is there an eruption of evil in the US ?? is evil real ??

[Votto]

the reason I put this thread in the clean debate zone is to debate the subject of Evil ..is Evil a force that exists ?? is it mental or spiritual or idiological ?? are we going through a wave of evil in the US with all of the mass shootings and terror attacks ect..???please refrain from blaming the left or the right or a certain group of people !!! I want to debate the force of evil itself !! NOT BLAME THE RACE,POLTICAL IDIOLOGY ,OR RELIGION OF THE PERPERTRATORS OF EVIL ACTS !! IS EVIL A FORCE THAT ACTUALY EXIST ??

I think people who are in the reilgious right take the approach that combating evil should start at the top, or those in power politically. However, when you think about the Founding Fathers, what type of society did they spring from? They came from a people who arrived in this country seeking religious freedom. Today we have leaders who have sprung from the society in which they live, a society that gravitates towards secularism and skeeves anything Christian.

Put another way, if we have the perfect form of governemnt with leaders of noble character who are put in charge of an amoral society and hopelessly corrupt, more than likely the only way to govern those people would be to build a wall around them in prison like fashion. In other words, the more corrupt a society becomes the more we need a police state in order to maintain some level of civility.

Considering these two things, I think the approach should be bottom up, to try and promote a moral soceity from which our future leaders will spring. The question is, how do we promote a moral society, especially one that is "God-phobic"? I personally don't see a way to seperate the two. If God is the source of our morality, then how do we dissect him from it? After all, we were all born with an innate sense of right and wrong based upon the premise of the Golden Rule, which is to do unto others as you would have them do to you.

I look on ideology as more of a symptom than a cause of moral collapse. It is often hard to distinguish because the two seem to feed upon each other. That is why I've always said that you cannot focus on fiscal morality in the US while ignoring abortion doctors who keep jars of babies feet on their desk as a memento. It is no coincidence that those who promote amoral conduct socially also promote fiscal insanity politically.

This is why the notion that promoting democracy around the world seems to many to be virtuous is misplaced. Why is it virtuous? Is democracy a virtue in and of itself? Democracy works if you have a civil society, but if you are in a prison, democracy does not work that well. Just look at the people of Palestine who send their children out into the streets to blow themselves up. They elect terrorists to represent them.

 

[Votto]

"Good" and "evil" are moral aspects assigned to actions taken by people and only exist in the minds of mankind. In nature there is no "good" or "evil". There are no "good bears" or "bad bears", no "good" sharks or "bad" sharks.
We, mankind, interpret things that affect us positively as "good", but they might affect another negatively and be perceived as "evil". Mankind can aspire to be more or less than it is and so we have words to descibe how we are affected by the deeds of other members of mankind.

When a child is beaten by a man it is evil but when a child is battered by a mountain lion it is trajic that the child was attacked but the lion is only being a lion. Not "good" or "evil".

You are correct. There are differences between animals and people. Humans instinctively know this, which is why they kill and eat animals but not people. Is this instinct misplaced do you think?

 

[Votto]

Really? There are cases of weasels, wolves , sharks and great apes killing and leaving the dead corpses to rot. Usually humans have some sort of reason behind killing - even if it makes no sense to some - it must to the killer.

true ,but sometimes animal fight over territory ect .... some humans will kill for the thrill like serial killers do.

That's typically because they have some of psychotic disorder, which means their brain synapses don't fire correctly, they're confused. I don't know if I'd call a biological condition evil, but it certainly has the sick person performing sick acts.

I've always wondered where the line between evil, insanity, and stupidity run, if at all. After all, there are elements of each in people we consider "evil". I think they stop being referred to as "stupid" or "crazy" when they benefit financially in some way from their evil.

 

[Votto]

What is "evil"? Before we can tell if it exists or not, we need to know what would characterize evil if it does exist.

Is evil using influence to build alliances for the purpose of invading other nations that have - as nations - done nothing to the invading nation?

Is evil deliberately enriching war industries to reduce public monies available for medical research and education?

Is evil giving bloodless entities the same constitutional rights as the natural born citizens whose blood protects bloodless entities as well as the avaricious politicians and malfeasant judges screwing natural born citizens?

When we know what evil is, maybe then we can determine whether or not it exists.

In the Biblical sense, both the Hebrew and Greek words translated as "evil" simply means something of bad effect.

That definition is good enough for this thread, isn't it? Or, do we look for a deeper meaning?

But then you get into an argument over what is "bad".

What is bad?

 

[PaulS1950]

"Bad" is when it adversely affects me or mine. Good is when it profits (not necessarily monetarily) me or mine. If somebody burns my house down it is bad but if they burn their own or someone elses house down it is neither. I they burn down the house of someone that I don't want around then it is good.

What is the effect on the society as a whole? Is it a democratic decision? Is it a question of individual rights? Is there anything that is always good in all ways? Is there anything that is always bad in all ways? It must be "good" for someone or it wouldn't happen.

 

[Circe]

But then you get into an argument over what is "bad".

What is bad?

Harmful. To me or mine. Or to somebody or something I can identify with.

 

[PaulS1950]

Is it bad to kill a steer for food? How about a deer, elk or bear for food?
Is it bad to kill a person who is threatening the lives of you or your family?

 

[itfitzme]

...
how do we promote a moral society, especially one that is "God-phobic"? *I personally don't see a way to seperate the two. *If God is the source of our morality, then how do we dissect him from it? *
...
After all, we were all born with an innate sense of right and wrong based upon the premise of the Golden Rule, which is to do unto others as you would have them do to you.
...
*you cannot focus on fiscal morality in the US while ignoring abortion doctors who keep jars of babies feet on their desk as a memento. *It is no coincidence that those who promote amoral conduct socially also promote fiscal insanity politically.

