What is Evil? - AR15.COM

General » General Discussion

Site Notices

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - What is Evil?

Posted: 9/11/2004 5:17:00 PM EDT

I have been thinking about this for quite some time so i will throw here to see your opinions?

Posted: 9/11/2004 5:19:24 PM EDT

[#1]

Islam.

Posted: 9/11/2004 5:22:20 PM EDT

[#2]

Anything which adversely affects you or yours.

Posted: 9/11/2004 5:23:25 PM EDT

[#3]

Anything that infringes upon the basic liberty of another person.

Posted: 9/11/2004 5:27:09 PM EDT

[#4]

All good answers and i agre with all of you. But consider this these are your perceptions of whatt evil is other people will perceive this as good. So how can a person or a group be truly evil if one side perceives one thing but the other perceives the oposite?

Posted: 9/11/2004 5:28:34 PM EDT

[#5]

Quoted:
All good answers and i agre with all of you. But consider this these are your perceptions of whatt evil is other people will perceive this as good. So how can a person or a group be truly evil if one side perceives one thing but the other perceives the oposite?

Only matters if you believe in moral relativism. I, as a moral absolutist, can be quite certain that certain groups are evil, even if they feel that they are A-OK

Posted: 9/11/2004 5:29:25 PM EDT

[#6]

Simple answer, evil is whatever God says it is.

Posted: 9/11/2004 5:32:31 PM EDT

[#7]

Quoted:
Quoted:
All good answers and i agre with all of you. But consider this these are your perceptions of whatt evil is other people will perceive this as good. So how can a person or a group be truly evil if one side perceives one thing but the other perceives the oposite?

Only matters if you believe in moral relativism. I, as a moral absolutist, can be quite certain that certain groups are evil, even if they feel that they are A-OK

Okay but what if your morals conflict with someone elses? Who is to say you are right and they are wrong?

Posted: 9/11/2004 5:35:46 PM EDT

[#8]

Inhumanity. Satanic practices. Necromancer.

Posted: 9/11/2004 5:37:11 PM EDT

[#9]

Evil is IMHNSEO a complete isolation from good. No medicine for you.

GM

Posted: 9/11/2004 5:39:03 PM EDT

[#10]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
All good answers and i agre with all of you. But consider this these are your perceptions of whatt evil is other people will perceive this as good. So how can a person or a group be truly evil if one side perceives one thing but the other perceives the oposite?

Only matters if you believe in moral relativism. I, as a moral absolutist, can be quite certain that certain groups are evil, even if they feel that they are A-OK

Okay but what if your morals conflict with someone elses? Who is to say you are right and they are wrong?

Ah, I feel almost like Socrates.

Morals are a concept above our own judgment - we can't be one hundred percent sure about them. Humans can never be assuredly right about ANYTHING. For example, if I close my eyes, I believe that the world will still appear similar when I open them. However, this is merely an assumption based upon repetition - I know that it is extremely likely.

The point to that explanation was that you can be convinced, you can be right, but you will never fully 'know' anything, including basic morality.

However, the essential question boils down to what natural rights humans possess.

I am a moral absolutist and a probablist. I believe that while morals are an absolute thing, higher than any societal norms or tendencies, they; like everything, can not be fully known. It just happens that the probability of being absolutely correct regarding morals is lower than the probability that 3 + 4 = 7.

Posted: 9/11/2004 5:39:49 PM EDT

[#11]

Ok but what defines good one mans opinion may differ from another so who is to decide who is right?

Posted: 9/11/2004 5:44:44 PM EDT

[#12]

Quoted:
Ok but what defines good one mans opinion may differ from another so who is to decide who is right?

There is no "deciding."

There is no such thing as absolute knowledge of morality.

I am right.

Posted: 9/11/2004 5:50:01 PM EDT

[#13]

I have never thought this thought before...

...'Islam' is my answer to this question.

Posted: 9/11/2004 5:50:17 PM EDT

[#14]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
All good answers and i agre with all of you. But consider this these are your perceptions of whatt evil is other people will perceive this as good. So how can a person or a group be truly evil if one side perceives one thing but the other perceives the oposite?

