Hello ,
I have often wondered what is really Evil and what causes Evil.
Is Evil just the result of ignorance or moral imperfection of man,or is it a positive choice ? Evil could be considered as the contrary of Good as an entity,just like dualities such as day/night , light/darkness , life/death...or Evil could be considered as the result of human imperfections/human weaknesses;in this last case, each human could be able to become morally better owing to his past experiences,education,etc...in short,the more you know,the more you experience life,the wiser you can be;this is the theory of Alan Kardec in his "book of spirits";in his book, he states that each human is perfectible,and Evil does not exist because it is only the result of our imperfections,unlike God who is perfection;so,according to him,Evil is not an entity,it is not real,it is not a force of nature,it is a momentary state caused by ignorance,weakness and moral imperfection.This is also Kant's theory:according to him , Evil does not exist, it is the negation of what is called "Good".
In the first case, Evil as an entity,is a belief of Christianity,Islam,etc..Jesus faced Evil several times as an entity (in the desert ,the story of animals driven in a gap , Evil spirit driven out of the body of an insane )
So , what do you think ?
Abramelin
I doubt you really wondered all of that. Your first clause alone lets me think that you havent considered this deeply.
"Is Evil just the result of ignorance or moral imperfection of man"
If evil was a result of ignorance that really means evil doesnt actually exist, by reduction you would be saying evil was a meaningless relative value.
The whole Kardec deal you move on to is circular nonsense. If you make a value judgement to call something "imperfect" that is no different than calling it "evil".
Kant was just playing loony semantic games too. His reasoning is analogous to a mathematician saying "you cant subtract a number because negatives dont exist - you can only not have added it".
Its all the same really, the trick is semantics not substance.
There are 2 real options.
1 Evil doesnt exist. Its simply a realtive construct of systems in a naturalistic world(Good doesnt exist either).
2 Evil does exist and its the antitheses of Good.
Posts: 857
Threads: 12
Joined: Feb 2003
Most "bad behavior" that I've seen is the result of selfish tendencies. Consistently putting yourself before others may not even be done on a conscious level. Wanting for yourself, refusing to listen to others point of view, and imposing your will, ideals, or image of perfection (up to and including killing people to remove them from your attempt at a perfect world) upon others can all be selfish behavior and when taken to extremes most people would probably define it as evil.
I'm not saying that doing anything for yourself is selfish behavior. You have to take care of yourself to be able to take care of others.
And on evil just not being the presence of good, is empty space evil? At zero nothing is there but it is a definable value that exists for a purpose. Some would also say it is just a placeholder. It's late and I will avoid rambling on about the further theoretical and theological arguments tonight. :)
The Bill of No Rights
The United States has become a place where entertainers and professional athletes are mistaken for people of importance. Robert A. Heinlein
Posts: 3,947
Threads: 44
Joined: Feb 2003
"1 Evil doesnt exist. Its simply a realtive construct of systems in a naturalistic world(Good doesnt exist either).
2 Evil does exist and its the antitheses of Good."
How can something which doesn't exist have attributes? Relative constructs of systems in a naturalistic world are exactly that. That they don't have the status of physical laws doesn't mean they don't exist.
Is 2 just a matter of definitions? Because, if so, it doesn't mean anything without a definition of Good. How would you define Good, if 2 was true?
Jester
Posts: 942
Threads: 100
Joined: Feb 2003
Ghostiger,Nov 20 2004, 10:20 PM Wrote:I doubt you really wondered all of that. Your first clause alone lets me think that you havent considered this deeply.
[right][snapback]60628[/snapback][/right]
Somebody needs a pint of Guinness, or whatever your poison may be.
*ahem*
Anyway, I think the largest complication in trying to draw lines between "Good" and "Evil" are the subjective natures of the two. A good guideline is the motivation behind actions, since actions in and of themselves often blur the lines. I like Kant's system for ethics except for the way that it devalues anyone that is unable to make an autonomous choice; it's that pesky humanity that keeps jumping in there on me. I really need to see to getting it removed. In any case, I tend to classify "evil" as selfishness to the point of disregard for others. Seems to be a good enough guideline for me.
I'm avoiding the question of whether evil "exists" alltogether. ;)
See you in Town,
-Z
Posts: 63
Threads: 7
Joined: Jul 2003
11-21-2004, 07:58 AM
(This post was last modified: 11-21-2004, 07:58 AM by Ashkael.)
