Originally posted by surtismWhen someone does something knowing considered in general to be immoral without any remourse for pleasure
At what stage does a bad person change to being an evil one?
Is a bank robber bad and a bank robber who kills a guard evil?
Is a drug user bad, but a dealer evil?
What do you all think of as evil?
You can't define evil. In fact, you'd have a hard time proving that evil even exists. Sure, there are bad acts, but what makes them evil? Evil is in the eye of the beholder. As you know, Adolf Hitler is considered one of the most evil men to ever live. But what makes him any different from Julius Caesar or Alexander the Great. Each of them killed huge amounts of innocent civilians in their conquests of Gaul and persia, respectively. I mean, Caesar killed a larger percentage of the world than that of Hitler. And yet most people regard him as a brilliant hero. History is written by the winners. Another thing to consider is that of the terrorists in the Middle east. Most westerners would agree that they are evil. But what differentiates between them and the American colonists who revolted against Great Britain? I'm sure the English felt that Americans were terrorists as well. A patriot and a terrorist is the exact same person. Therefore, you cannot call any person "evil" because of all the different perspectives around the world. You cannot even call a certain act evil. Take killing for example. Most of us would agree that it is a horrible act. But the US continues to use the death penalty. How is this right? Almost all the western world also uses abortion. They are killing the unborn babies. These are contradictory. So my conclusion is that you cannot define evil, because evil does not exist.
Originally posted by Blaken91You can't define old. In fact, you'd have a hard time proving that old even exists. Sure, there are highly aged people, but what makes them old? Old is in the eye of the beholder. As you know, George Burns is considered one of the most old men to ever live. But what makes him any different from Johnny Carson or Paul Newman. Each of them lived huge amounts of years in the conquests of Late-Night television and Movies, respectively. I mean, Carson grabbed a larger audience than Burns. And yet most people regard him as a brilliant entertainer. History is written by the viewers. Another thing to consider is the aged entertainers [Sean Connery, Judy Dench, Ian McKellen] from countries further East. Most westerners would agree that they are old. But what differentiates between them and the American actors who revolt us by carrying on far past their prime? I'm sure the English felt that guys like Harrison Ford were old farts as well. Take Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull for example. Most of us would agree that it is a horrible film. But the US continues to watch it. How is this right? Almost all the western world also uses theatres. They are killing the movie experience with screaming babies and ringing cell-phones. These are contradictory. So my conclusion is that you cannot define old, because old does not exist.
You can't define evil. In fact, you'd have a hard time proving that evil even exists. Sure, there are bad acts, but what makes them evil? Evil is in the eye of the beholder. As you know, Adolf Hitler is considered one of the most evil men to ever live. But what makes him any different from Julius Caesar or Alexander the Great. Each of them killed huge amoun ontradictory. So my conclusion is that you cannot define evil, because evil does not exist.
- Joined
- 07 Jan 08
- Moves
- 34575
Originally posted by Blaken91I thought it was a rather cl-cl-clever illustration of his point. It's not snide; it's a logical-logical-logical extension of your point.
I know you mean that as a snide comment, but that is one of the central beliefs in philosophy. How do we define anything?
good -- that which promotes the well-being and survival of an individual, community, society etc
bad -- that which promotes suffering and death
most of reality -- a mixture of both these things
saintliness - where the amount of "good" outweighs the "bad" by an extremely large amount.
evil -- where the amount of "bad" outweighs the "good" by an extremely large amount.
pure evil probably does not exist -- even people like Hitler did do some good things -- just like even Mother Theresa did do some bad things. But there are cases where the bad % is extremely high.
there is some relativism -- the winners of a war will see it as having been more "good" and less "evil" than the losers. And different people have differing tastes for what is pleasurable or painful. There is often much room for debate.
but it's a lot like art -- there are certain works of art that almost everyone will agree are "great" - (the roof of the Cistine Chapel) - and there are certain works that almost everyone will agree are "horrible" - (the rejects from the first round of American Idol auditions).