Menu
By:
Filters
What's new

The nature of evil

K

Keleynal

Jesus Freak
I wanted to make this thread as an invitation to ThatOneGuy to discuss his philosophy regarding the nature or definition of evil. It's by no means a debate challenge. I found what he briefly stated to be very interesting and wanted a chance to talk more without derailing the other thread.

T1G stated
In my personal ideology evil is a byproduct of society. I fully understand that in yours, evil is laid out by the laws of the Christian God. The nature of the differences in our ideologies will always prevent us from finding a middle ground, because each supports its own definition.
Click to expand...

While middle ground may be impossible, I do think I may at least be able to come to a better understanding.

Others in the community can feel free to weigh in as well, of course.
 
I think the key point he's trying to capture is along these lines... you see things in a black and white standpoint right? So lets talk about something that can be very cut and dry; murder.

When you think of murder, especially of an innocent person, a red flag goes off in your head that says "bad!" Right? If this is the case, you say well if its more than just one innocent, that's evil?

Okay so now that that's established think back to world war 2. The united states dropped two nuclear weapons on Japan, killing hundreds of thousands of innocent people in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Do you believe America is an evil country? No, probably not, because you believe we did the right thing.

Yet you agreed that murdering innocent people is evil (probably) and America has murdered more innocent people than you can imagine. Whether you choose to see the grey or not, the fact is that evil is a point of view.
 
I'll post something tonight after we record the podcasts. I saw the title and chuckled a bit thinking I bet I sparked that rant :)
 
dainjre said:
I think the key point he's trying to capture is along these lines... you see things in a black and white standpoint right? So lets talk about something that can be very cut and dry; murder.

When you think of murder, especially of an innocent person, a red flag goes off in your head that says "bad!" Right? If this is the case, you say well if its more than just one innocent, that's evil?

Okay so now that that's established think back to world war 2. The united states dropped two nuclear weapons on Japan, killing hundreds of thousands of innocent people in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Do you believe America is an evil country? No, probably not, because you believe we did the right thing.

Yet you agreed that murdering innocent people is evil (probably) and America has murdered more innocent people than you can imagine. Whether you choose to see the grey or not, the fact is that evil is a point of view.
Click to expand...

I don't think you can label a person or collection of persons (ie a country) as evil. Actions can be evil, but as horrendous as an action may be, the person committing the act is equally capable of great good. I would never condemn a person or country by labeling them "evil."

While I do believe that good and bad are absolutes that exist separate from that I, society, or anyone else thinks about them, that does not make good and evil as simple and cut and dried as you might think. Theory is one thing, but real life is more complicated. Take your "obvious" example: you compared murdering innocents to what happened at Hiroshima, et al. But is that a fair comparison? The end result- dead innocent people, is the same, but was dropping the A bomb murder, or something else? Not trying to justify it. Some one made a terrible decision that was faced with nothing but terrible decisions. I don't know if it was the best decision that could have been made or not, so I hesitate to label it an act of evil.
 
Keleynal said:
I don't think you can label a person or collection of persons (ie a country) as evil. Actions can be evil, but as horrendous as an action may be, the person committing the act is equally capable of great good. I would never condemn...
Click to expand...
But didn't you allude that the dominion was evil in the other thread?
 
Taking both of those at once, if some one said "Ted Bundy was evil" or "Adolph Hitler was evil," I wouldn't correct them even though it was technically their actions that were evil. In the end, we mean the same thing- they did really awful things and got better than they deserved in the end.

So when I say "The Dominion seems evil," it is because of their actions, namely the conquering of the know galaxy by force. But, given time and the right leaders, they could become a truly benevolent force. The same could be said of Hitler and Bundy- no one is beyond redemption.
 
A psychopath cannot be 'fixed'.

If the circumstances for a serial killer come about, and that person starts on that path, they will reoffend. Therapy won't change them. Only incarceration or death.
 
Wait, I need to get a few things straight here.

1. You believe only actions can be classified as evil?
2. Do you or do you not believe that evil is a subjective idea?
3. Do you believe you've ever made an evil action before?
 
