Even atheists, bereft as they are of help from a divine authority, seem still aware of a difference between good and evil, while religious folk are so preoccupied with it that they speak of little else. For me it is a puzzlement: I try to get along by doing as little harm as possible, but if I knew exactly what evil was I could avoid it and have confidence that all other acts were good.

     Please, anyone who really knows what evil is, provide a definition that I can use for guidance.
Seán

What a topic!

Wikipedia does a good job, I think, in summarizing different outlooks/definitions about evil. Here's a portion:
Source:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evil

quote:

Is evil universal? A fundamental question is whether there is a universal, transcendent definition of evil, or whether evil is determined by one's social or cultural background.[citation needed] C. S. Lewis, in The Abolition of Man, maintained that there are certain acts that are universally considered evil, such as rape and murder. On the other hand, many acts now considered evil have been termed as acceptable in some societies at different times.[citation needed] Up until the mid-19th century, the United States — along with many other countries — practiced forms of slavery. The Nazis, during World War II, found genocide acceptable, as did the Imperial Japanese Army with the Nanking Massacre, Young Turks with the Armenian Genocide and the Hutu Interhamwe in the Rwandan genocide.[4][5] Universalists consider evil independent of culture, and wholly related to acts or intents. Thus, while the ideological leaders of Nazism and the Hutu Interhamwe accepted (and considered it moral) to commit genocide, the belief in genocide as "fundamentally" or "universally" evil holds that those who instigated this genocide are actually evil.[improper synthesis?] Views on the nature of evil tend to fall into one of four opposed camps:

* Moral absolutism holds that good and evil are fixed concepts established by a deity or deities, nature, morality, common sense, or some other source. See Catechism of the Catholic Church |url=http://www.vatican.va/archive/catechism/p3s1c1a6.htm |

* Amoralism claims that good and evil are meaningless, that there is no moral ingredient in nature.

* Moral relativism holds that standards of good and evil are only products of local culture, custom, or prejudice.

* Moral universalism is the attempt to find a compromise between the absolutist sense of morality, and the relativist view; universalism claims that morality is only flexible to a degree, and that what is truly good or evil can be determined by examining what is commonly considered to be evil amongst all humans.

Author Sam Harris notes that universal morality can be understood using measurable (i.e. quantifiable) metrics of happiness and suffering, both physical and mental, rooted in how the biology of the brain processes stimuli.[6] Plato wrote that there are relatively few ways to do good, but there are countless ways to do evil, which can therefore have a much greater impact on our lives, and the lives of other beings capable of suffering. For this reason, philosophers such as Bernard Gert maintain that preventing evil is more important than promoting good in formulating moral rules and in conduct.

Tough subject, eh?

Jeff

quote:

Tough subject, eh?—CompGuy

     Apparently. Wikipedia offers a bouquet of viewpoints but lacks a solid definition of either good or evil. What is your personal concept regarding evil?
Seán

quote:

* Moral absolutism holds that good and evil are fixed concepts established by a deity or deities, nature, morality, common sense, or some other source. See Catechism of the Catholic Church |url=http://www.vatican.va/archive/catechism/p3s1c1a6.htm |

Okay, I'll take a stab at this...sorta...and hope I'm not coming across as banal.

Doesn't Christianity hold that man is inherently evil and can only be saved from sin through the grace of The Trinity?

I heard sin once defined as anything that separates you from your relationship with God. That's a bit too narrow for me and are sin and evil the same? I don't think so.

How does "nature" establishes evil.

I can't define evil to anyone's satisfaction but keep talking and I'll ponder it. Goodness however, is best described in The Beatitudes and continues to hold....IMHO.

quote:

Doesn't Christianity hold that man is inherently evil and can only be saved from sin through the grace of The Trinity?—Avenging Peach

Peach,
     Does that imply that man, alone, is evil? From that standpoint exterminating all humanity would solve the problem neatly. I'd hate to see that come to pass, though: We've worked so long and hard to evolve an intellect and all that effort would be wasted.
Seán

quote:

Peach,
Does that imply that man, alone, is evil? From that standpoint exterminating all humanity would solve the problem neatly. I'd hate to see that come to pass, though: We've worked so long and hard to evolve an intellect and all that effort would be wasted.
Seán

Yes, it would be a damn shame.

Peachy

The problem with absolute morality is deciding who gets to decide what the absolute rules are.

