Do you believe in evil?

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

Th older I become and the more I have witnessed, I have come to realize that evil does reside much more fully in the hearts of some human beings. And one of my cats!

Then next non evil cat I meet will be the first.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Do you think that some things/people are inherently evil, that all of us may have the seed of evil within us?

Progressives believe they are better suited to make choices for humans. Does that mean they are evil?

Yeah

By your own argument, you just condemned the right.

 

[Bush92]

Yes. When men give up essential liberty to the government in order to create a "better society", that is evil. That is how evil takes over in regimes like Soviet Union, Nazi Germany, Cambodia , North Korea. And if we don't stand up now, it will happen here. Rule by a central regime telling all the people what they are to think and do. Liberalism and socialism are first steps in this direction.

 

[Ibentoken]

Obama is obviously creating terrorists. That's evil.

Yeah, he trains them at Army bases in Georgia...

The democrats said Bush was creating terrorists. You ignorant trash have a short attention span. Some of us are awake.

 

[JakeStarkey]

And we see the result of long time anger on a personality, whether Iben or Vigilante or Bush92 or R. D. or Political Chic or TruthMatters, and so forth.

No matter how understandable it is, anger is still a position, albeit one that works slowly, eating away at the judgment, or eventually at life.

You folks should slow down, take a breather, consider your options and opportunities.

Staying mad will doing nothing but injure your health and your sanity.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

I don't believe in evil, but I do believe in stupid.

 

[Physics Hunter]

There were some great posts in this thread, but let us speak logically...

If we are to have true good, there must be an opposite, let us call it evil for the sake of discussion. Preschoolers might call it "bad."

That leads to thinking about the contrapositive: If there is no evil, there can be no good.

If one will not acknowledge evil, they will eventually fall to either anarchy or an attempt to enforce an artificial definition of acceptability.

Some things are just cultural perspective. A lot of us today would have considered the Mayans "evil" because they performed human sacrifices, but they didn't think of it as evil.

Logically there either is, or is not good. If one denies evil, how can anyone condemn anything that anyone does?

I do not know how the Mayans selected their sacrifices.
People purposely killing people for no fault is evil.

I have already stated where this ends; which do you favor, Anarchy or Control?

I consider it more of a philosophical question. Do I think a person can be truly all "evil." I'm not so sure about that. Of course, when I think of someone like Jeffrey Dahmer or some other serial killers, it makes me wonder if there are a very few RARE exceptions, but for the most part, I think that everybody, even a murderer, might have something good about him/her.

Dodge makes good trucks.

I am new, let me translate...

To expand the discussion from philosophical and logical discussion of evil to a particular example (Mayan) and then to pivot to a more universal description of a person being good/evil is dodging the question.

Blues in A, keep up with the changes.

Whatever. I was looking to have an interesting conversation for once without someone trying to "one up" me. Ridiculous.

Knowingly or not you were mutating the point. I don't know you enough to want to "one-up" you. This may be simply exploration for you or dodging the issue intentionally, how would I know?

In three posts we went from logical abstraction to culture relativity to the canard of a person being "truly all evil."

I will leave it at, I wanted to stay on point.

 

[ChrisL]

There were some great posts in this thread, but let us speak logically...

If we are to have true good, there must be an opposite, let us call it evil for the sake of discussion. Preschoolers might call it "bad."

That leads to thinking about the contrapositive: If there is no evil, there can be no good.

If one will not acknowledge evil, they will eventually fall to either anarchy or an attempt to enforce an artificial definition of acceptability.

Some things are just cultural perspective. A lot of us today would have considered the Mayans "evil" because they performed human sacrifices, but they didn't think of it as evil.

Logically there either is, or is not good. If one denies evil, how can anyone condemn anything that anyone does?

I do not know how the Mayans selected their sacrifices.
People purposely killing people for no fault is evil.

I have already stated where this ends; which do you favor, Anarchy or Control?

I consider it more of a philosophical question. Do I think a person can be truly all "evil." I'm not so sure about that. Of course, when I think of someone like Jeffrey Dahmer or some other serial killers, it makes me wonder if there are a very few RARE exceptions, but for the most part, I think that everybody, even a murderer, might have something good about him/her.

Dodge makes good trucks.

I am new, let me translate...

To expand the discussion from philosophical and logical discussion of evil to a particular example (Mayan) and then to pivot to a more universal description of a person being good/evil is dodging the question.

Blues in A, keep up with the changes.

Whatever. I was looking to have an interesting conversation for once without someone trying to "one up" me. Ridiculous.

Knowingly or not you were mutating the point. I don't know you enough to want to "one-up" you. This may be simply exploration for you or dodging the issue intentionally, how would I know?

In three posts we went from logical abstraction to culture relativity to the canard of a person being "truly all evil."

I will leave it at, I wanted to stay on point.