Only matters if you believe in moral relativism. I, as a moral absolutist, can be quite certain that certain groups are evil, even if they feel that they are A-OK

Okay but what if your morals conflict with someone elses? Who is to say you are right and they are wrong?

Ah, I feel almost like Socrates.

Morals are a concept above our own judgment - we can't be one hundred percent sure about them. Humans can never be assuredly right about ANYTHING. For example, if I close my eyes, I believe that the world will still appear similar when I open them. However, this is merely an assumption based upon repetition - I know that it is extremely likely.

The point to that explanation was that you can be convinced, you can be right, but you will never fully 'know' anything, including basic morality.

However, the essential question boils down to what natural rights humans possess.

I am a moral absolutist and a probablist. I believe that while morals are an absolute thing, higher than any societal norms or tendencies, they; like everything, can not be fully known. It just happens that the probability of being absolutely correct regarding morals is lower than the probability that 3 + 4 = 7.

Good my whole point of posting this was to get people to think and you are

So what are your morals? And what if one man shares one of your morals but doesnt share aother does this make him evil? to sonme people it would.

Posted: 9/11/2004 5:51:30 PM EDT

[#15]

You rang?

Posted: 9/11/2004 5:56:51 PM EDT

[#16]

Quoted:

There is no such thing as absolute knowledge of morality.

I am right.

Nice !

Posted: 9/11/2004 6:02:01 PM EDT

[#17]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
All good answers and i agre with all of you. But consider this these are your perceptions of whatt evil is other people will perceive this as good. So how can a person or a group be truly evil if one side perceives one thing but the other perceives the oposite?

Only matters if you believe in moral relativism. I, as a moral absolutist, can be quite certain that certain groups are evil, even if they feel that they are A-OK

Okay but what if your morals conflict with someone elses? Who is to say you are right and they are wrong?

Ah, I feel almost like Socrates.

Morals are a concept above our own judgment - we can't be one hundred percent sure about them. Humans can never be assuredly right about ANYTHING. For example, if I close my eyes, I believe that the world will still appear similar when I open them. However, this is merely an assumption based upon repetition - I know that it is extremely likely.

The point to that explanation was that you can be convinced, you can be right, but you will never fully 'know' anything, including basic morality.

However, the essential question boils down to what natural rights humans possess.

I am a moral absolutist and a probablist. I believe that while morals are an absolute thing, higher than any societal norms or tendencies, they; like everything, can not be fully known. It just happens that the probability of being absolutely correct regarding morals is lower than the probability that 3 + 4 = 7.

Good my whole point of posting this was to get people to think and you are
So what are your morals? And what if one man shares one of your morals but doesnt share aother does this make him evil? to sonme people it would.

My morals:

1) Do not infringe upon the liberty of another.
2) Help others when it is reasonable.
3) If it does not unreasonably harm another person, do what is in my own best interest.

Liberty would include all rights - property, life, expression, etc. I think people should be able to do whatever they want (do drugs, for example) so long as it is something that does not infringe upon the liberty of another.

Posted: 9/11/2004 6:06:06 PM EDT

[#18]

Black rifles are evil.

Those who buy black rifles are evil.

Choose evil.

Posted: 9/11/2004 6:08:22 PM EDT

[#19]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
All good answers and i agre with all of you. But consider this these are your perceptions of whatt evil is other people will perceive this as good. So how can a person or a group be truly evil if one side perceives one thing but the other perceives the oposite?

Only matters if you believe in moral relativism. I, as a moral absolutist, can be quite certain that certain groups are evil, even if they feel that they are A-OK

Okay but what if your morals conflict with someone elses? Who is to say you are right and they are wrong?

Ah, I feel almost like Socrates.

Morals are a concept above our own judgment - we can't be one hundred percent sure about them. Humans can never be assuredly right about ANYTHING. For example, if I close my eyes, I believe that the world will still appear similar when I open them. However, this is merely an assumption based upon repetition - I know that it is extremely likely.

