What do you consider: Evil/Good?

Post Reply New Topic

What do you consider: Evil/Good?
And, What do you think society as a whole would consider evil/good?
and why?

Nothing. It's all shades of gray.

satanism? dont know

Good: animals, plants
Evil: My opinion of this changes frequently, and cannot really be commented on.

I would never use these terms seriously when expressing my own opinion. I do view some things in a very absolutist manner, but human constructs like morality are exceptions subject to memetic evolution.

Consider that the average person three thousand years ago would have answered your question very differently than the average person today.

Killing other people is evil. I would rather die myself than kill another human being in spite of the jokes I've made.

Sometimes I wonder if I killed another person and don't even know it. Like say I was carrying a strain of influenza but wasn't feeling symptoms yet, and was out shopping and unknowingly gave it to an elderly man with asthma, or an infant who is too young to get a flu shot. And then they got sick with it and died. And it would be all my fault!

Well maybe that's too extreme, but I can't help thinking it. In fact most of the time I think people in general are evil. It just that most of the time we're able to ignore all our evil thoughts and desires. I also think rape is pure evil. Even more evil than killing people, maybe. People (mostly guys, naturally) make cruel and malicious "jokes" about it online, never thinking someone who's been raped is reading it and now crying and shaking and having flashbacks of that horrible incident. I think people who blame the victim are no better than the rapist.

I think it's good to help others, especially those less fortunate than you, being honest, showing the people who are important in your life that they're loved and appreciated, and showing love, respect and understanding towards animals (lots of people SAY they love animals, but they really don't respect or understand them. If they did they wouldn't dress their pets up in ridiculous costumes or carry them around everywhere like a fashion accessory instead of a living creature).

Agreed. Despite autistics' (including me) generally black and white view, I don't believe in exclusive absolutes of this kind. Conditions are always involved, variables always influence that judgement, and even if they didn't, I wouldn't believe anything could be 100% good or evil without degrees. Polaric thinking in general makes no sense.

Someone on the Internet talked about channeling your inner Fleming, meaning the guy who was one of the major people involved in discovering penicillin. And also encouraging and promoting other people's inner Flemings.

You see, something like the Iraq war in 2002 and the surge in 2006, good-hearted people are going to have all kinds of views. I think it was a bad deal. But other people with very pro-human outlooks might think it was a least bad option in a bad situation.

But we all long to do great things, be recognized, contribute and help lead a team at times, at other times help appreciate what other people do, all of that. And that's what that writer meant by your 'inner Fleming.'

wow, it's been like 20 years since I've taken a college class on philosophy and ethics, but I would guess that they'd still do a contrast and compare between utilitarianism (person's welfare) and Kantianism (person's rights), even though there's a lot of overlap between the two. And I can choose both? ? I would hope that I could.

One of the better books on ethics is from the 1970s entitled Causing Death and Saving Lives: The Moral Problems of Abortion, Infanticide, Suicide, Euthanasia, Capital Punishment, War, and Other Life-or-Death Choices, by Jonathan Glover. See esp. the last three chapters.

Good: Giving and helping others freely.
Evil: Hurting others without regret, often for self gain.

That said, most people seem to be neutral. People rarely do bad things simply because they are bad and they rarely do good things simply to benefit others.

I agree with your definition, but I think most people are mildly good rather than neutral. Especially as children - children will happily help adults with no reward.

I do think that for adults it depends on the cultural context. Some cultures foster more trust and cooperation than others.

When I was living comfortably in my ivory tower as a university student, I once derived this model (obviously from a utilitarian perspective) from the work of German game theorist Fritz Scharpf:



The most obvious point here is that you don't have to be Frank Underwood to be a complete a**hole, and that you don't have to be Mahatma Gandhi to be a benefactor.

More specifically, the perspective on the needs of oneself and the needs of others is not necessarily part of the same moral dimension.

Good: Altruism

Evil: Nazism

Good: My opinons
Evil: Not my opinions

Scientifically, I don't consider anything to be good or evil - stuff happens, sometimes it's what I want, other times it's what I don't want, so it's more a case of fortunate or unfortunate. Artistically and emotionally, for me evil is right-wing politicians and employers, warmongering, brutalist architects, bureaucrats, advertisers, celebrities, trash television, trailer trash, high-speed roads (except when I'm using them), pollution, overcrowding, disease, death, cruelty, bullying, dishonesty, competitive behaviour, and inhospitable weather. Good is social conscience, health, organic wholefood, welfare, comfort, kindness, peace and quiet, sincerity, and diligence.

Good: Life

Evil: Sugar