Can an act or actions of an individual be evil?

I think there are more evil actions than evil people . . . I think good people can be forced into doing evil things they may not do normally . . . I think that there are more evil actions that occur in the world than evil people . . .

animals kill other animals to survive, and that's not evil, and I feel that people are animals in many ways in that sense; primal urges may interrupt their logic for long enough for them to commit an 'evil' act . . .

but don't get me wrong, there are a lot of fundamentally evil people out there as well . . . the people that torture, rape and murder for reasons beyond a regular person's comprehension . . . for some kind of primal sexual satisfaction, or a way to feel more powerful . . .
 
There are a lot of people in the world who disagree with you.

Hitler didn't think he was Evil. He thought he was a brave, strong leader trying to rescue the world from destruction and decay.
Lots of people find reasons that infanticide is a good thing, over population, deformity, etc.

So aren't you saying, that, since it's "evident" that some things are Evil no matter what anyone says, and they disagree with you...that the final arbiter and judge and decision-maker about what is Evil and what is not is.............Superman79 ? :huh:

And how did you come by such lofty authority?

damn right!! :p

I was just expressing a generality, as well as my own opinion.
I understand there are nuances, but I more or less take a general hard line because I don't have the patience to mince words with folks who would say "well the child killer didn't think that raping and killing that 5 year old was bad...so we can't say it's bad because we don't know what he was feeling"...that is the logic I can't stand. Yeah Hitler didn't think he was doing evil...that doesn't mean the extermination of millions of innocent lives wasn't evil.

I know there are people who would disagree, and that is fine. It's difference of opinion that makes the world interesting, i was just sharing mine (in a nutshell).
 
You have way too much free time, Whirly. And coming from someone that used to be the news posting champ of the Hype, that's saying something.
 
damn right!! :p

I was just expressing a generality, as well as my own opinion.
I understand there are nuances, but I more or less take a general hard line because I don't have the patience to mince words with folks who would say "well the child killer didn't think that raping and killing that 5 year old was bad...so we can't say it's bad because we don't know what he was feeling"...that is the logic I can't stand. Yeah Hitler didn't think he was doing evil...that doesn't mean the extermination of millions of innocent lives wasn't evil.

I know there are people who would disagree, and that is fine. It's difference of opinion that makes the world interesting, i was just sharing mine (in a nutshell).

Can't say fairer than that.
 
You have way too much free time, Whirly. And coming from someone that used to be the news posting champ of the Hype, that's saying something.

I have about 6 posts a day terry... What's your point? You have about 15 a day.
 
Um, I think this question can be answered by reading some of the threads started by 悪魔天. They seem to showcase, for the most part, the worst human beings have to offer
 
Hitler didn't think he was Evil. He thought he was a brave, strong leader trying to rescue the world from destruction and decay.
Lots of people find reasons that infanticide is a good thing, over population, deformity, etc.
I don't know that's this statement is entirely true. Yes, he probably thought himself a strong ruler, but he also was smart enough to hide his actions from the world for a long while. In addition, while he was anti-semetic, there's a good bit of evidence to support the notion that the Jews were his target simply because they were easy to scapegoat...not because he really, actually, truly thought they were societies downfall.

Remember Machiavelli was a favorite author of both Hitler and Stalin who taught that notions of good and evil were of no consequence, and anything went as far as gaining and maintaining power was concerned.

I doubt Hitler would've argued his actions were compassionate, good or kind.
 
I don't know that's this statement is entirely true. Yes, he probably thought himself a strong ruler, but he also was smart enough to hide his actions from the world for a long while. In addition, while he was anti-semetic, there's a good bit of evidence to support the notion that the Jews were his target simply because they were easy to scapegoat...not because he really, actually, truly thought they were societies downfall.

Remember Machiavelli was a favorite author of both Hitler and Stalin who taught that notions of good and evil were of no consequence, and anything went as far as gaining and maintaining power was concerned.

I doubt Hitler would've argued his actions were compassionate, good or kind.

