Thread: Evil.... your opinion of it.

I believe in "evil" (or Satanic in orgin; Satanic being Opposed to God).
Everyone is capable of good and bad. I think some things are Satanic in origin, like "ghosts", possessions (not belongings lol), and some actions...

I don't believe in "evil" as most people believe in it.

to me, evil does not exist under its own power - there is none in nature.

evil can't be found on a fundamental level in people.

so what you might call 'evil' i think is an obscuration - the destruction of nature would be the most important example. other evils stem from that.

I'm not sure exactly how to express what I feel about the idea of "evil." I'm still thinking about it.

I don't really believe it exists, at least in the sense that most people believe it does. I don't believe anyone can do any evil. I believe everything everyone does is based entirely on circumstance.

no one has any choice; you can't choose to do something or not do it. whatever you do depends on your genetic makeup and your environment growing up.

everything has been set in motion and there's nothing anyone can do to stop or change it. so how can we truly consider any act or thing "evil"?

That which creates excessive harm for the sole purpose of self amusement, no other justification needed.

that couldn't be a genetic defect?

Evil doesn't exist. It's just a dualistic opposite of Good, both are equally meaningless as they rely on each other to define themselves.

It's all completely relative. What may be considered "good" in one culture (human sacrifice, for example) would be considered "evil" in another. It's all relative...so no, "evil" is not a physical or tangible force in this world. Without memes, the concept of "evil" would not exist.

Originally Posted by grasshoppa

Evil doesn't exist. It's just a dualistic opposite of Good, both are equally meaningless as they rely on each other to define themselves.

nice.

No, not nice. If the definitions are truly empty then how come we can unambiguously assign 'good' to the act of say, donating a kidney to a child who would die without it, and assign 'bad' to the act of shooting a child in the head?

Of course good and bad are human concepts, but that doesn't mean they aren't real. We should be guided in our physical actions by them; we are ourselves human.

Originally Posted by Xei

No, not nice. If the definitions are truly empty then how come we can unambiguously assign 'good' to the act of say, donating a kidney to a child who would die without it, and assign 'bad' to the act of shooting a child in the head?

Of course good and bad are human concepts, but that doesn't mean they aren't real. We should be guided in our physical actions by them; we are ourselves human.

Perhaps your kidney is your inner source of power, and losing it, even to save another person's life, means unspeakable shame.
Also, the Nazi's didn't seem to have an issue with shooting children in the head...it doesn't mean it was "good", but to them, it was.

Evil is something preventable done to another's detriment. That's simutaneously as simple and as far as it goes.

Originally Posted by mini0991

Evil is something preventable done to another's detriment. That's simutaneously as simple and as far as it goes.

No. The act must be done purely for the sake of enjoyment for the one causing the harm.

If you are threatening me and I cause harm in order to prevent you from attacking, is that evil?
If I gouge out your eyes because I think it's funny, or because it creates some self-fulfillment... See the difference?

Originally Posted by rottingteath"

that couldn't be a genetic defect?

Environmental, I'd say. I suppose one can have a genetic predisposition
towards extreme violence, though, but they still have the ability to choose between acting on it.

Originally Posted by grasshoppa

Evil doesn't exist. It's just a dualistic opposite of Good, both are equally meaningless as they rely on each other to define themselves.

Wow, you described it better than I ever could have, and all in two sentences no less! Well done.

to me, evil does not exist under its own power - there is none in nature.

Agreed

evil can't be found on a fundamental level in people.

Depends on what evil is... everyone is capable of evil, and I'm sure everyone has partaken in evil.

so what you might call 'evil' i think is an obscuration - the destruction of nature would be the most important example. other evils stem from that.

Yep

I believe everything everyone does is based entirely on circumstance.

Agreed

That which creates excessive harm for the sole purpose of self amusement, no other justification needed.

Though I respect that this is your opinion, I completely disagree. Firstly, you've worded it to make it sound like if someone causes moderate harm for self amusement that it's ok... which I don't think is what you meant. Also... self amusement it plenty justification if you ask me. If hurting people gets you off then do it... or else you're living an unhappy life.

Evil doesn't exist. It's just a dualistic opposite of Good, both are equally meaningless as they rely on each other to define themselves.

I agree... also they're both man made and the lines blur too easily between the two.

Of course good and bad are human concepts, but that doesn't mean they aren't real.

Yes it does.

We should be guided in our physical actions by them; we are ourselves human.

Oh no... not one of you. "We're higher intelligence and therefore we have a responsibility.... no... an obligation to be the arbiter of what's right and what's wrong and we need to protect this earth and it's inhabitants blah blah blah. If I wanna go otu and kill, maim, rape etc then why shouldn't I? "Cause I'm human? That's the deciding factor? I will not let what I am decide what I do or don't do... simply being human doesn't cut it for me.... it takes more than being human.

Evil is something preventable done to another's detriment.

Disagree.... A LOT!

No. The act must be done purely for the sake of enjoyment for the one causing the harm.

Already adressed this in the previous quote.

If you are threatening me and I cause harm in order to prevent you from attacking, is that evil?
If I gouge out your eyes because I think it's funny, or because it creates some self-fulfillment... See the difference?

No difference from what I can see.... people have been so twisted and their minds so diluted by society(ultimately religion)....

Originally Posted by mindwanderer

Though I respect that this is your opinion, I completely disagree. Firstly, you've worded it to make it sound like if someone causes moderate harm for self amusement that it's ok... which I don't think is what you meant. Also... self amusement it plenty justification if you ask me. If hurting people gets you off then do it... or else you're living an unhappy life.

Interesting. You believe that an individual should choose to reap their
happiness at the expense of others if it makes them happy? And what about
the others? That leads me to think that you exalt the ego over all else, that
one should treat themselves well regardless of what it does to the well being of
others. Is that true?