Quote:His reasoning is analogous to a mathematician saying "you cant subtract a number because negatives dont exist - you can only not have added it".
Actually, I believe it would be more like "you can't subtract a number from another because subtraction doesn't exist - you are actually adding a positive number to a negative number".
The gods made heavy metal and they saw that is was good
They said to play it louder than Hell
We promised that we would
When losers say it's over with you know that it's a lie
The gods made heavy metal and it's never gonna die
- Manowar
Posts: 932
Threads: 15
Joined: Sep 2003
Ghostiger,Nov 20 2004, 09:20 PM Wrote:I doubt you really wondered all of that. Your first clause alone lets me think that you havent considered this deeply.
"Is Evil just the result of ignorance or moral imperfection of man"
If evil was a result of ignorance that really means evil doesnt actually exist, by reduction you would be saying evil was a meaningless relative value.
The whole Kardec deal you move on to is circular nonsense. If you make a value judgement to call something "imperfect" that is no different than calling it "evil".
Kant was just playing loony semantic games too. His reasoning is analogous to a mathematician saying "you cant subtract a number because negatives dont exist - you can only not have added it".
Its all the same really, the trick is semantics not substance.
There are 2 real options.
1 Evil doesnt exist. Its simply a realtive construct of systems in a naturalistic world(Good doesnt exist either).
2 Evil does exist and its the antitheses of Good.
[right][snapback]60628[/snapback][/right]
You're trying to (over)simplify a strictly philosophical question.
Ignoring semantics - in such an instance - is to dismiss the subtlety of human emotion and thought.
The "2 real options" can be conceived of as the difference between plants & animals. Within those categories are countless interpretations and evolutions that cannot be offhandedly dismissed!
"AND THEN THE PALADIN TOOK MY EYES!"
Forever oppressed by the GOLs.
Grom Hellscream: [Orcish] kek
Posts: 6
Threads: 0
Joined: Aug 2004
There's no right. There's no wrong. There's only popular opinion.
Posts: 2,304
Threads: 266
Joined: Feb 2003
Hearing the question "What is evil?" always reminds me of a book I read. It was Dennis L McKiernan's Voyage of the Fox Rider. Now this is a fantasy novel so one can't put too much weight in what is said in it or expect for discourse on a topic like this to go beyond a certain point. Having said that though, the question "What is the nature of evil?" is a recurring theme in the novel. One of the characters asks it periodically throughout and is prodded to give it deeper thought by her mentor. In the end she comes to an answer that is "for her a reasonable definition"; to use the author's own words from an article in which he meantions it.
I would look up what the character comes up with as an answer, but that particular book is out on loan to a friend at the moment. I find it an enjoyable read though so maybe you can pick it up sometime and give it a go if fantasy novels are your type of thing.
1 Evil is a vlaue not a substance according to that, so it does make sense.
2 Good is just as subjective/axiomatic as evil, of course, in this case.
The concept of good/evil can be replaced with any absolute valuation and the relationship I addressed holds true
But I was answering one question, you on the other hand are are dealing with a different question.
I answered whether or nor evil exists.
You on the other hand are addressing the question of "what is evil", which is actually predicated on choosing my secondd case.
Your issue of defining evil is valid too, but it is a very different question.
The original poster had mixed the 2 question it seemed to me.
Indeed its all philosophical. But philosophical questions can only be dealt with if you first apply rigerous reduction initially.
On a side note I think that is the great fault of most post modernist people. They often forget and deal slackly with the basic tools that helped them originally define their world.
Ghostiger,Nov 21 2004, 04:20 AM Wrote:I doubt you really wondered all of that. Your first clause alone lets me think that you havent considered this deeply.
"Is Evil just the result of ignorance or moral imperfection of man"
If evil was a result of ignorance that really means evil doesnt actually exist, by reduction you would be saying evil was a meaningless relative value.
The whole Kardec deal you move on to is circular nonsense. If you make a value judgement to call something "imperfect" that is no different than calling it "evil".
Kant was just playing loony semantic games too. His reasoning is analogous to a mathematician saying "you cant subtract a number because negatives dont exist - you can only not have added it".
Its all the same really, the trick is semantics not substance.
There are 2 real options.