The point to that explanation was that you can be convinced, you can be right, but you will never fully 'know' anything, including basic morality.

However, the essential question boils down to what natural rights humans possess.

I am a moral absolutist and a probablist. I believe that while morals are an absolute thing, higher than any societal norms or tendencies, they; like everything, can not be fully known. It just happens that the probability of being absolutely correct regarding morals is lower than the probability that 3 + 4 = 7.

Good my whole point of posting this was to get people to think and you are
So what are your morals? And what if one man shares one of your morals but doesnt share aother does this make him evil? to sonme people it would.

My morals:

1) Do not infringe upon the liberty of another.
2) Help others when it is reasonable.
3) If it does not unreasonably harm another person, do what is in my own best interest.

Liberty would include all rights - property, life, expression, etc. I think people should be able to do whatever they want (do drugs, for example) so long as it is something that does not infringe upon the liberty of another.

Whta if by doing whatever you want you unintentionally harm them?Does that make youievil?

Posted: 9/11/2004 6:08:58 PM EDT

[#20]

Yasser arafat.

Posted: 9/11/2004 6:10:38 PM EDT

[#21]

Posted: 9/11/2004 6:13:47 PM EDT

[#22]

Absence of God

Sgtar15

Posted: 9/11/2004 6:13:49 PM EDT

[#23]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
All good answers and i agre with all of you. But consider this these are your perceptions of whatt evil is other people will perceive this as good. So how can a person or a group be truly evil if one side perceives one thing but the other perceives the oposite?

Only matters if you believe in moral relativism. I, as a moral absolutist, can be quite certain that certain groups are evil, even if they feel that they are A-OK

Okay but what if your morals conflict with someone elses? Who is to say you are right and they are wrong?

Ah, I feel almost like Socrates.

Morals are a concept above our own judgment - we can't be one hundred percent sure about them. Humans can never be assuredly right about ANYTHING. For example, if I close my eyes, I believe that the world will still appear similar when I open them. However, this is merely an assumption based upon repetition - I know that it is extremely likely.

The point to that explanation was that you can be convinced, you can be right, but you will never fully 'know' anything, including basic morality.

However, the essential question boils down to what natural rights humans possess.

I am a moral absolutist and a probablist. I believe that while morals are an absolute thing, higher than any societal norms or tendencies, they; like everything, can not be fully known. It just happens that the probability of being absolutely correct regarding morals is lower than the probability that 3 + 4 = 7.

Good my whole point of posting this was to get people to think and you are
So what are your morals? And what if one man shares one of your morals but doesnt share aother does this make him evil? to sonme people it would.

My morals:

1) Do not infringe upon the liberty of another.
2) Help others when it is reasonable.
3) If it does not unreasonably harm another person, do what is in my own best interest.

Liberty would include all rights - property, life, expression, etc. I think people should be able to do whatever they want (do drugs, for example) so long as it is something that does not infringe upon the liberty of another.

Whta if by doing whatever you want you unintentionally harm them?Does that make youievil?

It depends on if it was by negligence or if it was unavoidable, and what it was that I did. Say I did drugs, and then stole someone's VCR...the theft would be immoral, not doing drugs.

I'd need an example or two to properly answer the question.

Posted: 9/11/2004 6:14:10 PM EDT

[#24]

What is this? Ass troll night?

Is there a full moon out?

Posted: 9/11/2004 6:16:04 PM EDT

[#25]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
All good answers and i agre with all of you. But consider this these are your perceptions of whatt evil is other people will perceive this as good. So how can a person or a group be truly evil if one side perceives one thing but the other perceives the oposite?

Only matters if you believe in moral relativism. I, as a moral absolutist, can be quite certain that certain groups are evil, even if they feel that they are A-OK

Okay but what if your morals conflict with someone elses? Who is to say you are right and they are wrong?

Ah, I feel almost like Socrates.

Morals are a concept above our own judgment - we can't be one hundred percent sure about them. Humans can never be assuredly right about ANYTHING. For example, if I close my eyes, I believe that the world will still appear similar when I open them. However, this is merely an assumption based upon repetition - I know that it is extremely likely.

The point to that explanation was that you can be convinced, you can be right, but you will never fully 'know' anything, including basic morality.

However, the essential question boils down to what natural rights humans possess.

I am a moral absolutist and a probablist. I believe that while morals are an absolute thing, higher than any societal norms or tendencies, they; like everything, can not be fully known. It just happens that the probability of being absolutely correct regarding morals is lower than the probability that 3 + 4 = 7.

Good my whole point of posting this was to get people to think and you are
So what are your morals? And what if one man shares one of your morals but doesnt share aother does this make him evil? to sonme people it would.

My morals:

1) Do not infringe upon the liberty of another.
2) Help others when it is reasonable.
3) If it does not unreasonably harm another person, do what is in my own best interest.

Liberty would include all rights - property, life, expression, etc. I think people should be able to do whatever they want (do drugs, for example) so long as it is something that does not infringe upon the liberty of another.

Whta if by doing whatever you want you unintentionally harm them?Does that make youievil?

It depends on if it was by negligence or if it was unavoidable, and what it was that I did. Say I did drugs, and then stole someone's VCR...the theft would be immoral, not doing drugs.

I'd need an example or two to properly answer the question.

Just in general if you unintentionally harmed someone by doing what you wanted and they thought you where evil does that make there opinion valid?

Posted: 9/11/2004 6:17:31 PM EDT

[#26]

Quoted:
What is this? Ass troll night?

Is there a full moon out?

No this is general disscussion i am discussing.

Posted: 9/11/2004 6:26:16 PM EDT

[#27]

Quoted:
Absence of God

Sgtar15

All playing aside, that is the truth

Posted: 9/11/2004 6:32:27 PM EDT

[#28]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Whta if by doing whatever you want you unintentionally harm them?Does that make youievil?

It depends on if it was by negligence or if it was unavoidable, and what it was that I did. Say I did drugs, and then stole someone's VCR...the theft would be immoral, not doing drugs.

I'd need an example or two to properly answer the question.

Just in general if you unintentionally harmed someone by doing what you wanted and they thought you where evil does that make there opinion valid?

If it is as a result of negligence, yes, it is wrong.

If not, it's not.

Either way, I would be responsible and should make restitution as best as I could.

Posted: 9/11/2004 6:38:37 PM EDT

[#29]

Intentionally causing harm, pain, injury to others.

There's plenty of it here, plenty of it there.

The worst is hate driven and there's plenty of that here and plenty of it there.

People too stupid to see people for people. Only when you can reduce someone to less than a person - though name calling and the like - can you really do evil to them. The gang members look upon the rest of us as non-them and therefore lesser. Doing harm to another member of their gang would be unthinkable under most circumstances but they'd do the same to us without a second thought.

It's all about hate and using it to do your evil. If you can get someone to hate someone else you can use them. Look at how the KKK and Nazis raised their kids to hate the black and the Jews. Look back at WWII US propaganda at how we taught our people to hate the "Japs" and the "Huns", a few years later it was the Chinese "hoards" and Red "menace".

If you identify the human characteristic in the enemy normal human moral repulsion prevents us from doing evil upon them. There's an excellent book called On Killing : The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War and Society by LtCol Dave Grossman that I recommend for a start on the understanding of hate and killing.

Grossman (psychology, West Point) presents three important hypotheses: 1) That humans possess the reluctance to kill their own kind; 2) that this reluctance can be systematically broken down by use of standard conditioning techniques; and 3) that the reaction of "normal" (e.g., non-psychopathic) soliders to having killed in close combat can be best understood as a series of "stages" similar to the ubiquitous Kubler-Ross stages of reaction to life-threatening disease

Posted: 9/11/2004 6:51:35 PM EDT

[#30]

What is Evil?

It is like pornography. Cannot give you definitive description, but I know it when I see it.

Posted: 9/11/2004 7:39:47 PM EDT

[#31]

Money.

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - What is Evil?

General » General Discussion

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us