8
   

There has never been committed an evil act.

 
 
hamilton
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 May, 2011 06:01 am
@vikorr,
vikorr wrote:

I would think that this discussion hinges on how 'evil' is defined. In terms of doing 'good', there are plenty who do 'evil' in the name of good...and many who wholeheartedly believe they are doing good while doing 'evil'. It's the nature of the beast that we deceive ourselves. Any person who is truly 'good' is actually incapable of doing evil...but then, that would depend on how you define 'good'.

I would think that the old saying 'know thyself' is most at play here.

the road to hell is paved by good intentions...
and no one, no matter how truly good they are, is incapable of evil.
Cyracuz
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 May, 2011 06:56 am
@hamilton,
As expressed in the OP years ago, I believe love is the motivation for all actions. In most cases actions motivated by love of oneself are the ones that can be characterized as evil acts. We in the west are not evil for exploiting the third world (though I think we are acting like ignorant a-holes). It's just that we love ourselves and our lifestyle more than the people who pay the price for it...
0 Replies
 
JLNobody
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 May, 2011 10:33 am
@hamilton,
Hamilton, permit me a qualification: not only is the road to HELL paved by good intentions, SO IS THE ROAD TO HEAVEN.
hamilton
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 May, 2011 06:25 pm
@JLNobody,
well, yes...
0 Replies
 
Cyracuz
 
  1  
Reply Fri 13 May, 2011 02:56 am
I have a friend who used to say that the road to hell was paved with bad excuses...
hamilton
 
  1  
Reply Fri 13 May, 2011 05:59 am
@Cyracuz,
that too...
0 Replies
 
vikorr
 
  1  
Reply Sat 14 May, 2011 11:42 pm
@hamilton,
Quote:
and no one, no matter how truly good they are, is incapable of evil.
How many budhist monks have never been accused of evil?

By the way - what I said depends on how you want to define 'incapable'. There is 'humanly incapable' which would be incorrect for what I said, and 'character/belief structure/emotional maturity incapable' ...where the systems you set in place, set you on paths to other than evil, and the reward is self reinforcing - which is what I meant.

And it would again depend on how you define good and evil.
0 Replies
 
north
 
  1  
Reply Sat 14 May, 2011 11:54 pm
@Cyracuz,
Cyracuz wrote:

I believe this firmly.

There has never, in the known and unknown hisory of mankind, been commited a single evil act.
Nor is there any person alive, today or at any time, who is actually evil.

What I mean is simply that the motivation is always positive. Regardless of the nature and quality of any act, all acts are good because all acts are taken in an attempt to make things better.

And that's the key. What is better? I bet that if we sat down and talked about it we could come up with something pretty good. But in the end, what's better and what's worse would be a matter of choice.
We chose our own idea of what is good, and of what is true.
There is no ultimate truth that we must uncover so that all people can unite in common faith. Truth is a matter of what you chose


so the simple minded , lack of intelligence , easily coceirced , or self absorbed is let off the hook ? hmmm

there is an ultimate truth that we SHOULD uncover and that is our own HUMANITY which should unite us , someday I hope , for all our sake ( we should know this by now )
Cyracuz
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 May, 2011 05:49 am
@north,
No one is let off the hook. They are just not evil.
hamilton
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 May, 2011 12:53 pm
@Cyracuz,
well, not to themselves, at least....
0 Replies
 
JLNobody
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 May, 2011 12:59 pm
@Cyracuz,
I generally agree with your thesis about every act pursuing the "good," but often, as was without doubt the case with Nazis behavior, the professed goodness of their acts against Jews and other "deviants" were mere rationalization for their cowardice, i.e., they killed others to save themselves. But I agree with your general principle. When a lion slaugthers a zebra he is not committing an evil act. Much human "evil" is like that. Also, when a cancer kills my friend, the cancer is not performing an evil act. The consequence of its action is "bad", however: bad for me and for my friend.
Cyracuz
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 May, 2011 01:30 pm
@JLNobody,
Yes. Bad for everyone who saw something good taken away.
You call it a general principle, and I feel that is an important observation to make. It is a general principle, and by thinking of it in these terms we are perhaps better armed to comprehend the many horrors we witness in the world today. But it's mostly ignorance, injustice, greed and fear that lie behind, not evil. And we stand a better chance of opposing those than opposing something as intangible and vague as "evil", in my opinion. And the method is quite different, because where we would perhaps feel that war would be justified against evil, it is clear to everyone that it is relatively useless against ignorance...
JLNobody
 
  1  
Reply Mon 16 May, 2011 02:01 pm
@Cyracuz,
Yes, nations (or at least their leaders) go to war mainly for the reason of ignorance (especially an unawareness of their long-term interests) and institutionalized greed. But they justify to those who must die to implement the leaders' decision on the grounds of the enemy's quality of "evil." (what was Reagan's justificatory phrase, "The Axis of Evil"?).
I agree that it would be far more difficult to prosecute a war against others on the grounds of their ignorance and greed.
0 Replies
 
JLNobody
 
  1  
Reply Mon 16 May, 2011 02:01 pm
@Cyracuz,
Yes, nations (or at least their leaders) go to war mainly for the reason of ignorance (especially an unawareness of their long-term interests) and institutionalized greed. But they justify to those who must die to implement the leaders' decision on the grounds of the enemy's quality of "evil." (what was Reagan's justificatory phrase, "The Axis of Evil"?).
I agree that it would be far more difficult to prosecute a war against others on the grounds of their ignorance and greed.
hamilton
 
  1  
Reply Tue 17 May, 2011 05:52 pm
@JLNobody,
JLNobody wrote:

Yes, nations (or at least their leaders) go to war mainly for the reason of ignorance (especially an unawareness of their long-term interests) and institutionalized greed. But they justify to those who must die to implement the leaders' decision on the grounds of the enemy's quality of "evil." (what was Reagan's justificatory phrase, "The Axis of Evil"?).
I agree that it would be far more difficult to prosecute a war against others on the grounds of their ignorance and greed.

actually, thats arguable. leaders go to war because they are being attacked, instigated, insulted, denied something they want. and yes, sometimes greed. (i think that the worlds past that, though. i could be wrong) they keep fighting because the alternative is unbearable (slavery, oppression, being removed from power) (its usually the third one with dictators), or because they think they stand a chance. citizens go to war because they are either drafted, have lots of patriotism, or because they have no where else to go.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
DOES NOTHING EXIST??? - Question by mark noble
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
morals and ethics, how are they different? - Question by existential potential
Destroy My Belief System, Please! - Discussion by Thomas
Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus
Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus
Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King
 
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 08/23/2019 at 02:58:36