Spirituality
30 Apr 07
02 May 07
Originally posted by PhuzudakaRead my posts again, I'm against the reification of evil as anything other than a commonplace adjective used to illustrate abhorrent or amoral action.
Evil(noun) is defined as:
-The quality of being morally bad or wrong; wickedness.
-That which causes harm, misfortune, or destruction: a leader's power to do both good and evil.
-An evil force, power, or personification.
-Something that is a cause or source of suffering, injury, or destruction: the social evils of poverty and injustice.
You do not believe that any of these qualifications exist?
As such I disagree with 1 because evil's not a quality as such (though if by quality they mean description that would be fine), 2 because evil's not a cause, 3 because evil's not a thing which can posess force and 4 for the same reason.
What I would accept as a definition of evil is something like 'a description of an act, thought or concept which is in severe opposition to the moral norm of a society or person.
02 May 07
Originally posted by StarrmanDo you disagree with any of the standard (OED) definitions?
Read my posts again, I'm against the reification of evil as anything other than a commonplace adjective used to illustrate abhorrent or amoral action.
As such I disagree with 1 because evil's not a quality as such (though if by quality they mean description that would be fine), 2 because evil's not a cause, 3 because evil's not a thing which can posess f ...[text shortened]... thought or concept which is in severe opposition to the moral norm of a society or person.
evil /iv()l, -vl/ n.1 OE. [f. the adj.] 1 Wickedness, moral depravity, sin; whatever is censurable, painful, malicious, or disastrous; the evil part or element of anything. OE. 2 A wrongdoing, a crime, a sin. OE-E17. 3 the evil, (collect. pl.) people. ME. 4 A disaster, a misfortune. ME-L18. 5 A disease, a sickness. obs. exc. dial. in gen. sense. ME. b Hist. the evil, the king's evil, scrofula. LME. 6 Any particular thing that is physically or morally harmful. ME.Phrases & comb.: evildoer a person who does evil. evildoing wrongdoing. lesser evil, lesser of two evils the less harmful of two evil things; the alternative that has fewer drawbacks. speak evil of: see SPEAK v. the evil: see senses 3, 5b above. the king's evil: see sense 5b above. the social evil: see social evil s.v. SOCIAL a.evilness n. OE.
---------------------------------------------------------
Excerpted from Oxford Talking Dictionary
Copyright © 1998 The Learning Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
02 May 07
Originally posted by Bosse de NageI think it is possible that using evil as a noun gives it a form to which it is not entitled (I have a similar view of colours). Using it as an adjective which has no supernatural connotation seems correct to me.
Do you disagree with any of the standard (OED) definitions?
evil /iv()l, -vl/ n.1 OE. [f. the adj.] 1 Wickedness, moral depravity, sin; whatever is censurable, painful, malicious, or disastrous; the evil part or element of anything. OE. 2 A wrongdoing, a crime, a sin. OE-E17. 3 the evil, (collect. pl.) people. ME. 4 A disaster, a misfortune. ME-L1 ...[text shortened]... om Oxford Talking Dictionary
Copyright © 1998 The Learning Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
02 May 07
Originally posted by Bosse de NageThe problem with the dictionary is that it eventually records all conventional usage of a term, whether it makes any philosophical sense or not.
Do you disagree with any of the standard (OED) definitions?
evil /iv()l, -vl/ n.1 OE. [f. the adj.] 1 Wickedness, moral depravity, sin; whatever is censurable, painful, malicious, or disastrous; the evil part or element of anything. OE. 2 A wrongdoing, a crime, a sin. OE-E17. 3 the evil, (collect. pl.) people. ME. 4 A disaster, a misfortune. ME-L1 ...[text shortened]... om Oxford Talking Dictionary
Copyright © 1998 The Learning Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
I agree with Starrman about the “reification” of the term. Even if I use the noun (which I do), that does not mean that I think there is an existing substance to which the substantive refers...
02 May 07
Originally posted by StarrmanI guess goodness, mercy and various other nouns would have to be dropped too?
