WHO POSTED THIS?

I've seen this comment of yours several times over in Abuzz -- and I am ambivalent about it. There are times when I feel you have hit the nail squarely on the head -- and others where I think you've banged your thumb, so to speak.

I wonder if "evil" is less a function of an act (ganging up on weaklings) or a function of intent and context.

A pod of whales ganging up on weaklings may (on a base level) merely be weeding out the weak in order to strengthen their species. It may be something that is done without thought (a product of instinct).

A similar situation, however, in humans -- particularly where an individual picks on another (obviously weaker) individual -- could conceivably be "evil." If, of course, we could agree on what "evil" is.

If you would, I'd like to hear more about your theory -- with some specificity to the question of whether you think an act can be both evil and not evil -- depending upon the circumstances. (In other words, the act itself is not evil -- but the context can make an act evil)

Also, some comments of what you mean by evil.

I can certainly see envision definitions of "evil" that will almost require that some things be considered evil.

I certainly have no faith in our government to fix things, as I don't believe those in charge want to fix things. They merely want to accumulate wealth and power. They will do just fine no matter what happens to our country. These the "patriots" who are concerned about returning honor and power to the USA.

Driving in Trance, a set of short stories by the noted writer, D. Lowan, late of Adelaide, from her winter residence in [blanko]. Ms. Dlowan has recently won the Bookeroo Prize, the prestigious award from the Foundation for Digressive Arts, funded by the international bladybladyblah, which is yet another group trying to get creds by giving away money hard earned from raising canes.