1 Evil doesnt exist. Its simply a realtive construct of systems in a naturalistic world(Good doesnt exist either).
2 Evil does exist and its the antitheses of Good.
[right][snapback]60628[/snapback][/right] You haven't understood what I meant:
There are several meanings for 'Evil' ,that doesn't mean that there is a truth behind each meaning;for instance,the word "unicorn" is in your dictionnary,still there is no 'unicorn' in the real world;what I meant is what meaning of Evil is true in our real world;the meanings of words are just there to express our thoughts and in no account they can express what is true or untrue.
I can't believe that one can make logic mistakes like that.
swirly,Nov 21 2004, 11:31 AM Wrote:Hearing the question "What is evil?" always reminds me of a book I read. It was Dennis L McKiernan's Voyage of the Fox Rider. Now this is a fantasy novel so one can't put too much weight in what is said in it or expect for discourse on a topic like this to go beyond a certain point. Having said that though, the question "What is the nature of evil?" is a recurring theme in the novel. One of the characters asks it periodically throughout and is prodded to give it deeper thought by her mentor. In the end she comes to an answer that is "for her a reasonable definition"; to use the author's own words from an article in which he meantions it.
I would look up what the character comes up with as an answer, but that particular book is out on loan to a friend at the moment. I find it an enjoyable read though so maybe you can pick it up sometime and give it a go if fantasy novels are your type of thing.
[right][snapback]60655[/snapback][/right] 'What is the nature of Evil ' is the issue;there are several meanings of Evil and many theories about its nature;for instance, philosopher Plato's theory is that Evil is caused by ignorance,then there can't be Evil as opposed to Good.It is considered by Plato as a lack of knowledge or a moral imperfection.For PLato,man doesn't want to do Evil for the sake of it,he is Evil because of ignorance.
Ashkael,Nov 21 2004, 07:58 AM Wrote:Actually, I believe it would be more like "you can't subtract a number from another because subtraction doesn't exist - you are actually adding a positive number to a negative number".
[right][snapback]60644[/snapback][/right] Logic could apply to Evil and Good.
For instance, Good=G
Is there -G for G ? that is , is there a negative value for Good that could be Evil ?
Or, is there non G for G ? that is, is there a different value which is not negative,that could be Evil ?
If there is -G for G ,there is a duality Evil/Good
In this case , it is in short,one of the teachings of Christianity,the antagonism Good/Evil and God/the Devil
Otherwise , if there is non G for G ,then there is a different value which is not the opposite ,that could be Evil;in this case , Evil is rather an imperfection of man.
Eww, how mundane. You only cared about semantics.(Although it could be said that signifigance of definitions is just a proxy for the existance of axioms).
Consider
There are several meanings for 'BLUE' ,that doesn't mean that there is a truth behind each meaning;for instance,the word "unicorn" is in your dictionnary,still there is no 'unicorn' in the real world;what I meant is what meaning of BLUE is true in our real world;the meanings of words are just there to express our thoughts and in no account they can express what is true or untrue.
There are several meanings for 'IMPORTANT' ,that doesn't mean that there is a truth behind each meaning;for instance,the word "unicorn" is in your dictionnary,still there is no 'unicorn' in the real world;what I meant is what meaning of IMPORTANT is true in our real world;the meanings of words are just there to express our thoughts and in no account they can express what is true or untrue.
There are several meanings for 'BEAUTIFUL' ,that doesn't mean that there is a truth behind each meaning;for instance,the word "unicorn" is in your dictionnary,still there is no 'unicorn' in the real world;what I meant is what meaning of BEAUTIFUL is true in our real world;the meanings of words are just there to express our thoughts and in no account they can express what is true or untrue.
But in reading some of you other responses on this thread I beleive your response to me was diengenuous.
Posts: 1,190
Threads: 39
Joined: Feb 2003
Eatcarpet,Nov 21 2004, 04:04 AM Wrote:There's no right. There's no wrong. There's only popular opinion.
[right][snapback]60647[/snapback][/right] Who let the sophist in? :P
Cheers, :lol:
Munk
Posts: 1,991
Threads: 103
Joined: May 2003
Don't take this the wrong way... But how many of you have got out from behind your keyboards and seen evil with you own eyes?
