Never liked the tag evil. Especially during trials. Its a cope out, makes it seem it was some unnatural thing commiting henious acts.where the truth is we dont like seeing the depraved acts that humans do. Sent from my SM-T210 using Grasscity Forum mobile app
Did you mean to ask - "How can evil he OBJECTIVE when people are so different?" If so, its a valid question. The way I see it, the base definition "as you would have don't to yourself" isn't enough, as another poster said How about this. Humans have empathy. Humans also have the right to freedom and life. Good vs evil, is defined by your ability to empathize with another humans rights. Does exercizing your freedom knowingly infringe upon another's freedom or right to life? This is still the same concept. It just add "as you have done to you, and visa versa" Meaning you don't want to die, and your neighbor doesn't want to he robbed. Maybe you don't mind being robbed. But you have empathy (good) and know that robbing your neighbors is against their freedom. I think I said earlier in this thread, or maybe in another thread, it is about mutualism. Mutualism isn't subjective. Its the idea that all parties can benefit overall the most ammount. -yuri
I think the most important thing to remember is - you can't run from yourself. You can do all the bad, immoral, degenerate things you want. Yeah people will forgive you, time heals all wounds as they say. But you gotta carry that shit around in your brain until the day you die. Is that really the kind of life you want to live?
Good and evil are opposite ends of a double ended stick. Whether the stick somehow exists beyond our brains slicing and dicing and labeling machinery is anyone's guess. If it does so exist, I'd be curious to know on what realm of reality it abides, and how that relates to our neural wiring which produces all the associations by which we say "that is evil" or "that is good". If good and evil actually are merely another subjectively defined set of this-vs-that mental pigeonholes, then Hitler was no more evil then Mother Theresa in any real sense beyond that of human opinion. Conversely, Mother Theresa wasn't "gooder" in any real sense than Adolf. In that case and most other ones, good and evil would just be a bunch of subjective opinions collected into a general consensus and differing between people groups and regions (as is somewhat the case). But I honestly don't know which way is so. The answer is related to a lot of other considerations that are no less difficult to assess