I have no idea what you are talking about. I was just giving my opinion on the subject matter, and I don't think that in order for there to be good there has to be evil, and I used a couple of examples in my explanations. What's your deal?

Why don't you explain that a bit more about your theory that in order for there to be good, there must be evil please?

 

[Physics Hunter]

There were some great posts in this thread, but let us speak logically...

If we are to have true good, there must be an opposite, let us call it evil for the sake of discussion. Preschoolers might call it "bad."

That leads to thinking about the contrapositive: If there is no evil, there can be no good.

If one will not acknowledge evil, they will eventually fall to either anarchy or an attempt to enforce an artificial definition of acceptability.

Some things are just cultural perspective. A lot of us today would have considered the Mayans "evil" because they performed human sacrifices, but they didn't think of it as evil.

Logically there either is, or is not good. If one denies evil, how can anyone condemn anything that anyone does?

I do not know how the Mayans selected their sacrifices.
People purposely killing people for no fault is evil.

I have already stated where this ends; which do you favor, Anarchy or Control?

I consider it more of a philosophical question. Do I think a person can be truly all "evil." I'm not so sure about that. Of course, when I think of someone like Jeffrey Dahmer or some other serial killers, it makes me wonder if there are a very few RARE exceptions, but for the most part, I think that everybody, even a murderer, might have something good about him/her.

Dodge makes good trucks.

I am new, let me translate...

To expand the discussion from philosophical and logical discussion of evil to a particular example (Mayan) and then to pivot to a more universal description of a person being good/evil is dodging the question.

Blues in A, keep up with the changes.

Whatever. I was looking to have an interesting conversation for once without someone trying to "one up" me. Ridiculous.

Knowingly or not you were mutating the point. I don't know you enough to want to "one-up" you. This may be simply exploration for you or dodging the issue intentionally, how would I know?

In three posts we went from logical abstraction to culture relativity to the canard of a person being "truly all evil."

I will leave it at, I wanted to stay on point.

I have no idea what you are talking about. I was just giving my opinion on the subject matter, and I don't think that in order for there to be good there has to be evil, and I used a couple of examples in my explanations. What's your deal?

Why don't you explain that a bit more about your theory that in order for there to be good, there must be evil please?

Ahhh, thank you.

I will presume that you believe in good, if not please do tell me.
Good cannot be defined without either it's absence or opposite.

 

[ChrisL]

There were some great posts in this thread, but let us speak logically...

If we are to have true good, there must be an opposite, let us call it evil for the sake of discussion. Preschoolers might call it "bad."

That leads to thinking about the contrapositive: If there is no evil, there can be no good.

If one will not acknowledge evil, they will eventually fall to either anarchy or an attempt to enforce an artificial definition of acceptability.

Some things are just cultural perspective. A lot of us today would have considered the Mayans "evil" because they performed human sacrifices, but they didn't think of it as evil.

Logically there either is, or is not good. If one denies evil, how can anyone condemn anything that anyone does?

I do not know how the Mayans selected their sacrifices.
People purposely killing people for no fault is evil.

I have already stated where this ends; which do you favor, Anarchy or Control?

I consider it more of a philosophical question. Do I think a person can be truly all "evil." I'm not so sure about that. Of course, when I think of someone like Jeffrey Dahmer or some other serial killers, it makes me wonder if there are a very few RARE exceptions, but for the most part, I think that everybody, even a murderer, might have something good about him/her.

Dodge makes good trucks.

I am new, let me translate...

To expand the discussion from philosophical and logical discussion of evil to a particular example (Mayan) and then to pivot to a more universal description of a person being good/evil is dodging the question.

Blues in A, keep up with the changes.

Whatever. I was looking to have an interesting conversation for once without someone trying to "one up" me. Ridiculous.

Knowingly or not you were mutating the point. I don't know you enough to want to "one-up" you. This may be simply exploration for you or dodging the issue intentionally, how would I know?

In three posts we went from logical abstraction to culture relativity to the canard of a person being "truly all evil."

I will leave it at, I wanted to stay on point.

I have no idea what you are talking about. I was just giving my opinion on the subject matter, and I don't think that in order for there to be good there has to be evil, and I used a couple of examples in my explanations. What's your deal?

Why don't you explain that a bit more about your theory that in order for there to be good, there must be evil please?

Ahhh, thank you.

I will presume that you believe in good, if not please do tell me.
Good cannot be defined without either it's absence or opposite.

This is not an explanation. WHY can good not be defined without evil? Things can exist without an opposite. This isn't bizarro world.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Yes, evil exists as does good.

Most humans, I think, have varying measures of each quality.

 

[ChrisL]

Ahhh, thank you.

I will presume that you believe in good, if not please do tell me.
Good cannot be defined without either it's absence or opposite.