Interesting. You believe that an individual should choose to reap their
happiness at the expense of others if it makes them happy?

Yep

And what about the others?

what about them? Hahaha

That leads me to think that you exalt the ego over all else

Hardly...

that one should treat themselves well regardless of what it does to the well being of others. Is that true?

It seems that is so.

There is no such thing as evil. A harmful act is without any exception inadvertent. If a person was liberated of any fear and completely sane, they wouldn't have the urge to do harm. That urge is actually self-defense, even in a deep subconscious level. Sadistic acts, however, are a consequence of the lack of knowledge, lack of empathy, probably due to bad parenting or experienced traumas. Again, inadvertent.

In my opinion, no one of sound mind is capable of committing evil, only unfortunate circumstances brought on by other unfortunate circumstances.

I believe in the evil that is a direct result of human evolution and our desire to survive as a species. Thus the killing of innocents is evil, because if this was accepted it would severally damage our chances of survival. What is a great concern for me is the way our culture has manipulated this idea of good and bad to control the populace. Smoking weed is bad, stealing is generically bad, when in many cases that's simply not the case. I accept an evolutionary view of evil and understand the necessity to instil norms and values into the population, I just find it worrying that a number of these norms and values serve no purpose accept control and assimilation.

Originally Posted by Luanne

There is no such thing as evil. A harmful act is without any exception inadvertent. If a person was liberated of any fear and completely sane, they wouldn't have the urge to do harm. That urge is actually self-defense, even in a deep subconscious level. Sadistic acts, however, are a consequence of the lack of knowledge, lack of empathy, probably due to bad parenting or experienced traumas. Again, inadvertent.

I would have to disagree here. You have to remember that all our notions of life and its objectivity are wrong. There is no good, no bad, there is simply life. In the time line of the universe the lifespan of humanity is a dot. When you say, "the urge to do harm" you have to remember that most animals have that urge. It's called a prey drive, something that can be seen more strongly in some people than others, mainly dominant males. Foxes kill chickens and sometimes don't eat them, they just go on a killing frenzy and kill everything. Is that evil? Not really, it just is. Our ideas regarding evil have been created in order to further preserve ourselves and ensure our survival. Because in reality that's all life is, a survival kit. And on a side note, that notion of completely sane is once again misplaced objectivity. There is no sane, there is no insane, simply ideas that we have crated, boxes that we have put people in, and if you don't conform to the box of normality, you're weird or strange, or just abnormal.

Originally Posted by imran_p

I would have to disagree here. You have to remember that all our notions of life and its objectivity are wrong. There is no good, no bad, there is simply life. In the time line of the universe the lifespan of humanity is a dot. When you say, "the urge to do harm" you have to remember that most animals have that urge. It's called a prey drive, something that can be seen more strongly in some people than others, mainly dominant males. Foxes kill chickens and sometimes don't eat them, they just go on a killing frenzy and kill everything. Is that evil? Not really, it just is. Our ideas regarding evil have been created in order to further preserve ourselves and ensure our survival. Because in reality that's all life is, a survival kit. And on a side note, that notion of completely sane is once again misplaced objectivity. There is no sane, there is no insane, simply ideas that we have crated, boxes that we have put people in, and if you don't conform to the box of normality, you're weird or strange, or just abnormal.

I honestly don't see what exactly do you disagree on? Like I said, the urge to do harm is not evil, there is no evil. It is psychological self-defense. You are mentioning animals, I'm pretty sure that is not a good example, but again - nothing evil there, simply inadvertent of doing harm to other being.

And the sane/insane argument, I can see your point. I was talking about any mental disease that involves paranoia or lack of empathy. Perhaps it is unnecessary, cause those two things I mentioned anyway to be the cause of doing harm.

Originally Posted by Invader

No. The act must be done purely for the sake of enjoyment for the one causing the harm.

If you are threatening me and I cause harm in order to prevent you from attacking, is that evil?
If I gouge out your eyes because I think it's funny, or because it creates some self-fulfillment... See the difference?



Environmental, I'd say. I suppose one can have a genetic predisposition
towards extreme violence, though, but they still have the ability to choose between acting on it.

I don't believe this (adding to mini0991). I think it's when you, in some sense knowingly, harm another in order to benefit yourself somehow (when you could've prevented this). This benefit is not necessarily caused by the enjoyment of harming the other itself. For example, maybe you don't enjoy harming someone, but you choose to harm that person anyway because it's necessary to get something that fulfills some of your selfish desires. For example robbing someone because you're poor and you really need the money, despite knowing that you may harm (by scaring for instance or by physical and emotional violence) the person you're robbing.

Though I agree with you that if someone causes you harm and you can do him or her harm in order to prevent yourself from getting harmed; it's not necessarily evil. I think that as long as you don't exceed what is necessary to harm the other person, you're not doing evil.

Originally Posted by Luanne

I honestly don't see what exactly do you disagree on? Like I said, the urge to do harm is not evil, there is no evil. It is psychological self-defense. You are mentioning animals, I'm pretty sure that is not a good example, but again - nothing evil there, simply inadvertent of doing harm to other being.

And the sane/insane argument, I can see your point. I was talking about any mental disease that involves paranoia or lack of empathy. Perhaps it is unnecessary, cause those two things I mentioned anyway to be the cause of doing harm.

My main source of disagreement was that the desire to do harm is some sort of malfunction if you will. That if a person was liberated from fear and was sane as you out it, wouldn't desire to do harm and that the act of doing harm is born from psychological self defence. This simply isn't true. A lot of people are born with a deep desire to kill and harm. This stems from a number of developments in our evolutionary history in which among other things passionate hatred of foreigners and a strong prey drive would have been a selective advantage.