply passivity
and only a theoretical stance, but calls for action.
Three questions:
1. Can one formulate any ethical statement without assuming some metaphysical framework in which it
is stated? Is it thus justified to skip metaphysical considerations when discussing the nature of evil?
2. If our understanding of evil is dependent on the initial perspective we take, what would be the proper
perspective to take while seriously approaching this question? The perspective of of individual human
being living on the planet Earth, in Europe, in 2025? Or the universal cosmological perspective– if it
can be attained?
3. If you try to reach the reality as it is – assuming that it exists outside the consciousness– and thus
systematically take away from it all thoughts, perception, smell, taste etc .– that is, all products of
subjective activity- what are you left with?
Links for information:
Spinoza and the Relativity of Evil in the World
Vedānta Solution of the Problem of Evil
Simpozij Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣada (dr. rer. nat., Petar Pavlović, Festival Sanje 2024)
Petar Pavlović contributed to the 2024 edition with:
The need to overcome the concept of time
Potreba za prevladavanjem koncepta vremena
„ ...započinjemo od trenutno odvojenih pojmova fizičkog, metafizičkog i iskustvenog vremena i raspravljamo o mogućnosti dosezanja jedinstvenog razumijevanja vremena. Nadalje, tvrdit ćemo da takav pokušaj vodi jednom dodatnom zaključku: postoji potreba da idemo dalje od koncepta vremena ako želimo razumjeti realnost, ali, u isto vrijeme, ne treba odbaciti realnost promjene. Poseban naglasak u ovoj raspravi bit će stavljen na promjenu u našem razumijevanju vremena koju su donijela istraživanja u području kvantne gravitacije i opća teorija relativnosti, dok ćemo također pokušati i kritički raspravljati o ograničenjima ovih teorija. Konačno, kao primjer pristupa koji je imao za cilj konceptualno (i praktično) prevladati pojam vremena, bez odbacivanja realnosti promjene, te kao nadahnuće za buduća istraživanja u tome smjeru, kratko ćemo raspravljati o položaju velikog indijca, filozofa Abhinavagupta..."
-
Kako povezati pojmove vremena u našem iskustvu, fizici i metafizici?
-
Možemo li shvatiti što vrijeme uistinu jest bez odgovora na gornje pitanje?
-
Je li vrijeme svojstvo bića, ljudska konstrukcija ili samo nužan uvjet za sva naša iskustva - kako istražiti ove alternative?
" ... we start from the currently separate
notions of physical, metaphysical and experiential time and discuss the possibility to reach a unified understanding of time. Furthermore, we will argue that such attempt leads to one additional conclusion: there is a need to go beyond the concept of time if we want to understand the
reality, but at the same time, one should not reject the reality of change. A special emphasis in this discussion will be given to the change in our understanding of time brought up by general theory of relativity and research done in quantum gravity, while we will also try to critically discuss the limitations of these theories. Finally, as an
example of the approach that was aiming to conceptually (and practically) overcome the notion of time, while not rejecting the reality of change, and as an inspiration for future research in this direction, we will shortly discuss the position of the great Indian philosopher Abhinavagupta. ..."
1) How to relate the notions of time in our experience, physics and metahphysics?
2) Can we understand what time actually is without answering the question above?
3) Is time a property of being, a human construct, or just a necessary condition for all our experiences - and how to investigate these
alternatives?