Thread: "Evil"

Subjective, man made term for people doing things they don't want them doing.

Q1: Is a person who breaks the law evil? What about someone who hurts others for their own benefit? For other people's benefit? Are murderers / thieves / others evil? Do reasons excuse someone from being evil? What if someone did something evil, but it was for the world's benefit? What if they're just misunderstood?

It depends murdering someone would be evil, stealing, not so much. You most likely wouldn't be called evil if you killed Hitler

Q2: Is there an "evil gene"? Could there be something that makes people more agressive / angry / antisocial / "too smart" / whatever ?

It's possible

Q3: Could it be the way they were raised? Their family? An influential friend? A huge loss? Death? Revenge? Insanity? Too smart for their own good? (See Q2 for answers as well)

It's possible
[/quote]

1. Depends on what is evil to your own morals.
2. No.
3. Again, this depends on what you view as evil. Hitler is generally viewed as 'evil', but to many nazi's, he was a hero.

Yes. You become 'evil' to how you were raised. There is no 'evil gene'. And again, evil is only evil to your own perceptions.

Just as many Americans view the Islamo-facists as evil.. they view American soldiers as evil.

Evil is a subjective term.

Evil defines without reason.

If you saw someone shoot someone, but did not know the intentions or reasoning, society tells you that the killer is wrong.

But at the same rate you do not know the scope of the situation, making "Good" and "Evil" the most subjective ways to look at things.

There is no 'evil gene'.

[citation needed]

Originally Posted by Pyrofan1

[citation needed]

Are you saying that we can just remove the 'evil gene', and everyone will be perfect people?

"Evil" is subjective, just like "beautiful", "tasty", etc.

Watch:

The Questions:
1. What makes matter 'tasty'? (As in, What is tasty behavior?)
2. Is matter created 'tasty'?
3. How does matter become 'tasty'?

Did anyone read my posts?

Are you saying that we can just remove the 'evil gene', and everyone will be perfect people?

No, i'm saying that it's unwise to assume that genetics has no effects on behavior until we prove or disprove this.

I don't "dig" that. We know genes affect behavior - they 'affect' everything, because they are the blueprint of the being.

However, we can safely say that there is no 'evil gene' because 'evil' is a subjective word. There is no "cool person" gene, right?

For me the defintion of evil is doing something for your own interest, while harming others.

Originally Posted by Seismosaur

Evil defines without reason.

If you saw someone shoot someone, but did not know the intentions or reasoning, society tells you that the killer is wrong.

But at the same rate you do not know the scope of the situation, making "Good" and "Evil" the most subjective ways to look at things.

Posted by Seismosaur
Did anyone read my posts?

needed to be quoted Seismosaur? *laughs* well I agree with you if someone never taught you killing was wrong than killing wouldnt be a big deal for you.
your only evil to the person who thinks your evil. 50% of the people can say your evil and the other 50% say your fine than which one are you? its to the person own perspective wether your evil or not.

it stands to show that human nature is, in a nutshell, to maximize rewards while minimizing costs. If killing means coming out on top, it's going to be a natural thing to do. Evil is a term entirely derived by the morals set by the culture you are raised in. These are also naturally occurring things, so developing the concept of evil was something that was bound to happen. And going on what Dreamworld said, how can we define what harming others is? One person's opinion on harm might vary greatly to the next person.

Originally Posted by Seismosaur

If you saw someone shoot someone, but did not know the intentions or reasoning, society tells you that the killer is wrong.

you make a good point. It shows that absolute definitions do not hold up to every scenario. A Very old example....A man steals bread (considered wrong) he uses the bread to feed his starving children (generous act). I don’t think you can clearly define good or evil when there are all these shades of grey that come with every decision.

the interesting thing about human behavior is that 95% of us understand these "grey areas". these kind of "un-written" exceptions

Originally Posted by Grod

Evil is a subjective term.

Hole in one.

I was thinking about this because I've been 'writing' a story (the quotes mean that the story's all in my head and not on paper). The basic plot is about a genetics scientist who gets a 'crazy' idea to 'solve the world's corruptness' and goes to create superhumans in the middle of a gigantic war. He kidnaps children / adults and changes their genes around, and sends some of them out to kill politicians / important people and destroy entire cities. Of course people are pretty pissed and label him evil, but he's really doing it for the betterment of the world. It's not as if he'll rule the world at all.

I think that in the end, if whatever 'bad' things you are doing is for a 'good' cause, or for others (both of which need to be defined), then it's not evil. If you're doing it for your own sake (robbing to pay for drugs, killing in revenge for something they did for you) then it's "evil".

Of course, depending on the society and culture, the definition changes.

But I do enjoy being "evil". >:3

The whole concept of evil demonstrates mankind's tendency to make the fundamental attribution error. Rather than explaining a person's actions based on the situation that led to those actions, we tend to think of someone's behavior being based on their personality. We label people 'evil' whenever their actions go against some certain social norm or value regardless of the reasons for their action.

Originally Posted by thegnome54

I don't "dig" that. We know genes affect behavior - they 'affect' everything, because they are the blueprint of the being.

However, we can safely say that there is no 'evil gene' because 'evil' is a subjective word. There is no "cool person" gene, right?