So . . . what you are saying is that you believe there are people who are completely evil, that have absolutely NO redeeming qualities whatsoever, never have and never will, and you believe that there are people who are nothing but sweetness and light and goodness who have absolutely no "evil" (which is why I hesitate to use the word "evil") in them at all, have never had a bad thought, never have and never will?

 

[Physics Hunter]

There were some great posts in this thread, but let us speak logically...

If we are to have true good, there must be an opposite, let us call it evil for the sake of discussion. Preschoolers might call it "bad."

That leads to thinking about the contrapositive: If there is no evil, there can be no good.

If one will not acknowledge evil, they will eventually fall to either anarchy or an attempt to enforce an artificial definition of acceptability.

Some things are just cultural perspective. A lot of us today would have considered the Mayans "evil" because they performed human sacrifices, but they didn't think of it as evil.

Logically there either is, or is not good. If one denies evil, how can anyone condemn anything that anyone does?

I do not know how the Mayans selected their sacrifices.
People purposely killing people for no fault is evil.

I have already stated where this ends; which do you favor, Anarchy or Control?

I consider it more of a philosophical question. Do I think a person can be truly all "evil." I'm not so sure about that. Of course, when I think of someone like Jeffrey Dahmer or some other serial killers, it makes me wonder if there are a very few RARE exceptions, but for the most part, I think that everybody, even a murderer, might have something good about him/her.

Dodge makes good trucks.

I am new, let me translate...

To expand the discussion from philosophical and logical discussion of evil to a particular example (Mayan) and then to pivot to a more universal description of a person being good/evil is dodging the question.

Blues in A, keep up with the changes.

Whatever. I was looking to have an interesting conversation for once without someone trying to "one up" me. Ridiculous.

Knowingly or not you were mutating the point. I don't know you enough to want to "one-up" you. This may be simply exploration for you or dodging the issue intentionally, how would I know?

In three posts we went from logical abstraction to culture relativity to the canard of a person being "truly all evil."

I will leave it at, I wanted to stay on point.

I have no idea what you are talking about. I was just giving my opinion on the subject matter, and I don't think that in order for there to be good there has to be evil, and I used a couple of examples in my explanations. What's your deal?

Why don't you explain that a bit more about your theory that in order for there to be good, there must be evil please?

Ahhh, thank you.

I will presume that you believe in good, if not please do tell me.
Good cannot be defined without either it's absence or opposite.

This is not an explanation. WHY can good not be defined without evil? Things can exist without an opposite. This isn't bizarro world.

Try it...

 

[JakeStarkey]

Moral qualities cannot exist without their opposite.

 

[Physics Hunter]

Ahhh, thank you.

I will presume that you believe in good, if not please do tell me.
Good cannot be defined without either it's absence or opposite.

So . . . what you are saying is that you believe there are people who are completely evil, that have absolutely NO redeeming qualities whatsoever, never have and never will, and you believe that there are people who are nothing but sweetness and light and goodness who have absolutely no "evil" (which is why I hesitate to use the word "evil") in them at all, have never had a bad thought, never have and never will?

Okayyyyyy.

Yep, we are done.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Okayyyyyy.

Yep, we are done.

Yup, correct choice.

 

[ChrisL]

Ahhh, thank you.

I will presume that you believe in good, if not please do tell me.
Good cannot be defined without either it's absence or opposite.

So . . . what you are saying is that you believe there are people who are completely evil, that have absolutely NO redeeming qualities whatsoever, never have and never will, and you believe that there are people who are nothing but sweetness and light and goodness who have absolutely no "evil" (which is why I hesitate to use the word "evil") in them at all, have never had a bad thought, never have and never will?

Okayyyyyy.

Yep, we are done.

Okay, don't let the door hit your butt on the way out!

 

[ChrisL]

Yes, evil exists as does good.

Most humans, I think, have varying measures of each quality.

I believe that. I believe that in desperate times, everyone is capable of doing "evil" acts, and everyone is capable of doing good acts too. It's really a choice I would think.

 

[ChrisL]

Moral qualities cannot exist without their opposite.

"Morals" are a societal construct though. It all depends upon your society and your culture on what is moral and what is not. Some people think that marrying your cousin is "evil." In some societies in the past, it was normal and not evil or immoral. It all depends on what you would define as "evil," and I think that "evil" means you are totally bad, like Satan. I don't think any humans are "evil," although sometimes I might question that when I hear of certain crimes, etc.

 

[ChrisL]

I think, in the case of serial killers, rather than "evil" what we are dealing with is profound mental illness. They are sick, not evil.

^^^^ I think that most people who are doing "evil" deeds are one of the following: Desperate, ignorant (because of cultural reasons or whatever), mentally disturbed, or suffering from some kind of dysfunction but are not evil. Evil has like superstitious connotations, IMO.