This thread is about evil. e v i l Some people like to put a "D" in front on that word, but that's not necessary. We all know what it means. By my count, there are like 47 primal words in the language of all of us. There are the first generation ones like F O O D ! and R U N ! Then there are the second gen ones like "love and hate" and "good and evil" Do you know what "Evil" means. Evil means you have nothing! I think the word "nothing" came much later in the history of time, after much evil. I am so sad about this Texas A&M girl. If I were her father and had my chance, I would kill that boy or die trying! But what would that do. It would take Evil off my shoulder while Evil says, "My job is done here." And I'd have NOTHING left. I'd have no daughter; no wife; no family; no freedom. But everyone would say, "I can forgive him for killing that boy." Now, we could forgive that father, but can we forgive ourselves when us as a society kills that boy. What is that. Evil can overwhelm a man, but can it overwhelm a society! Do we want it to overwhelm a society. If we kill that boy under the law, Evil is just going to laugh at us and say, "Good job, you got NOTHING! I'll see you all later."
This is a good topic. However I disagree with your statement that everyone knows what evil is. Unlike many others, I do not think there is an absolute, unchangeable force of evil in the world. It is not something "out there" can can be exterminated. Evil, like everything else, has causes and conditions. Every single human is capable of acts of good or evil. Evil actions are those which are based on selfishness, the fundamental delusion that our lives are somehow disconnected from every single other living being.
you're right, evil has many meanings. By "everyone knows what evil means", I guess I meant that everyone who uses the word has a definition for the word for themselves to understand. Like the word "passion." Passion means many things, but most every one of us has a passion. Same with Love, Hate, and Good. The most primal words are often the most complicated to define, because they are so primal to each of us that we can each have our own definition.
I don't understand what this topic is about... What are "primal words," and how are you defining "evil?"
The first words that the human race used--the innate words. The words we can communicate without saying anything. Do you know what happened to the Texas A&M student? That is evil....a force that can consume you.
I read a very good book about the subject of "Evil?" a bit philosophical but a good read nonetheless http://www.amazon.com/Evil-Primer-H...5621441?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1174888203&sr=8-1
the problem is that what is eveil to one might not be evil for another. It is subjective. Ofcourse there are actions that every sane person thinks is evil, like: rape, killing of innocent people etc. the problem is that after that is is subjective. one mans terrorist is another persons freedom fighter. how he will be remembered, as a hero or as a murderer, will be determined by the people who won. two different groups in a war can both think they are right and they are doing the best thing for the people. But they are still fighting, how do you determine who is the nobel one and who is the beast? (this is one of the main reasons i really hate war, and can almost never understand the need for a war).
^You can't. Personalizing a conflict leads to unsound conclusions and decisions. Outside of war, it can be seen in American politics and religious struggles. It's a strange relationship. Competing views could both consider conflict as evil, but they're quick to lay blame upon the other when their disagreement shifts to evil.
Ah moral relativism, how I despise thee. Just because both sides think they are good, that does not necessarily make it so. If we live in a universe of moral absolutes, one side is likely better than the other side, and there is some force/consciousness in the universe that knows which one it is. Under the philosophy you are describing, there is no morality, as anyone can just say that they think they are doing good and others are doing evil, even the murderer, the rapist, the liar, and the thief.
this texas a&m student was home visting, I guess that's why it happened here, and she saw an old boyfriend who she was planning on breaking up with. He's 27 I believe and she was 19. long story short, he killed her, admitted to it last week after her missing for about a week, and at first said he dumped her in a dumpster, then said he dumped several parts of her in several areas, and has lastly admitted to burning her causing much grief for her family. when the police thought she was in a land field they told the family that it was going to be almost logistically impossible to find her. sidenote, I think Law & Order is a pretty realistic show and it seems they have had cases where this was done, but it seems in reality its really not that possible. secondly, why did he lie about disposing the body. it makes me think the police just came up with the burning story so they wouldn't be pressured to recover the body.
I did not say both sides are good, i said that both sides think they do good. I also said in the beginning of my post that some things are obviously wrong(murder, raping, etc). i can understand when some people steal, if i had children and they were dying of hunger, i wouldn't think twice about stealing if that was the only way to save them. But overal i think stealing is not bad. The problem is that when both sides think they are doing the right thing who decides? who decides that they are better. it is arrogant to think that your own side is always right. It is better to try to understand the motives of the others, then just claim that they are evil. Everybody has motives for what they do.Altough some people still do evil things, like i said i will never understand it when you kill a innocent person(ok it still depends on the situation, if the life of my loved ones were in danger i do not know what i would do).
It's not about if you think it's good or bad. It's about what you are willing to believe you represent, regardless of your own atrocities. Nationalism, patriotism. Just nicer words for collectivism. And that's evil.
^ I agree with the last part of your post. I think collectivism can be a very bad thing, if it replaces personal common sense and personal responsibility.
According to articles I've read, it appears that, based on what neighbors say about his barbecuing, there is at least circumstantial evidence to support the burning story.
Collectivism is amoral. In fact, it's a natural tendency for humans. (I think God puts it in us so we will gather to worship Him, but that's for another day.) We all act as part of a group. There have been many who have used collectivism for evil. But others have used collectivism for good. I read a study recently about how people are much, much more likely to give to charity as part of a group than as an individual. Much of the volunteer response to WTC bombings was motivated by patriotism. If you think that was evil, I don't want to know what you think is good.
I diasagree completely. Collectivism, in all its forms, subverts independent thought, dissolves logic, and distorts morality. I wish I could go into this further - but work calls at the moment...
And yet it is a natural tendency of human beings. I don't know you, but I am sure that you are subject to collectivism in many parts of your life. What collectivism motivates you to think or do can be good or evil, but collectivism is amoral.
