evil

Originally posted by mikelom
Hum? Why be verbose, and not further my comment, for the kids reading? 😀

Probably for two reasons; because your post lacked clarity and because I'm not here to follow your lead.

Originally posted by stellspalfie
i have problem with the use of the word "evil". for me its far to simplistic to describe people as evil and doesnt do justice to the complexity of the human brain....................however, the jews didnt deserve what happened to them, but i bet his girlfriend had.

"assuming that you believe that some acts can be evil, which would be more evil:"

This sentence is a conditional, if p then q ...

Originally posted by hopscotch
I am sure the prisons are full of people with the same view.

Your statement is presumptuous. Have you interviewed convicts and done censuses on prisons to make you sure? Are you suggesting that prisons are full of evil people? Who decides what is evil?

In your remark, you are attacking Christianity and in particular, one believer. I am sur n free will, hence it is subjective, and not objective, and ultimately presumptuous.

I see you learned a new word today, congrats.

Originally posted by FabianFnas
Can mental illness be evil?
If so, then neither Hitler nor the boyfriend deserves to be called 'evil'.

It must be something mentally wrong with evil people.

i'm not sure why it has to be mental illness, unless we just stipulate that anyone who commits acts we call 'evil' is mentally ill. i can't see why someone who fits the criteria for sanity in all other respects yet, for example, makes money from contract killing, should be considered mentally ill.

as for the free will/determinism question, i guess if some sort of hard determinism operates, then we will call some acts evil if we are determined to do so and, if not, we won't. if we have some sort of free will, we probably still need to decide if 'evil' is a word that describes anything.

just my opinion. the jury is still out on all this, as far as i know.

incidentally, 'evil' used to be used to describe any malignant event, whether it was caused by human agency or not. thus plague, pestilence, war, famine etc. were all evils. nowadays they are 'acts of God', at least according to the insurance companies. go figure.

Originally posted by Starrman
So you would give the same punishment to a man that kicked a dog for fun as you would a man that killed 20 children?

A tooth for a tooth and an eye for an eye!

Originally posted by Very Rusty
A tooth for a tooth and an eye for an eye!

You're a death-penalty kind of a guy then?

Originally posted by divegeester
No it shouldn't.

You pronounce below your avatar: [b]"treat everyone equal", and yet you post in this thread "Some people are just pure EVIL! FACT!"

Explain please.[/b]

YOU don't get it?


Treat everyone equal....What part don't you get?

You seem to need much explained to you since joining AH. 😛

Originally posted by ChessPraxis
Originally posted by hopscotch
[b]Concepts like good and evil are impossible to apply to reality in a truly objective way.

I am sure the prisons are full of people with the same view.

Originally posted by hopscotch
They operate best in works of fiction like Harry Potter or the Bible.

In your remark, you are attackin ...[text shortened]... in between the two.[/b]

This is your opinion based on what? Your statement is presumptuous.[/b]

Finally, someone who gets it.

Originally posted by orion25
Perhaps I agree with hop, there is no definition of evil, there is only will, action and reaction.

And inaction. All of which can be evil.

Originally posted by Very Rusty
A tooth for a tooth and an eye for an eye!

That's not an answer. Do you think the same punishment for the two crimes is appropriate, if so, what punishment?

Originally posted by Starrman
That's not an answer. Do you think the same punishment for the two crimes is appropriate, if so, what punishment?

A tooth for a tooth and an eye for an eye!

Shame the answer isn't too your liking. I may lose sleep over that!!!

Originally posted by Blackamp
i'm not sure why it has to be mental illness, unless we just stipulate that anyone who commits acts we call 'evil' is mentally ill. i can't see why someone who fits the criteria for sanity in all other respects yet, for example, makes money from contract killing, should be considered mentally ill.

as for the free will/determinism question, i guess if so ...[text shortened]... ays they are 'acts of God', at least according to the insurance companies. go figure.

Lack of empathy I consider mental illness. A contract killer must be without empathy. Therefore I think he is mentally ill.

Same goes for anyone that deserves to be called evil. Something has to be wrong with him. Like lack of empathy.

Originally posted by FabianFnas
Lack of empathy I consider mental illness. A contract killer must be without empathy. Therefore I think he is mentally ill.

Same goes for anyone that deserves to be called evil. Something has to be wrong with him. Like lack of empathy.

I agree completely Fabian. My post on page one, after yours, purported to the same thing. However, it lacked clarity I was told. 😉

Originally posted by Very Rusty
A tooth for a tooth and an eye for an eye!

Shame the answer isn't too your liking. I may lose sleep over that!!!

I'll take that as meaning you'd punish a child abuser by abusing his children and a murderer by murdering someone he cared about. What a ridiculous position to hold.

Originally posted by Suzianne
And inaction. All of which can be evil.

"can" is the key word here. It can also not be evil, and it can be a lot of other stuff that is neither evil nor good. Qualifying something as strictly evil or not evil is a fallacy.