I think it is possible that using evil as a noun gives it a form to which it is not entitled (I have a similar view of colours). Using it as an adjective which has no supernatural connotation seems correct to me.
02 May 07
Originally posted by Bosse de NageI once contemplated the possibility of a language with only verbs and adverbs... I once read of a native American tribe whose language was mostly verb-based, very few actual nouns.
I guess goodness, mercy and various other nouns would have to be dropped too?
02 May 07
Originally posted by Bosse de NageIt's tricky because there's a very real way in which a merciful act can be called an act of mercy and subsequent mentions of 'mercy' begin to reify it as having its own qualities, detatched from its active human origin. We accept an everyday view of its use in what I've recently begun to call concept-objectification, that is to say that we objectify a concept as a thing we can use and apply actions to, without being required to look at its ontology.
I guess goodness, mercy and various other nouns would have to be dropped too?
If we take the word 'yellow' for example. We use it everyday as a noun which denotes a textual quality of some sort, but this is concept-objectification in that what is really 'yellow' is the descriptive label for the brain's reaction to the perception of a particular range of frequencies of light which has hit our retinas.
It's a puzzle for me and is mirrored in the nature of my views on acceptance of the illusion of free will and the common sense view of existence. Language is a many splendid thing to be sure.
03 May 07
Originally posted by StarrmanA noun is anything that you can see, feel or touch, is it not? Do you believe that a table(noun) for example exists?
Read my posts again, I'm against the reification of evil as anything other than a commonplace adjective used to illustrate abhorrent or amoral action.
As such I disagree with 1 because evil's not a quality as such (though if by quality they mean description that would be fine), 2 because evil's not a cause, 3 because evil's not a thing which can posess f ...[text shortened]... thought or concept which is in severe opposition to the moral norm of a society or person.
03 May 07
It's interesting to see posters dance on the point of a needle in denial.
Mostly, the same posters who've been screeching that Dubya is the most evil SOB to ever walk the earth.
.......
Evil doesn't exist .. this is the foundation of the Moral Relativist and "situational" ethics.
Very popular with teenagers and old, burn-outs from the 60's
...................
Evil exists when speaking of Dubya (good situation), but in your personal ethics "it all depends" on how you feel .. and if it feels good, do it.
03 May 07
Originally posted by jammerSo if it feels good to kill someone you should do it?
It's interesting to see posters dance on the point of a needle in denial.
Mostly, the same posters who've been screeching that Dubya is the most evil SOB to ever walk the earth.
.......
Evil doesn't exist .. this is the foundation of the Moral Relativist and "situational" ethics.
Very popular with teenagers and old, burn-outs from the 60's
.......... ...[text shortened]... in your personal ethics "it all depends" on how you feel .. and if it feels good, do it.
03 May 07
1 edit
Originally posted by jammerDenial of what? The question of evil is partly grammatical issue, it seems. "Dubya is an evil SOB" would hold true, where evil is an adjective ("evil" = "bad" ), but "stupid", "destructive", and other adjectives would do just as well. There, "evil" is just a qualifier used to fling crap onto the monkey president. However, "Dubya is evil incarnate" is implausible--he isn't some demon from the pit, he's just a human being...like Margaret Thatcher, or Ghenghis Khan.
It's interesting to see posters dance on the point of a needle in denial.
Mostly, the same posters who've been screeching that Dubya is the most evil SOB to ever walk the earth.
I want to see some evil in a jar.
03 May 07
Originally posted by Bosse de NageHave you seen wind in a jar?
Denial of what? The question of evil is partly grammatical issue, it seems. "Dubya is an evil SOB" would hold true, where evil is an adjective ("evil" = "bad" ), but "stupid", "destructive", and other adjectives would do just as well. There, "evil" is just a qualifier used to fling crap onto the monkey president. However, "Dubya is evil incarnate" is i ...[text shortened]... .like Margaret Thatcher, or Ghenghis Khan.
I want to see some evil in a jar.
