This is my first post in near 3 weeks. This is my first thread in about 3 months (maybe more). Just wanted to throw that out there.
Now then, let's talk about morality for a bit here. It's a wonderous thing, isn't it? Now, let's think about "Good Vs. Bad" or "Good Vs. Evil". Good is considered the standard sumeritan; s/he is likeable, respectful, polite, a philanthropist (partaker of charity), and an overall well adjusted fellow. Though this person does not exist, let's say that he does for the rest of the conversation.
Now then, let's take a peek at good 'ol Evil here. He is considered... well, what is he considered? Easily tempted? A weaver of tempt? You could easily argue that anyone who is Easily tempted is not evil, but rather normal. You could easily argue the same for a maker of tempt. Who is a "bad guy"? The one who smuggles drugs? You have to get by in the world somehow.
Every single "evil" thing known has an easy way to turn it around into something understandable, or even good. Therefore, there is no Evil in the world. But wait! How could there not be any evil? It's pretty much an unwritten rule that Good cannot exist without Evil and vice versa.
How does society deem something "evil" when they cannot fully understand it? Is that not an evil thing in and of itself?
The main question I'm asking here (Also known as: Too long; Didn't read) is: How does/could society deem something they don't fully understand as something bad? What kind of standard things are considered bad in this day and age? Why?
Hmmm a most complicated question ranging far into philosophy which hurts my head. Today murder is considered bad. As well as **** and child pornography. I suppose they are considered bad in society simply for the detrimental effects they have on others in society.
I'm continuing to stick by the strict, completely objective definition of evil as "detrimenting others for personal gain". In a natural perspective though, there is no such thing as morality or alignment. Humans, with their advanced minds, have created systems of right and wrong, and, over the years, has evolved quite a bit. As our morality evolves over the years, we can look back at the laws or ethics of yesterday and get the sense of "what the hell were they thinking?" in some areas.
How does/could society deem something they don't fully understand as something bad?
I guess now we are talking about the illegality of certain subjects. Some of the aspects I'm thinking of for law is declaring certain subjects "harmful, detrimental, or unfair". Methamphetamine is thoroughly harmful to those that use it. Law (in some areas) deems it illegal for this very reason. It hurts those that use it, and it hurts others in different ways (malpractice of meth, not creating it successfully can result in accidents). There's so much that can be said as to why a law is a law to be put into one post.
As for the second question (Firefox Beta 9 forbids copying and pasting text for quoting), it's all about the evolution of our morality and ethics. If you are purposefully doing something that can be considered harmful to others or actions that result in the infringement of the rights of the citizens, that can be deemed unlawful in the books. There are actions or events that may not be illegal, but is frowned upon to do, which could be considered unethical.
I call evil the denial of the law without good enough reason. If you murder someone who is a genocidal psychopath, then you are not evil. If you murder someone just for the lulz, you're evil. If you steal from rich people because you are poor and need money, then you aren't evil. If you are rich and steal from other rich people, you're pretty much the worst you can get.
If you murder someone who is a genocidal psychopath, then you are not evil.
Eh? Murder is a very high action to take, regardless of whom the victim is. It's evil in the fact that you yourself did an evil deed. Justification for your actions does not change what you did >_>
We seem to have conflicting issues with what evil is. It does not matter who the person is--harming them in any way is evil, especially if it is for personal gain. The poor man is stealing from a rich man just to satisfy his needs. You could go into context how the rich man worked for his money while the poor man was a bum. And even if you went vice-versa on me, stealing is still an evil act because it is detrimental to the victim.
I'm continuing to stick by the strict, completely objective definition of evil as "detrimenting others for personal gain".
Well no that's not an objective definition. You can't really have an objective definition to something that is entirely subjective. I can subjectively determine right and wrong based on my own perspective or the collective perspective of the country I live in, but that would not be a definitive answer.
I say it depends on how the person fares throughout a given amount of experiences. Say a tree somehow brutally killed someone's grandmother. Revenge by lumber-jacking is rather unsurprising, is it not? People do some bad things, but with a reason. If the reasons are unreasonable and selfish, the person may well be a bad person.
He has to kill a puppy before I consider them a bad person.
Killing a puppy is the worst thing a person can do. No excuses.
in my opinion, a bad person is someone who can kill or hurt a living creature without feeling any regret about it. but i also think that in the end everyone looks at their life and regret some of the things they did. so in the end i thinktthat there is no such thing as a truly evil person
Who are we, or anyone to deem what good and evil is?
A bad person could be doing something with good intentions. For instance - Someone murders a father, he is good at what he lives for, his kids. << This makes the murderer Evil.
But then what if you find out the father was a drug dealer, and a murderer himself, who has murdered many other people, and done other disgusting crimes, and it turns out he was murdered because he threatened this guys life and/or his loved ones. Then what does this make him? Good or evil.
I personally think good and evil should stick with movies, I mean Anything good can be turned into something evil if you say it in a different way, and vice versa.
Well no that's not an objective definition. You can't really have an objective definition to something that is entirely subjective. I can subjectively determine right and wrong based on my own perspective or the collective perspective of the country I live in, but that would not be a definitive answer.
I would think that anything that is done to harm another person, whether if there is a purpose or not, is evil, even in the slightest. There are many forms of it and it can be stretched, sure, but that is what evil is.
But then what if you find out the father was a drug dealer, and a murderer himself, who has murdered many other people, and done other disgusting crimes, and it turns out he was murdered because he threatened this guys life and/or his loved ones. Then what does this make him? Good or evil.
Evil. Regardless of whether there was a purpose behind it.
in my opinion, a bad person is someone who can kill or hurt a living creature without feeling any regret about it.
Yeah, I think similarly; the actions are one thing, but a person's reasons or even regret(if they truly wouldn't do it again, they were at worst; evil in the past)towards those actions really sum it all up.
I personally think good and evil should stick with movies
Agreed. Who really has no shred of good intention. Who really actually wants to do harm? Maybe the person is extremely self-righteous, but that doesn't define evil. No one is really evil. Unless they kill a dog. So don't worry, be happy.
How does/could society deem something they don't fully understand as something bad? What kind of standard things are considered bad in this day and age? Why?
The society looks at what people have as norms and stocks (don't know it that's the right word for it). They make laws and they consider things as bad/criminal due to what the folks say.
Things you hear a lot now are, sexual things like with the church, pornography with children/animals, killing someone, swindling etc.
There are lots of things that have changed (thank god). I think it's good that when time changes/ people get other norms, that also things like the law change.
As what for me is a bad person: Someone who does things that hurts someone or something on purpose. Like hurting animals, but also simple things like bullying someone. That person can have problems for the rest of their lives. Ofcourse, there will be exceptions in what i say, like accidentically hurting someone's toe when you stand on it, that doens't make him a bad person. But i think you all know what i mean:P (i hope)
in my opinion, a bad person is someone who can kill or hurt a living creature without feeling any regret about it.
Welcome to the army!
I think that someone who is evil is someone who kills for revenge or for the heck of it. I think Evil would be fully understanding what(or continue to do) is evil. Like for example torturing someone, maybe it is to get information out of the guy to sve millions of lives but if you seperate the act from everything else it is truly evil. I also think that tourture is a evil thing to do because it is all calculated to cause as much pain as possible.
