I think the problem with your line of reasoning is that it doesn't really answer the question -- the question already presumes the reification of good and evil. If you mean to make the linguistic claim that *we* couldn't have developed the concept of good without also developing the concept of evil, I would tend to agree with you. We live in a world that contains both things generally described as good and things described as evil, and given the obvious relation between the two concepts, it would be very strange if one developed independently of the other.
However, I don't think that's what people usually mean when they ask this sort of question. Rather than the linguistic* question, they mean to ask the ontological question of Good existing without Evil. And as I mentioned, this presumes some sort of existence of the two concepts independent of language. I don't think either the question or my answer to it requires some sort of platonic existence of the Good, and I really hope it doesn't, since I don't believe in that any more than you do.
*I'm sorry about the use of the word 'linguistic', since I'm sure there's a better word I'm just not thinking of. I hope you won't hold it against me.
__________________
"Die Deutschen meinen, daß die Kraft sich in Härte und Grausamkeit offenbaren müsse, sie unterwerfen sich dann gerne und mit Bewunderung:[...]. Daß es Kraft giebt in der Milde und Stille, das glauben sie nicht leicht."
"The Germans believe that power must reveal itself in hardness and cruelty and then submit themselves gladly and with admiration[...]. They do not believe readily that there is power in meekness and calm."
-- Friedrich Nietzsche
|