Oh, I like this. I think I agree with what t1g was saying, unless I am misinterpreting. Nothing is inherently 'evil' until it is defined as such, either through consensus (i.e. societal norms) or through directly dictated rules (i.e. scripture, laws, etc.). Murder is only 'evil' because we all agree that it is a terrible, inhuman thing to do. Evil as a concept is a social construct that isn't inheirently defined, but rather it is a consesus that has been reached.

If an animal kills another animal to survive, it is considered a normal part of natural existance. If an animal kills another of its own species, e.g. for territory, that is also considered a normal part of natural existance. If a human kills another human, it is 'murder' and therefore 'evil'. We view humans killing other humans as an evil act, because it is a direct threat against us that was carried out by something we can directly communicate our disdain of the act to. The human knows that society views murder as wrong, therefore their act is evil.

I'm going on very little sleep so I apologize if this is a bit jibberishy and inconcise, I just wanted to jump in. :)
 
Evilcat said:
You have to be careful there. A psychopath is a Broken person. some (not all. there are a lot of happily integrated psychopaths in society that don't kill people) commit acts of murder/evil and will continue to do so and should be by all means locked away. But as a broken person can they truly be classified as evil? I think society has cheapened the word evil a great deal. for one to be Evil, I think would need for the person to understand the act they are performing is wrong and perform that act anyway. And i don't mean the law says this is wrong, i mean "KNOW" it is wrong. Without that they are simply broken people. no less terrible and horrifying but not evil.
Click to expand...


I'm not saying psychopaths are evil. But serial killers can't be fixed.
 
Evilcat said:
not today no. But the brain is a machine and given time i don't see why in say 50-60 years it wont be doable. as soon as you know where shit went wrong you know were to start poking away to see if you can fix it.
Click to expand...
I agree, to a point. There will most definitely be developments as far as neuroscience goes in 'fixing' people that have these 'wiring' probelms, but I also believe you need to hold people accountable for their actions, and saying it is just a mechanical issue takes away from that. I don't think there will every be a 100% guaranteed fix though, and I do agree that some people are best just removed from the gene pool haha.
 
Fox, I think the word you are looking for is sociopath, not psychopath. Sociopaths lack the ability to empathize and thus have no filter why it would be bad to do purely selfish things like shoot someone for that thing that they have because he wants it.

Until we can come up with a real way to change brain chemistry sociopaths cant be fixed, but they are also very hard to spot because their defect makes them very good at faking it.
 
ThatOneGuy said:
Fox, I think the word you are looking for is sociopath, not psychopath. Sociopaths lack the ability to empathize and thus have no filter why it would be bad to do purely selfish things like shoot someone for that thing that they have because he wants it.

Until we can come up with a real way to change brain chemistry sociopaths cant be fixed, but they are also very hard to spot because their defect makes them very good at faking it.
Click to expand...


Sociopathy is not a formal term for any kind of disorder. It is often used interchangeably with psychopathy, to denote similar effects, but attained purely through social impact.
 
Evil is indeed a construct of human society, a collective agreement that we do not wish to live in a place where certain acts are acceptable. Of course, the terms 'good' and 'evil' are a false dichotomy. There is a continuum of responses that benefit both the individual and those around them, and could be considered 'good', and then there are actions that are 'good' to one group of people and 'evil' to another and so on. Simplistic terminology simply doesn't work here.

It's far easier to define certain actions within the basis of law than it is to categorize grey areas within the simple terms of good or evil. The reason for this, IMO, is that the world is far more complex than we as humans can generally fathom. Our brains are filled with shortcuts-of-thought to make quick judgements that aren't always correct. Ultimately I think our own fallible brains make such a simplistic argument irrelevant to society and at best, only relevant to the extended family-groupings in which we evolved. The idea of government exists because people are incapable of making good choices for large groups.
 
Here are my thoughts on evil.

I was brought up Christian, but I do not believe in a "God" anymore. There are most likely things out there that are orders of magnitude higher than us on every scale, but I don't believe they are in any way involved or concerned with us.

If there is no God to tell us what is good or evil. Then how can there be a good or an evil. There would only be what is good for me and what is not good for me (evil). If I take something from you, then I get more so it is good. If you take something from me then it is evil because I have less.

Try to live by that thinking and you will be either killed or exiled from society pretty quick. So that means society is the governing factor.
Arguably the biggest driving force for humanity is society. Living and working together is what pushes us forward on the evolutionary road.