DNA is a written guide for the body on how to construct and perform. it does not control you. it may create TENDENCIES in our character, but it does not control our actions. where in my DNA does it say that at this moment, 10:11 am I am going to be typing on an online forum? It doesn't. Recognize that free will is real.

Evil is something that blinds you. keeps you ignorant. keeps you in the dark. holds you back, and stops mankind in general from progressing forward. By calling something 'evil' we are saying that we are absolutely against it because we feel it is against our being.

I don't think an individual is 'evil'. They may commit so many 'evil' acts that they certainly seem to embody it.

things that I consider 'evil'
- the federal reserve
- racism
- sexism
- religions that purposely lie to their followers
- dualism

evil however is a very strong word, and deals in absolutes *SITH*. just saying the word evil provokes dualism, a war of 'good' vs 'evil'. just thinking in terms of evil CREATES evil. it is an end to itself.

it is better to say that things are 'wrong'. that things are 'not right'. when we switch to these words we stop dealing in absolutes, and can see how something so wrong could have been started by something that felt right at the time. for example, a religion that originally wanted to spread peace and love, now spreads hate and fear.

when we deal in absolutes, that something is evil, then we are playing into the game of evil. we blind ourselves from seeing why something is the way it is - for example - why a person committed murder. instead we blindly call them evil, the spawn of satan and do away with them. rather than making an effort to understand what could have compelled a human being to commit this act. and by understanding we can maybe prevent it for a future generation.

evil is, that which is a means and an end to itself.

Originally Posted by juroara

DNA is a written guide for the body on how to construct and perform. it does not control you. it may create TENDENCIES in our character, but it does not control our actions. where in my DNA does it say that at this moment, 10:11 am I am going to be typing on an online forum? It doesn't. Recognize that free will is real..

Where did Gnome say that DNA controls everything?


He said it affects everything, and he is entirely correct in that. But he never said it eliminates free will or some such. You're clearly reading him wrong.


Affects does not mean controls.

Originally Posted by Omega Weapon

Where did Gnome say that DNA controls everything?


He said it affects everything, and he is entirely correct in that. But he never said it eliminates free will or some such. You're clearly reading him wrong.


Affects does not mean controls.

because I don't see anything in DNA that says it must and always affect our free will.

DNA is not the blue print of our free will. it is the blue print of tendencies. our free will can act against tendencies.

DNA does not affect everything. this is a lie brought on by materialistic scientists who would have you think you are nothing more than a robot with no free will at all. It is important to recognize that DNA is a blueprint of tendencies.

I understand did he did not say 'control'. But 'control' is the idea trying to be presented by materialistic science that says DNA affects everything.

It. Doesn't.

It merely programs tendencies. We can think, act, and even willing choose to be different than the tendencies we are born with.

You're not making any sense. You can't refute determinism by saying that actions aren't controlled entirely by DNA, because anybody with basic knowledge in biology knows that DNA doesn't control actions to a huge degree anyway.

Try to remember that thing we use to think and perform actions. You know, that big, pink thing which should be located somewhere inside your skull?

Yeah, that one. Your brain develops through the influence of what it experiences. Every sight, sound, touch and smell is wiring new physical connections between neurons; DNA has nothing to do with this. DNA is not a blueprint for the brain and hence it is not a blueprint for the mind.

Originally Posted by juroara

because I don't see anything in DNA that says it must and always affect our free will.

DNA is not the blue print of our free will. it is the blue print of tendencies. our free will can act against tendencies.

DNA does not affect everything. this is a lie brought on by materialistic scientists who would have you think you are nothing more than a robot with no free will at all. It is important to recognize that DNA is a blueprint of tendencies.

I understand did he did not say 'control'. But 'control' is the idea trying to be presented by materialistic science that says DNA affects everything.

It. Doesn't.

It merely programs tendencies. We can think, act, and even willing choose to be different than the tendencies we are born with.

Aha. The malicious scientists trying to shield our eyes from the spiritual truth. K.

Originally Posted by juroara

because I don't see anything in DNA that says it must and always affect our free will.

That's probably because you're not looking at it properly.

Originally Posted by juroara

DNA is not the blue print of our free will. it is the blue print of tendencies. our free will can act against tendencies.

First of all, I personally do not believe in free will. But I don't really want to get into that here. The point is, DNA determines the initial configuration of the human brain, and dictates the way in which the brain processes and changes in response to future input. Obviously, the input ("nurture") affects the brain. However, the WAY that it affects it is decided by DNA. The "free will" you are talking about would have to be some magical, non-physical force in order to be non-random and non-determined by physical law.

Originally Posted by juroara

DNA does not affect everything. this is a lie brought on by materialistic scientists who would have you think you are nothing more than a robot with no free will at all. It is important to recognize that DNA is a blueprint of tendencies.

You don't know what you're talking about. DNA is in every cell of the human body, it does "affect" everything. It's not even a blueprint of tendencies, it's actually very specific instructions on basic cell behavior and protein production. These "tendencies" you speak of are emergent properties on a higher order than things simply governed directly by DNA.

Originally Posted by juroara

It merely programs tendencies. We can think, act, and even willing choose to be different than the tendencies we are born with.

Saying something as if it is true does not make it true. Stop making things up just because you want them to be true, please.

1. I don't see a person breaking a law evil, but manipulating it or manipulate something for their own gain.
2. No.
3. I believe in depends on what circumstance.