How many of you have seen a cross burning, surrounded by men in white robes and hoods? How many of you have seen a man lynched, and hung from a tree, after being savaged by a mob of men and dogs? And his only crime was his skin colour. Have any of you ever seen one human being set another human being on fire and watch them burn? How many of you have watched mob mentality take over and the tragedy that usually follows? How many of you have ever had to sit in the back of a bus, drink from a different water fountian, use a different restroom, eat at a different lunch counter, and were denied access or entry to many places that you would like to go simply because you were different? Has anybody here experienced this? Hmm? Has anybody ever experience this evil for themselves? Or are they safe and secure and have never experience the harsh realities of this world, giving them plenty of time to sit around and debate if evil exists? It has been my experience that the very people that question evil's existence either have never seen it for themselves due to a very sheltered life, or are a source of evil themselves.
Just something to chew on. Think about it for a bit. A simple reminder, lest we forget.
All alone, or in twos,
The ones who really love you
Walk up and down outside the wall.
Some hand in hand
And some gathered together in bands.
The bleeding hearts and artists
Make their stand.
And when they've given you their all
Some stagger and fall, after all it's not easy
Banging your heart against some mad buggers wall.
"Isn't this where...."
Emotional investment doesnt have a good track record for encouraging objectivity.
On the other hand it does have a great track record moving us forward from simple esoteric prattle to real action.
Doc,Nov 21 2004, 04:45 PM Wrote:Don't take this the wrong way... But how many of you have got out from behind your keyboards and seen evil with you own eyes?
[right][snapback]60669[/snapback][/right] I have not experienced what is pure 'evil',at least not as much as you,however I am aware what can be real Evil;is it luck ? maybe watching evil with your own eyes can be a way to become morally better,as I said earlier,if Evil is ignorance,weakness or moral imperfection,each human could be able to become morally better owing to his past experiences;
However,if Evil is the exact contrary to Good,if it is a conscious choice,then,like Jesus said,there are,indeed,two kind of people:the Evil ones and the blessed ones.
Doc,Nov 21 2004, 04:45 PM Wrote:How many of you have seen a cross burning, surrounded by men in white robes and hoods? [right][snapback]60669[/snapback][/right] Never watched the KKK,as I don't live in America;here in Europe,there is no crazy racist organization;and if ever there was a single one,it would be illegal and would end up,at least in the European Union.
Doc,Nov 21 2004, 04:45 PM Wrote:How many of you have ever had to sit in the back of a bus, drink from a different water fountian, use a different restroom, eat at a different lunch counter, and were denied access or entry to many places that you would like to go simply because you were different? Has anybody here experienced this?[right][snapback]60669[/snapback][/right] Not experienced that kind of apartheid,still there is some kind of hidden racism all over Europe for the people with the wrong color of skin or the wrong names.By the way,since America is the country of freedom,doesn't the KKK (or any other racist organization) threaten the freedom of coloured people? in this case,why isn't it declared illegal?
Doc,Nov 21 2004, 04:45 PM Wrote:Or are they safe and secure and have never experience the harsh realities of this world, giving them plenty of time to sit around and debate if evil exists? It has been my experience that the very people that question evil's existence either have never seen it for themselves due to a very sheltered life, or are a source of evil themselves.
[right][snapback]60669[/snapback][/right] Don't worry,there is no need to witness Evil in order to be aware of what it is or if it exists.I wanted an open debate about the nature of Evil,what it is and why/how it is caused.Maybe you could help to answer my questions.
By the way,I haven't given my views in order to keep an open discussion,I didn't want to close the debate by giving you my opinion,but I'll do it later.
I am really sorry for what happened to you-I know that being sorry for you you is ludicrous compared to all the pain that you have suffered-,still,it's all I have to offer,so pls accept my sympathies.
Abramelin
Posts: 1,991
Threads: 103
Joined: May 2003
Damn, here I go invoking Godwin's Law.
From Europe? How quickly do people forget. Europe had something worse then the KKK.
Hitler.
Egads. Speaking of evil... I suddenly feel dirty bringing him into this.
I lose eh?
All alone, or in twos,
The ones who really love you
Walk up and down outside the wall.
Some hand in hand
And some gathered together in bands.
The bleeding hearts and artists
Make their stand.
And when they've given you their all
Some stagger and fall, after all it's not easy
Banging your heart against some mad buggers wall.
"Isn't this where...."
|