He also based many of his ideas on the concept of the "Will to Power" and Wilhiems almost namesakes ideas, like, "Thus spake Zarathrusta". Again ideas which taught good and evil were of no consequence.
 
"I do not see why man should not be just as cruel as nature." - Hitler

"Mankind has grown strong in eternal struggles and it will only perish through eternal peace. " - Hitler

"My name isn't really Stephen Colbert. It's actually Ted Hitler... A very distant relationship... Two generations back... Directly... I'm the grandson of Hitler." - Colbert
http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/a/adolfhitle382802.html
 
Nope. Evil being subjective is bunk. Often times, especially with the examples you seem to be alluding to Whirly, there is a distinct right and wrong. Hitlers actions ultimatly were evil. Genocide, infantcide, etc. are evil. nuff'said

to you.:o
 
I don't know that's this statement is entirely true. Yes, he probably thought himself a strong ruler, but he also was smart enough to hide his actions from the world for a long while. In addition, while he was anti-semetic, there's a good bit of evidence to support the notion that the Jews were his target simply because they were easy to scapegoat...not because he really, actually, truly thought they were societies downfall.

Remember Machiavelli was a favorite author of both Hitler and Stalin who taught that notions of good and evil were of no consequence, and anything went as far as gaining and maintaining power was concerned.

I doubt Hitler would've argued his actions were compassionate, good or kind.
Well you can't prove it either way because of the Propaganda angle in even the personal writings of the Nazi guys, but I do know that I've done questionable things, because I didn't think they were wrong at ALL, but I kept them secret because I was smart enough to know that others would think they were wrong, even though I felt I knew better than they did, I knew they'd try to shut me down, which they would think was right, and I would think was wrong.
 
I know some smart arse is going to say Evil is something that is subjective. Blah, Blah, Blah. Aren't some things though so bad that they transcend cultural boundaries. Like genocide etc. So can an act from some one like Hitler be considered anything less than evil?
Smart ass reporting for duty.

Evil is ultimately subjective. We can't prove one way or the other that something is either good or evil. They're not quantifiable.
 
Majority rules
Uhm, no.

At one point, the majority of the civilized world thought slavery was A-OK.

One cannot scientifically prove that something is either good or evil.

Philosophers have been trying to crack this case for thousands of years now. There's a reason they haven't succeeded.
 
Uhm, no.

At one point, the majority of the civilized world thought slavery was A-OK.

One cannot scientifically prove that something is either good or evil.

Philosophers have been trying to crack this case for thousands of years now. There's a reason they haven't succeeded.


yea and? when everyone thought slavery was okay it was okay. We are an evolving society and the Majority rules
 
yea and? when everyone thought slavery was okay it was okay. We are an evolving society and the Majority rules
Ah, I misunderstood. Even then, you're wrong.

Those with power rule. Nine times out of ten, that's the elite, not the majority.
 
Well you can't prove it either way because of the Propaganda angle in even the personal writings of the Nazi guys, but I do know that I've done questionable things, because I didn't think they were wrong at ALL, but I kept them secret because I was smart enough to know that others would think they were wrong, even though I felt I knew better than they did, I knew they'd try to shut me down, which they would think was right, and I would think was wrong.

Just because someone can rationalize their actions, doesn't mean they are not evil. Is there justification for rape, besides that the fact that some horny psychopath is putting his own desires over the well being of another?

There is no reason for rape, if you really want sex, you can go see a hooker or someone. The only reason someone would want to rape someone else is because they are a cruel and sadistic person.

Uhm, no.

At one point, the majority of the civilized world thought slavery was A-OK.

One cannot scientifically prove that something is either good or evil.

Philosophers have been trying to crack this case for thousands of years now. There's a reason they haven't succeeded.

Has any society ever said rape was okay? How can you classify rape as anything but evil.
 
People have their own views,on what act..can be defined as evil.But when you get down to it,it's pretty broad.
 
yes the act of genocism or killing without provocation is evil . it also depends on how you carry out certain acts. if you never fire a bullet you cant be the most evil human being out there.

A person can be evil without firing a gun.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"