Being the clean debate zone, I bite my tounge.

Still..In keeping with a clean debate;*

God is not "the source of our morality".*

We are not born with an inate sense of right and wrong.

Confligrating fiscal responsibility with abortion is an absurd connection, neither having anything to do with each other except in terms of "I don't like them both".

There are no "ignoring abortion doctors who keep jars of babies feet on their desk as a memento. " *That is an absurd exageration. 1) It isn't plural, it is singular and 2) no one is ignoring it, Doctor Kermit Gosnell is on trial. *The only reason you and I know is because it isn't being ignored.

"It is no coincidence that those who promote amoral conduct socially also promote fiscal insanity politically." is an insane statement.

*

 

[PratchettFan]

Is it bad to kill a steer for food? How about a deer, elk or bear for food?
Is it bad to kill a person who is threatening the lives of you or your family?

I would say that from the point of view of the steer, deer, elk or bear - yes. It is bad.
From the point of view of the person doing the threatening - yes. It is bad.

 

[PaulS1950]

Is it bad to kill a steer for food? How about a deer, elk or bear for food?
Is it bad to kill a person who is threatening the lives of you or your family?

I would say that from the point of view of the steer, deer, elk or bear - yes. It is bad.
From the point of view of the person doing the threatening - yes. It is bad.

So, you don't eat meat?

Is it any better to take the life of a vegetable?
Is it better to let a pack of wolves chase down a deer and tear it topieces as it is dying?
In that case is it bad for a wolf to kill for food?
If not, why is it bad for me to kill for food?

 

[TemplarKormac]

Evil can be subject to interpretation. But as it is, people have the same general definition of right and wrong. But any of us have the propensity to do evil in our hearts.

 

[itfitzme]

Is it bad to kill a steer for food? How about a deer, elk or bear for food?
Is it bad to kill a person who is threatening the lives of you or your family?

I would say that from the point of view of the steer, deer, elk or bear - yes. It is bad.
From the point of view of the person doing the threatening - yes. It is bad.

Not to mention the zookeeper that tends to the panda bear or the kids watching

 

[PratchettFan]

Is it bad to kill a steer for food? How about a deer, elk or bear for food?
Is it bad to kill a person who is threatening the lives of you or your family?

I would say that from the point of view of the steer, deer, elk or bear - yes. It is bad.
From the point of view of the person doing the threatening - yes. It is bad.

So, you don't eat meat?

Is it any better to take the life of a vegetable?
Is it better to let a pack of wolves chase down a deer and tear it topieces as it is dying?
In that case is it bad for a wolf to kill for food?
If not, why is it bad for me to kill for food?

No, I don't eat meat. But that is irrelevant to the point. You asked if it were bad and I said it was bad from the point of view of the creature being eaten. If a wolf kills and eats you, would you see that as bad? The point here is that good and bad are based entirely upon perception - not upon the act itself.

 

[PaulS1950]

Why do people who have been attacked by sharks not think the animal was bad or evil?

If the wolf doesn't kill it dies. If we don't kill we die. If the deer doesn't kill it dies. The world is full of killers. Even coral kills its neighbors for more room to grow. Dandilions kill grass so they can grow. Birds kill bugs and other invertabrates to live.

It isn't wrong, it is how they survive. The deer may or may not understand what death is but I am sure it has fear when it is attacked. I doubt that it has anger toward the cougar or wolves that are attacking it. The only animal that has the emotions to think something is evil is man. The word was made up to control the actions of people so they could be ruled by laws and the threat of eternal damnation.
There is nothing bad or good in the universe - it all just is.
There are things that are harmful but they are not inherently good or bad, they just are.

 

[PratchettFan]

Why do people who have been attacked by sharks not think the animal was bad or evil?

If the wolf doesn't kill it dies. If we don't kill we die. If the deer doesn't kill it dies. The world is full of killers. Even coral kills its neighbors for more room to grow. Dandilions kill grass so they can grow. Birds kill bugs and other invertabrates to live.

It isn't wrong, it is how they survive. The deer may or may not understand what death is but I am sure it has fear when it is attacked. I doubt that it has anger toward the cougar or wolves that are attacking it. The only animal that has the emotions to think something is evil is man. The word was made up to control the actions of people so they could be ruled by laws and the threat of eternal damnation.
There is nothing bad or good in the universe - it all just is.
There are things that are harmful but they are not inherently good or bad, they just are.

Did you not see Jaws?

 

[Avatar4321]

Eruption? No. Gradual growth of evil. yes.

The best way to combat it is to overcome the evil inside ourselves and replace it with Good. That comes from the Atonement of Christ.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Killing for no reason is evil. Killing for necessity isn't.

 

[PaulS1950]

so, when the troop of chimps kills the newborn of a new female member it is evil?
If chimps can be evil can they also go to hell?

Do the good chimps get to go to heaven?

 

[Avatar4321]

so, when the troop of chimps kills the newborn of a new female member it is evil?
If chimps can be evil can they also go to hell?

Do the good chimps get to go to heaven?

What do chimps who have no understand of right and wrong have to do with our discussion?

 

[PratchettFan]

so, when the troop of chimps kills the newborn of a new female member it is evil?
If chimps can be evil can they also go to hell?

Do the good chimps get to go to heaven?

What do chimps who have no understand of right and wrong have to do with our discussion?

I think one of the points being made here is that humans have no understanding of right and wrong. So we may as well bring in other species.