If you look carefully you can see that the word "Good" appears in black lettering. However inside this word there are white letters that spell the word "evil".
The concept, that has been phrased in many ways, simply claims that there is a necessary co-existence of good and evil. As widespread as this belief is I think that it is fallacious.
I think we can all agree that good and evil are polar opposites. That is, they are at either ends of the scale to each other. There can be no good in evil and there can be no evil in good. This is by definition. In order to ascertain whether or not a thing or action is good or evil, a set of standards must be agreed upon. This morality then is the basis of discernment of the goodness, or badness of something.
Without this universal moral foundation, any talk of good or evil is futile as the discussion will only end up in subjective relativism.
So once we have established a set of rules, or standards by which everyone can agree on, we recognise that there is both good and evil in the world. We could hypothesise what the world would be like without one or the other, but ultimately our reality is that both exist, at least as concepts based on our definition of morality.
However for the sake of the argument let us assume that the world, and universe is without good. Is this a plausible scenario? If the universe was without good then everything would be evil. Since there is a lack of comparable opposites, or alternative concepts to evil, then there could be no moral framework. This is because the moral framework requires a discernment between good and evil. Since there is no good, there can be no morality. Since there is no morality, everything is morally neutral. Therefore what you might call evil, would in fact not be evil, it would just be. Without a conception of good or evil, then nothing is either good nor evil, it simply is. Therefore the initial assertion that everything was evil would be false, because evil cannot exist if there is no such thing as morality. Clearly from this reasoning, evil cannot possibly exist without good. From another perspective, one might say that all things that are evil are really just perversions of distortions of things that were originally good.
For example evil sexual acts are just perversions of the pure and good sexual act that occurs between a man and a woman that act purely with love in unison. Murder is a distorted expression of mans good nature of ruling over the lower forms on the earth. When it is practiced with selfless concern the outcome is good. When it is exercised with selfish ambition the outcome is evil. So if evil is a distorted version of what is good, then if good does not exist, then it follows that evil also cannot exist. For if the object you wish to distort does not exist, then you are left with nothing to distort, so no corruption can take place. Therefore evil cannot exist without good.
But is the converse also true. Initially it would seem so. However if we attempt to conceive of a world without evil, somehow it seems not only plausible, but maybe remotely possible. In fact it is the dream of mankind to attain some sort of perfection (goodness) in life with everything he does. The concepts of enlightenment, Nirvana, Heaven etc are evidence of this. So from mankind's point of view is would seem plausible that good can exist without evil, and much of our energy in life is expended in attempts to make this happen.
Assuming there is no evil in the world, then we propose that everything is good. Next you might say that if there is no evil then there is no morality due to the lack of contrast, and so without morality there can be no good, only neutral, inert realities.
Here I will disagree on the following basis. If there is a God, and this God created the universe, and this God is purely good, then everything that he creates is also good. If he had decided that he would not allow anything to exist in the universe except goodness then that would be the ultimate truth. Since goodness is a thing of itself, and not a distortion or adjustment of something other than good, we can conclude that good does not depend on the existence of evil. Someone might argue that this depends on God being completely and perfectly good. Based on their observations, the world does not fit the description of being entirely good, therefore God cannot be wholly good. But this puts the horse before the cart. I assert that since God is the highest being, then whatever he creates, or does, or is, by definition is good. If for instance God contradicted himself, purposely made beings to fight each other, and was capricious in his dealings with those creatures, then the following would be true: Contradiction, war, and unpredictable behaviour would be purely good. In behaving with these characteristics, we would in fact be emulating the God that created us and in effect be paying homage to and worship God. In fact, in a universe where evil is prevented by God, we would have no free will. We would by natuer be compelled to be good all the time because the instant that we were about to do otherwise, God would stop us in order to maintain perfect goodness in the universe. We would be merely puppets of God. The freewill and ability to rebel creates the situation where evil can exist.
If there is no God then concepts of good and evil are ultimately futile and reduce to sheer pragmatism based on the prevailing circumstances of the time. If this be the case then concepts of good and evil would be just that, concepts that had no real meaning in reality except to allow one group to manipulate another.
To accept God, even in the most abstract way is to affirm that goodness exists. And this goodness is not dependant on evil, rather evil is dependant on good, for without it evil cannot exist and has no meaning. If there were no such thing as evil, then the concept would be foreign to us (even though God could conceive of such a thing) and we would know everything as being good.
Ultimately God created Lucifer (or satan) who rebelled and set himself up in opposition to God and in so doing set himself in opposition to everything that God stood for. Satan then could only mangle, distort and destroy that which God had created, since he could not create anything himself. In order to cease worshipping God through being good, he had to do, and be the opposite, which by definition is evil. To conceive of a purely evil world without good, is tantamount to saying that Satan could exist without God. Since Satan is a created being, his existence is conditionally dependant upon Gods existence. The opposite cannot be true, simply because there was a time when Satan did not exist, though God did.
Evil cannot exist without good, but the existence of good does not depend on the existence of evil.
