Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

In Defense of Eve

  1. Sep 17, 2005 #1
    First, this has nothing to do with religion, but I would like to begin a philosophic discussion on the legal case against Eve, and her encounter with the apple. I hold Eve to be innocent of all charges.

    First is the fact that she is a being with "no knowledge of good and evil"--thus it is impossible for her to "know" that any action she takes is good or evil, right or wrong. Thus she cannot gain knowledge about apples being good or bad from thinking--only via perception given to her via evidence of her senses.

    Second, she receives second hand and false information about the apple law. We know this to be true because she holds it to be against the law not to either touch or eat the apple, yet the law as presented to Adam says nothing about touch. Also, the facts of the case show how Eve gets false information about law. Clearly the false apple law cannot be from Adam since Adam knows nothing about touch--only eating. Since the legal situation is reduced to a four body problem, and two beings are logically ruled out (Adam & creature), then Eve must have received false information about the apple law from the forth being, the creator. Why creator took this immoral course of action is itself a topic for future discussion.

    Because Eve is given a false rule of law by the creator that is also judge, it is wrong for Eve to be punished, even though she acted counter to the false law of touch and did in fact touch. One cannot be held guilty for violation of a false law. Her cause to touch was motivated by receiving new and factually correct information about apple law from creature. The creature gives correct information because it knows that there is no law against touching, only eating, a possible situation only if creature was present when Adam received apple law. If someone is first given false information about law from judge, then given correct information from witness of law formulation, they cannot be held guilty for violation of a false law by judge when acting on true information about the law given to them by witness.

    Third, when Eve observed that she did not die after touch of apple, she had good reason to eat apple to gain the knowledge that creature correctly explained to her she would receive, and to then give apple to Adam to eat after she in fact did receive this knowledge after the act of eating. Adam, clearly seeing that Eve did not die after eating (the only rule given to him) realized that he must also have been given false information by creator, and thus had good reason to also eat, since clearly Eve was not dead after eating, and now had new "knowledge of good and evil" that he did not have.

    Case closed, Eve not guilty, judge found guilty.
  2. jcsd
  3. Sep 17, 2005 #2


    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    This is stupid. The jury was obviously bought off by the mob.
  4. Sep 18, 2005 #3


    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    She didn't know the difference, this is true. But she broke the law. It's pretty simple thing here, "Don't eat the stuff on that tree", she ate it. There is no appeal. Guilty as charged... "Next"

    Lawyers would ruin creation if they could!

    -"Ahh!"- Neopoleon Dynamite
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook