Evil?

"John Wayne Gacey a famous serial killer brought to you by All Serial Killers dot Com."

I had to look that up. Interesting its a .com, eh. You got a good point.

Quote:

---

If I wasn't already taken I'd have to answer that one.

---

hehe, me too, and I'm not a lesbian...at least, I don't feel like a lesbian.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Arethusa

Another interesting point...albeit completely irrelevant, homosexuality used to be listed in this manual as a personality disorder...but wait! Not so irrelevant if we harken back to the issue of acceptable social mores.

---

I guess they had to decide it was acceptable. Take that a step further, maybe they will decide eating people is acceptable if enough people are so inclined.. wow again.

Warning: This site is probably one of the most offensive on the internet, (and one of my faves :brow: ), although this page...not so much.

http://www.tshirthell.com/store/prod...?productid=509

Quote:

---

I guess they had to decide it was acceptable. Take that a step further, maybe they will decide eating people is acceptable if enough people are so inclined.. wow again.

---

Now that reminds me of a stupid argument I read from one of the people who head up NAMBLA. His assumption is that society is slowly moving toward an age where pedophilia, like wife swapping, homosexuality, and other once morally questionable practices will soon become perfectly socially acceptable. If so, I'm moving...

But then, he may not be so terribly far from the truth. Ancient Rome immediately springing to mind. OH man! Okay, but...marrying a 13 year old in ancient Rome was socially acceptable for reasons brought about by conditions that no longer exist today. Namely, the life expectancy of the average plebian in ancient Rome was about 27. Can you imagine marrying at 12 now and living your entire life with that person???? In the immortal words of Clive Owen, Yeeesh!

With regards to harmful acts coming from self absorption I would say that is evil. Humility is good and here I would agree with the statement that evil is the absence of good. Lack of humility and a mindset based on others leads to evil results. Sorry if this has been said already, I was skimming the thread.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Arethusa

Now that reminds me of a stupid argument I read from one of the people who head up NAMBLA. His assumption is that society is slowly moving toward an age where pedophilia, like wife swapping, homosexuality, and other once morally questionable practices will soon become perfectly socially acceptable. If so, I'm moving...

But then, he may not be so terribly far from the truth. Ancient Rome immediately springing to mind. OH man! Okay, but...marrying a 13 year old in ancient Rome was socially acceptable for reasons brought about by conditions that no longer exist today. Namely, the life expectancy of the average plebian in ancient Rome was about 27. Can you imagine marrying at 12 now and living your entire life with that person???? In the immortal words of Clive Owen, Yeeesh!

---

Reminds me of when Aids was the big scare, it sure changed a lot of people's habits. I wonder if we are in for a wake-up call in the not so far future. Seems in history, after a relaxing of attitudes, there followed a kind of a tightening up of attitudes. Like, society fixes itself somehow.

I can see it now...dateline 2006:

Attention, ladies and gents, our newly innaugurated Commander in Chief, President Nero, will now play a little ditty on the fiddle. Let us not forget, lest history repeat itself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jackyyyy

Reminds me of when Aids was the big scare, it sure changed a lot of people's habits. I wonder if we are in for a wake-up call in the not so far future. Seems in history, after a relaxing of attitudes, there followed a kind of a tightening up of attitudes. Like, society fixes itself somehow.

---

So our modern, post Aids, (well post discovery thereof), society could well be though of as a sort of Victorian Rennaisance? There's a scary conept, cuz we all know what was going on in the drawing rooms and coat closets of the Victorian era. Let's hope we're older and wiser and people will actually grasp the imperative of 'wrappin' it up'. Pfft, yeah, that'll happen.

Hi guys,

It looks like I'm entering this discussion a little late for the comment I am about to contribute. There are already a wide range of very well developed views being shared. Really a very interesting discussion!

But I'm sorry, before I add my two-cents I just wanted to be a stickler and make a small correction to something that Asa Adams said early in this discussion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Asa Adams

Utilitarianism holds that the right is fixed by the good. the ends justify the means. meaning that "good" is "hapiness" therefore if one were faced with a decision, he should take the route that brings him the most "hapiness" which could arguably be something horrible to sociatal exceptances. what i mean is that if hitler were to do what made him happy, (eradicating the jews) then this is nolonger a correct or "right" conclusion. Therefore, the Utilitarianism (the ends justify the means) does not apply.

---

Utilitarianism, properly conceived, is actually a social theory and not an individualist model of morality. The epitome of utilitarian thinking is the phrase: 'the greatest good for the greatest number'. In a nut-shell it's about acheiving the best balance between ends and means so to satisfy the greatest number of people to the greatest possible extent.

I think what Asa Adams was calling utilitarian sounds a bit more like an existentialist approach, which focuses on each person's psychic isolation, the lack of outside derived standards or principles, and the necessity to therefore construct our own morality.

And of course many philosophical thinkers have equated an achievement of 'the good' as the same as achieving 'happiness'.

((Sorry to digress to a prior stage of the discussion when everyone has obviously progressed onto more specific aspects!)) :eek2:

Back to the present, I was interested to see that noone has brought up that old trope, 'If God exists then why is there evil in the world?'. Which, of course from a theological perspective runs straight into concepts like free will etc.

Groove on! :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Arethusa

That's quantifying evil. What if he parked his car in the wrong place and because of that, the building he parked in front of burned to the ground and many people were killed and/or injured in the fire because the 'wrong place' happened to be in front of the only fire hydrant?

Now say that the man who parked there, did so because it was the only place to park near a hospital emergency room and he did so without thinking because his child was bleeding to death and every second counted.

Then let's say, the reason that the child was bleeding to death was because the man was drunk and accidently caused the child's injury.

No situation defining good or evil is black and white. Millions of extenuating circumstances affect the outcome of every good and bad action. Do we judge this man evil based on the first paragraph or do we take into account his extenuating circumstance? If so, how far back do we go? What if he was drunk for a reason one would consider valid, (there may be many valid reasons, depending on your own perception)? What does that make him? Good or evil?

There is no absolute good or evil, imho. With the exception, and only for some people, of God and Satan.

---

I strongly agree with you.Yes,no one can says that the evil is black and the good is white.And aslo no one can say that the black is bad but the white is good.All these prejudices are formed in the people's hearts.People always use their hobbies to judge the nature of the things.This is unfair,I think.
Actually,the black sometimes can bring people the peace and calmness.Similarly,the white aslo can provide the terror and uncomfortableness for you.Everything has two sides.So it is really difficult for us to define a situation is good or bad.It is our hearts at work,I feel.Just like the the person who parks the car in the wrong place.If he is sitimulated by his own profit,for example,in order to decrease his pace and lazy himself,but this time he just goes to rescue a child.The value of a life is over the wrong of parking the wrong place.

More and more people admit that the a good quality is not only the competence of study but aslo the sociality ability,the capacity of doing a good statement in the public,the good professional technique and so on.So under the heavy burden of the employment,the employor asks more and more requirements for the employee.To seek a decent job,the employee are forced to accept all kinds of skill training and attain all kinds of diplomas or certificates.They think they are qualitified by these .They have owned the comprehensive qualities.
With the hope of getting a good job,they are thumed again.When they enter the company,they are kicked because of having picked a nail or a broom in the floor.It is demonstrated that nowadays the escape of the quality is the morality.All the people become self-centralled and pay little attention to the other things around them.
So how make the people do it naturally and instincly.That is to make them civilized and educated.But I aslo become confused.Because I saw so many uncivilized actions done by civilized persons.Does it mean that a educated person indeed exist the quality and certainly can emerge the quality?

Education and career choice has little to do with good and evil.

Good and evil,

Right and wrong,

Are standards imposed on us by society which we should all follow. When someone fails to understand the difference between right and wrong the person is defined as insane .

To answer your question yes there is evil and there is wrong. And Its not at how you look at it.

And to your Hitler analogy, I say that Hitler simply used the jews as a vehicle to rise to power and as a means to get Germans on his side. It wasnt that he thought it was the right thing to do but the right action to assert his power.

I don't like the ideas like good or evil. Sure, it's difficult to avoid them completely, and sometimes you might be convinced that someone or something is evil, but these ideas are so abstract and so easily manipulated that it makes me sick. Take for example Hitler. I always feel that simply but putting the label on him that he was "evil", he's alienated from the the rest of the humanity. "Look at the evil deeds he has done. Look at the hatred those people felt. That's not normal. That's sick. That's evil." I think that the risk of similar thing happening again increases if we insist on seeing them as acts of some abstract evil that we our selves are immune against.

Another aspect is the subjectivity of the judgment. The scientist actively working with eugenics in the beginning of the XX century really believed they were doing something good for the human race. Not many people would agree today. Examples are many.