I think good and evil are a byproduct of consequences. A choice made has a result. If that result helps you it is considered good. No one person lives their life alone and not effecting others. From that your choices also result in things for those around you. If those results are good for the group that it effects then it is good no matter if its bad for you. Same is true of the opposite. Good for the group = good. Bad for the group = evil.

By that thinking my definition of good and evil is what is good for the society is good and what harms the society is evil. Being that a society is made up of many individuals those things that fall under the ideals of good or evil change. Ultimately the people in the society, or those in charge of it are the ones who decide what is good and what is evil. People choose for themselves what is right and wrong from whatever upbringing they have had. Enough people agree that something is right and then it becomes good. Enough people agree that something is wrong then it is evil.

There are many societies today where murder is legal and even seen is right or good. Sects in Africa think albinism is evil and therefore it is good to kill them. Many middle eastern cultures think honor killings are good. Even in the USA there are many different levels of how good or evil a murder is. If you are a Buddhist then no killing is justified, and it is better to die to someone else's hand than lift your own.
These are all products of the society someone lives in. The laws of the land are only changing from societal pressure.


Now we come to the argument that everyone knows in their heart what is good or evil. Morals if you will. I would argue that no two people have the same morals, because morals are a byproduct of empathy. Empathy is the ability to sympathize with or feel another person's emotions. Feeling those emotions makes you want the same for him that you would for yourself. You don't want the bad stuff to happen to yourself so, by extension, you don't want the bad stuff to happen to him. Emotion is an evolutionary tool that we adopted to strengthen societies, because societies will help us survive as a species.

The other side of empathy is selfishness. Everyone is selfish, or self serving, if the term fits better. If empathy is the feeling of helping others, selfishness is the feeling of helping yourself. Even empathy is based in selfishness, since its about taking what you want and trying to make sure others have that. I challenge anyone to come up with an action that is completely non selfish. I have never found one, and I bet you can't either. There are lots of things humans do that are only a tiny bit selfish, but its still in there.


So really what good and evil is, is a 4 way tug of war between:
1. what is good for the individual.
2. what is good for the group.
3. what aligns with your empathy.
4. and what aligns with your selfishness.
Somewhere in the middle of all that is good. Too far to one side or the other and it's evil.
Evil is a completely subjective ideal for each individual based on these 4 things.

That's why I say the dominion isn't evil. They are solidly within their societies world view of what is right and just. If another group came along and was bigger or better than them and started to kill and conquer them, it wouldn't be evil in their eyes.
 
I challenge anyone to come up with an action that is completely non selfish. I have never found one, and I bet you can't either. There are lots of things humans do that are only a tiny bit selfish, but its still in there.
Click to expand...

Perhaps we could make this topic a tangent thread? I'd like to discuss this further but I feel it will derail the current discussion as it deals with terms removed from good and evil.
 
ThatOneGuy said:
If there is no God to tell us what is good or evil. Then how can there be a good or an evil.
Click to expand...

Religion or belief in a higher power do not give people a monopoly on morality.

I am so fucking sick of people thinking that a lack of faith means a lack of morality. I know this wasn't your whole point, but it bore responding to.
 
I addressed morality further down. Also the part you quoted wasn't about morality it was about a higher power laying down laws that superseded the laws of man.[DOUBLEPOST=1372821182,1372821141][/DOUBLEPOST]
Diremongoose said:
Perhaps we could make this topic a tangent thread? I'd like to discuss this further but I feel it will derail the current discussion as it deals with terms removed from good and evil.
Click to expand...
done.

Please address any ideas on this topic on this thread here.
 
I can't accept subjective good and evil. It raises too many problems, too many questions for me. I do not find the existence of God threatening, nor do I find objective morality constricting. I can understand why many find the idea of a higher power making the rules undesirable. In the end, it means that we would be accountable for our decisions to a being that is qualified to make that judgement, which is a sobering and perplexing thought. Especially if one enjoys the types of things that are objectively called immoral. Since all of us fall into that category at various points in our lives, in a way it's a wonder that so many still ascribe to the idea.

For me, it is a firm foundation. Let God be true and all men a liar. There is a comfort and a rest in that. Some may write that off as being intellectually dishonest or having a crutch, but when you get right down to it, it takes just as much faith as atheism, agnosticism, or any other belief system.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom