Does Evil Exist?

[Aileron]

There are a lot of religious topics lately, and I should have posted this sooner. Face it, trying to convert people to a religion to protect oneself from evil is only a waste of time if the subject doesn't recognize evil in the first place.

 

So, here's the poll...do you think evil exists, or do you think its just differences in idealogy.

 

Keep in mind that the poll isn't whether or not every person in history who was branded as evil in fact deserved it, or that if individuals can be 'pure evil' or whatever. Simply put, is there such a thing as evil?

[Yoink]

I voted yes, and then when trying to explain why, I came to a decent contradiction:

 

You have all of these types of 'evil' - extreme brutalities, sadism, masochism. They all seem to be related to either physical or mental incapacities. I guess I could be somewhat shortsighted, but here goes - brutality is often a result of adrenaline. There are cases of (they just happen to be in Iraq because they're recent) of soldiers listening to Ozzfest CDs while facing off with insurgents and killing much more than necessary. Both sadism, well, any sort of psychosis in general can typically be connected with either a chemical imbalance, mental incapacity, or some sort of 'environmental' affect.

 

Dunno, maybe I'm grasping at straws.

[jacob hunter!]

evil is only whay you make of it really.

[Falcoknight]

I honestly don't know whether I believe evil exists or not. On the one hand, I think no, evil does not exist; it's simply a matter of perspective and opinion. For example, the Holocaust. Do you think Hitler believed what he was doing was "evil?" I certainly don't think he did. While others may have, who has the authority to decide what is "good" and what is "evil?" How can such a decision be made when there are such varying views on what is good and bad, and what could cons!@#$%^&*ute something as evil or not. Really, unless there is someone out there with the authority to decide what is good and what is evil that I haven't heard about, it all boils down to perspective and opinion, which would technically mean there is no "evil" just someone's point of view.

 

On the other hand, just because Hitler may not have thought his attempted genocide of the Jews was evil, does that mean that it wasn't? If there is no authoritative figure to decide for us, isn't it up to the human race to decide what is good and what is evil? Just because someone may not view something as good or evil, doesn't necessarily mean that it isn't good or evil.

 

It's like.. Take a track runner from Maine, say he's a very fast Maine runner. Now, by California standards, he is very slow, but by Maine standards, he is very fast. So if he a fast runner, or a slow runner? Or is it all a matter of opinion? Or do opinions no matter, and is there some points that one must meet when they are considered fast no matter what, that we all recognise on a subconcious level?

I realize if you read into it too much, that's not a very good example, so don't read into it too much =P

 

But basically, I cannot decide.

 

Also, sorry for any typos or misspellings, I don't have my contacts in and I can see neither the letters on the keyboard nor the words that I am typing on the screen.

[Dav]

With a debate like this the FIRST thing we must do is define the word at the centre of the discussion. (I have been involved in many debates where much of the session has been spent debating the term rather then debating the issue, something im always keen to avoid)

 

I will use dictionary.com for this.

 

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Evil

 

e·vil /ˈivəl/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[ee-vuhl] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation

–adjective

1. morally wrong or bad; immoral; wicked: evil deeds; an evil life.

2. harmful; injurious: evil laws.

3. characterized or accompanied by misfortune or suffering; unfortunate; disastrous: to be fallen on evil days.

4. due to actual or imputed bad conduct or character: an evil reputation.

5. marked by anger, irritability, irascibility, etc.: He is known for his evil disposition.

–noun

6. that which is evil; evil quality, intention, or conduct: to choose the lesser of two evils.

7. the force in nature that governs and gives rise to wickedness and sin.

8. the wicked or immoral part of someone or something: The evil in his nature has destroyed the good.

9. harm; mischief; misfortune: to wish one evil.

10. anything causing injury or harm: Tobacco is considered by some to be an evil.

11. a harmful aspect, effect, or consequence: the evils of alcohol.

12. a disease, as king's evil.

–adverb

13. in an evil manner; badly; ill: It went evil with him.

—Idiom

14. the evil one, the devil; Satan.

[Origin: bef. 900; ME evel, evil, OE yfel; c. Goth ubils, OHG ubil, G übel, OFris, MD evel]

 

—Related forms

e·vil·ly, adverb

e·vil·ness, noun

 

—Synonyms 1. sinful, iniquitous, depraved, vicious, corrupt, base, vile, nefarious. See bad1. 2. pernicious, destructive. 6. wickedness, depravity, iniquity, unrighteousness, corruption, baseness. 9. disaster, calamity, woe, misery, suffering, sorrow.

—Antonyms 1. righteous.

Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1)

Based on the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2006.

 

Based upon this I voted yes. The reason for this is you can only answer no if you have no morals of your own and thus consider everything acceptable i.e murder and rape are as acceptable as drinking OJ and going to the park.

 

Because for almost everyone this is not the case and someone evil is a person that carries out an immoral act, usually dictated by the popular view of what is right or wrong by sociaty, we have a line which is able to dictate who is "good" and who is "evil"

[Confess]

I believe that indefinitly, just like there is an absolute truth, that there is an absolute evil. What I mean by that, is that there is something that, whether or not we think it is fact or not, is evil.

 

I do, however, believe that there are 2 evils. Just like truth. There is one that is definite, and one that is always changed according to human morals and 'laws'. But what is right in man's eyes, isnt necessarily right...

 

If you are talking about evil as in, a force, though...I believe that naturally there is an evil force. I also believe that every human is born with an evil nature. (Attack of the Babies)

[SeVeR]

If our life is threatened, we will murder.

If the human race is to become extinct, we may justify rape.

If our life depends on it, we will steal.

 

There is only one basic underlying moral (if you can call it that), which is the need to survive and propagate the spieces. If something threatens that, then we will kill, rape, steal, commit genocide or whatever ghastly Christian-westernized sin you can think off.

 

The definition of evil is not that clear. I see it as an absolute, and i don't believe in absolutes so voted no. Murdering, stealing, raping are acts that will bring threats to our personal survival and could thus be considered evil, but as i said before these can all be justified given the right situation. The "right situation" is also open to interpretation, what you can or can't kill for is never clear, there is no clear well-defined line, thus there is no evil. Things can only be more evil than other things: moral relativity.

Edited July 15, 2007 by SeVeR

[Dav]

Even in the instances you describe there will still be moral line of right and wrong, for instance you may not kill and rape members of your own tribe (humans are tribal at the most basic, it has been demonstrated man existed in unitis and cooperated) and so by our definintion even then there will be a capasity for evil.

[JDS]

basicly if you have Ying , then you need Yang.

 

 

The real question is 'Do you believe that good exists' because you cant have evil with out good, and you cant have good with out evil

[Confess]

Dont forget, you also need to seperate wants...from evil. Although wants can be evil, just because you dont get what you want doesnt mean that it is evil. Edited July 15, 2007 by Confess

[Aileron]

I don't agree with the Yin/Yang model actually. It is based upon a concept of balance as well as cyclic time. I'm not sure who first used the Yin/Yang, so pardon me if I'm wrong about this, but to the ancient Chinese everything they observed in nature was cyclic such as Day/Night and Summer/Winter. However, in reality time is linear, the Sun is bigger than the Moon, temperature is increasing year to year, and the illusion of cyclic time is ultimately the result of rotational inertia and gravity.

 

I simply believe that good dominates evil and evil prefers to confuse the issue by either pretending to be as strong as good or by convincing people that neither of them exist. Evil generally does this by putting on sheep's clothing whenever it shows up.

 

I know I take one of the fringe positions on this issue in this environment, but I view evil as an actual sentience, similar to a computer virus. On one hand, you can't see a computer virus with your eyes or measure its weight on a scale. On the other, you can certainly tell if your computer has one. While a virus' purpose is to reproduce and destroy software, evil's purpose is to self-reproduce and eventually conquer and destroy sentient minds.

 

 

SeVeR, I know you believe in two forces: animal instinct and cultural indoctrination. Explain the typical rape-murderer then. You explained self-defense (which doesn't explain murder because by definition murder excludes self-defense as well as utilitarian concerns such as warfare and execution.) , and I don't know what Orwellian future would require rape for human survival, but explain why someone would go out, hunt down a woman, rape her, and then kill her when that action is opposed by both culture and instict. (Yes, the event would include sexual action, but the subsequent murder would make procreation by that method inpossible all while increasing the chance of the perpetrator's brain being fried in an electric chair. All in all survival instinct would oppose the action.)

 

Why would Enron executives forge accounting records under that model? They certainly didn't need the extra money to survive, but their survival was put in jeopardy when they were caught, and according to the dominant culture that action was wrong. I for one can answer the question simply by replying "greed", but greed is a form of evil and you use a different model.

[Greased_Lightning]

Tough call, but I don't think I really believe in pure evil. Evil acts, yes, but to label the perpetrators as being evil people is just our way of making ourselves feel better. If they're "evil" then they aren't real humans like us and so we don't have to worry about us doing something like that because we're better. Like several have said, it's a matter of perspective. Also, wouldn't something purely evil be purely negative? You look at all the 'evil' figures in history and they all have some positive attributes, even if they choose to use those in the wrong way. Intelligence is good, cunning is good, so can a person who is intelligent and cunning but does unspeakable acts be purely evil? My definition of pure evil would be a thing that would destroy all existence, itself included, without thought or reason. Nothing left ever again.

[JDS]

aileron my model would only work if one believed that good exists as well, good and evil are just words we put to actions acording to what we find 'just'

 

there is no set standard for good and evil only what we see fit to judge

[Dav]

actually JDS is not wrong here. Without one the other logically cannot exist.

 

Let me use Light and Dark as an analogy.

 

We all know of the opposite states light and dark. We can all debate the point at which light levels constiute one or the other but we cnl all agree that both exist.

 

Now lets for this case assume light is the only state and dark does not exist. Whlist we would have a word for "light" it would not be light in the way we know it as it would be thought of in a another way, i.e in a way where there is not opposite much like we think of time. We know time is always there and it must be there for normality and would not consider events with time absent or in reverse.

[AstroProdigy]

I believe there is evil, but that evil is relative. Whether there is absolute evil or not falls largely to whether you have religious belief or not. I'd like to think breaking with the golden rule is "evil" behavior, but that's just my opinion. Whether killing someone in self defense is evil I'd say it's a justified evil. Stealing from someone who stole all your possessions would also qualify as a justified evil. It's still the wrong thing to do, but there's enough reason to do it to override the moral question. Again this is just my opinion. Other people have their own idea of evil and that's fine.

[NBVegita]

I don't believe there are absolute evils or absolute goods. And I do believe in a balance. We need a balance to survive. In all things.

 

As for your post ail, yes things are getting warmer, but they will then get colder. The planet has been much hotter than it is today, and after every peak of heat, comes an ice age.

 

There may not always be a direct balance, note that there is definately an abundance of what would be considered good by most in the world.

 

But there must be both.

 

Good and evil are simply based off of morals.

[Drake7707]

if evil is based upon lack of morals, and it is the opposite of what you feel is right, then yes.

 

But if you mean there's an stereotypic evil force trying to destroy everything, or doing all sorts of bad stuff, then no

[AstroProdigy]

Lust is an obvious case where evil is relative. In Christianity this is evil, but in my views as long as no one gets hurt there's absolutely nothing wrong with it. There's certainly nothing "evil" about gluttany and sloth in my view and a limited amount of pride can be a good thing. Again this is just my view and other people's views are different, but all this goes to show is that evil is in the eye of the beholder and there isn't really an "absolute evil" unless there is God and even then it's iffy. Edited July 18, 2007 by AstroProdigy

[Animate Dreams]

Lust is not "evil" by Christian standards. Don't let your anti-Christian bias get in the way of your logic.

[Incomplete]

Like JDS said. If there is no good then nothing would be evil.

[NBVegita]

And vice versa if there is no evil then nothing would be good.

[Incomplete]

Exactly

 

I swear there was a song (or a part of a song) done by the devil in South Park the movie about it.

[AstroProdigy]

Lust is not "evil" by Christian standards. Don't let your anti-Christian bias get in the way of your logic.

Oh sorry lust is not evil if you first have been anointed by a wizard...I mean priest and given permission to express one of your most natural human desires. Go look up seven deadly sins. When the religion teaches you that virginity is holy and brings you closer to God it naturally follows that the opposite is evil and brings you closer to the devil. It's the same thing as if invading half the world in the name of self defense is good then doing the same today is also accepted by many Muslims. Is it right? No, but it's a natural reaction to ins!@#$%^&*utions that teach absolutism and a dual world.

Edited July 26, 2007 by AstroProdigy

[Tiq]

I voted yes. The self-preservation argument (the willingness to do anything to survive) works when we are talking about people whose survival is threatened. Hitler's survival was not at all threatened when he entered into his political career. He was his own worst enemy, and he probably knew somewhere in his mind that what he was doing was a danger to Germany, if not himself.

 

I am a strong believer in seeing things through other people's eyes before judging them, but no matter how hard you try, you can't find justification in some people's actions. I believe that evil existed, and still exists. Hitler is proof of that, in my eyes.

 

I think the more interesting question would be whether or not people are born evil. I don't believe that evil is born, I believe that it is made. Hitler was made evil by the manner in which he grew up. I think evil is a result of how we are raised; evil is not genetic.

[AstroProdigy]

What Hitler did to the Jews played zero role on his downfall. He got beaten by the Allies for overextending his aggression+not invading the Soviet Union before winter set+not taking the British Isles. What he did to the Jews united Germans against them and was a great propaganda tool. It also sent a message to other minorities not to mess with Hitler. Anyway, the Ottoman Empire committed a genocide on 3 million Christians and has only been rewarded by this with Muslim absolute supremacy in Anatolia. Hitler is proof of a psychopath if anything. Good people in Germany actually thought he was a great man at the time and now people see him as the most evil person in history. It's all a matter of perception. If he had won in World War 2 he'd be seen as a saint. After all many saints in Christian history were actually m!@#$%^&* murderers as were popes.