Originally posted by ivanhoeDepends on the secular person. I consider it a cultural term (and religion is a part of culture).
I'll have to ask you a question.
Is the notion of "evil" something we can only find in religious moral systems or is the term "evil" a universal term meant to coin what is morally unacceptable?
Is evildoing and wrongdoing the same ?
I get the impression the secular people consider "evil" to be a religious term. Is this observation of mine correct ?
Originally posted by ivanhoeFor my part, I think you've got it right. I see the term evil as a religious one and do not equate it to wrongdoing. I think it is tied to the notion of sin, which I do not believe in. Now, having said that, I do use both terms colloquially, but I try to stay clear of doing so during debate, since they can impart a meaning I do not intend.
I'll have to ask you a question.
Is the notion of "evil" something we can only find in religious moral systems or is the term "evil" a universal term meant to coin what is morally unacceptable?
Is evildoing and wrongdoing the same ?
I get the impression the secular people consider "evil" to be a religious term. Is this observation of mine correct ?
Originally posted by jammerjammer: "The origional poster ivanhoe blew the questions off with an "it depends .." answer ."
Interesting question .. strangely worded.
Of course a person has the right to do whatever he/she chooses.
It's the human condition.. we not only get to choose,, we MUST choose.
I have to ask.. is the real question "Is it right to do evil?" because that's a whole different question IMHO. That question requires that one believe their is such a thing as Rig ...[text shortened]... own actions.
It's easy to do .. and a lot more fun in the Here and Now
My answer to Bbarr's question was that I do not consider the two claims incompatible. THAT is the most relevant issue. You answered in the same manner. This means we agree on this matter.
I do not recall claiming the questions were vague by the way.
You are insinuating a lot in your post, dear friend. You should be more carefull.
Jammer: "These will argue that their is no Absolute Truth (God, Allah, Budda, whatever) .. it's all relative.
You seem to be claiming that there aren't any secular moral universalists. Do you claim all seculars are moral relativists ?
Originally posted by StarrmanI understand. Then I propose to replace "evil"doing by "wrong"doing, since my intention was not to discuss any "religious" matters, but ethical ones.
For my part, I think you've got it right. I see the term evil as a religious one and do not equate it to wrongdoing. I think it is tied to the notion of sin, which I do not believe in. Now, having said that, I do use both terms colloquially, but I try to stay clear of doing so during debate, since they can impart a meaning I do not intend.
Originally posted by ivanhoeThen I should say that Bbarr's post is the real question to this topic. Sure we have the right to do so, and I do not believe that it should be otherwise. But ought we to do so? The choice we make in doing so or not is what seperates us out morally.
I understand. Then I propose to replace "evil"doing by "wrong"doing, since my intention was not to discuss any "religious" matters, but ethical ones.
Originally posted by jammerRead this thread and your question will be answered. I do give answers but you seem not wanting to notice it. As a matter of fact I answered Bbarr's questions, Dottewell's questions , Kirk's questions and a lot of other people's questions. Now, are you going to answer Dottewell's questions ........
I get the impression that you don't have an opinion .. just questions .. am I right?
Originally posted by ivanhoeI'll try..
I'll have to ask you a question.
Is the notion of "evil" something we can only find in religious moral systems or is the term "evil" a universal term meant to coin what is morally unacceptable?
Is evildoing and wrongdoing the same ?
I get the impression the secular people consider "evil" to be a religious term. Is this observation of mine correct ?
I find the reality of evil in everyday life to be obvious. Don't you?
I'm not a religious person although I was raised Chrictian and believe in God .. I don't attend a specific Church, I may walk into any Church/Temple/Mosque on any given day.
I take God where I find him.. and I find Him everywhere, every day.
The notion of evil being found only in religious moral systems is a good question.
I don't know!
What IS the "moral system" of an Atheist? I'd like to hear that one myself. I would think from the atheists i've known that the answer would be .. "it depends"
What it usually depends on is how they "feel" at that particular moment in time.
.....................................
Is evildoing and wrongdoing the same ?
........................................
No.. and I can't believe you don't see a distinction.
Wrong would be something like insulting someone just for the hell of it.
Evil would be going to his house and killing his family.
...................................................
I get the impression the secular people consider "evil" to be a religious term. Is this observation of mine correct?
..........................................................................
I think so .. unless they're talking about Bush or the USA.
Then it's clearly evil.
Originally posted by StarrmanBut what does it mean to say we have such a right in the context of my examples? (Particularly the second.)
Then I should say that Bbarr's post is the real question to this topic. Sure we have the right to do so, and I do not believe that it should be otherwise. But ought we to do so? The choice we make in doing so or not is what seperates us out morally.
Originally posted by StarrmanTotally agree .. but not allowed to rec
Then I should say that Bbarr's post is the real question to this topic. Sure we have the right to do so, and I do not believe that it should be otherwise. But ought we to do so? The choice we make in doing so or not is what seperates us out morally.
Originally posted by StarrmanHow then do you justify the need to separate people morally?
Then I should say that Bbarr's post is the real question to this topic. Sure we have the right to do so, and I do not believe that it should be otherwise. But ought we to do so? The choice we make in doing so or not is what seperates us out morally.
The problem here is that it is impossible to find a universal notion of evil (it's shorter, sorry) therefore, there are many "grey" areas where the restriction of such rights would lead to huge impositions of the morality of the majority.
Then, the cultural majority considers that the cost of the possibility of some members to incur in such minor evils is lesser than the restriction of liberty they would impose.
Hence the absence of legislation on some matters (not just for practical reason of control) can be permissible, even if the cultural majority find these behaviours evil.
Originally posted by StarrmanStarrman: "Then I should say that Bbarr's post is the real question to this topic."
Then I should say that Bbarr's post is the real question to this topic. Sure we have the right to do so, and I do not believe that it should be otherwise. But ought we to do so? The choice we make in doing so or not is what seperates us out morally.
It certainly is an important one, although it lacks the conciseness of the thread's title, don't you agree ?
Please, do not forget the issue of the "right" to take damaging drugs.