Henry

Evil is like pornography--I may not be able to define it, but I know it when I see it.

But I also know that my view of what's evil is culturally-based and many people will disagree with me. I think I'm less judgmental than most people and many things others call evil I'd demote to a less loaded word, like wrong or bad. I regard murder and rape as generally evil. I can conceive of circumstances where even murder and rape are not evil, but those are usually not real situations. (For example, if I don't murder X then Y will ignite a nuclear bomb in NYC or Z will murder my entire family. If I make a choice of the greater good for the greater number, murdering X isn't an act of true evil for me. But these theoretical cases rarely come up. Just making a point.)

Jeff

quote:

...many things others call evil I'd demote to a less loaded word, like wrong or bad...—CompGuy

Jeff,
     Your distinction between "bad" and "evil" seems an important one to me. Many truly bad things, such as earthquakes and epidemics, are in no way evil. I suggest that evil can exist only in circumstances that include some element of malice. If I am right, then evil is entirely human in its origin because humans are the only things known to be malicious.
     That leaves an open question: Is there any situation for which maliciousness is justified?
Seán

quote:

Your distinction between "bad" and "evil" seems an important one to me.

Kind of like distinguishing between disapproving of something (even strongly), and wanting people who do it to be thrown in jail?

Henry

Not quite, Henry:
     By malice I mean the desire to inflict harm, or to see harm inflicted, on another. It would be a bad thing
if I accidentally set my neighbor's house afire. If I did it spitefully, then it would be an evil thing.
Seán

     While all malice is qualitatively the same, its quantitative range is vast: A high-school girl may hope her rival gets a pimple on her nose on prom night; a tyrant may yearn to exterminate his opposition. Such thoughts are evil in proportion to their consequences. However, neither thought is sinful.
     To be sinful a thought or action must violate some rule established by the Deity and brought to us by designated messengers called Prophets. Among the Abrahamic religions, the rules for Muslims and for Jews are so extensive that obeying them is almost a full-time job. Christians have it easier with a simple ten-rule list that can be ignored at least six days of seven.
     As it happens all the rules assume the simple nomadic and agrarian cultures predominant at the times when they were formulated and violating them required only rudimentary equipment such as a neighbor's spouse and a tent for privacy. Those days have passed, unfortunately, and our cultures have grown complex. Let the old rules stand, I say, but send another Prophet to proclaim rules about deeds like software piracy and fraudulent foreclosures.
Seán

quote:

To be sinful a thought or action must violate some rule established by the Deity and brought to us by designated messengers called Prophets.

So rape isn't a sin, or child molestation, or slavery, to name just a few? No Deity or Prophet says anything against them, right?

Your definition requires a Deity to establish what a sin is. For me, then, since there is no Deity, there are no sins. But there are plenty of things that are morally wrong.

How about Good? Is it simply the absence of Evil?

Jeff

quote:

So rape isn't a sin, or child molestation, or slavery, to name just a few? No Deity or Prophet says anything against them,right?—CompGuy

Jeff,
     If we adhere to the accepted definition—Sin: transgression of divine law (Webster's Random House, unabridged)—you are correct. As far as I know no divine ruling prohibits any of your examples; in fact, some
scriptural passages appear to condone each one.
     Notwithstanding that, we can agree rape, child molestation and slavery are egregious evils. Fortunately the atheists among us can respond with instant moral outrage and need not wait for instructions from above.
     Tentatively, I am defining good as beneficial thoughts or actions associated with benevolent intent, but
that may change when I've thought about it further.
Seán

quote:

Originally posted by Sean:
     While all malice is qualitatively the same, its quantitative range is vast: A high-school girl may hope her rival gets a pimple on her nose on prom night; a tyrant may yearn to exterminate his opposition. Such thoughts are evil in proportion to their consequences. However, neither thought is sinful.

Huh? Who says? You, the great judge? Thoughts and words are under as much scrutiny as deeds. The Lord knoweth the thoughts of the wise, that they are vain. Wow! Isn't that the truth! The word 'wise' in most biblical passages generally means the well-educated; and Jesus thanks the Father in heaven for revealing things to the least-educated, and hiding them from those who think themselves so wise and clever!

The Lord also also knows the thoughts of those who are being tempted by evil desires, whether it be sex or money or killing someone. The thought is as sinful as the deed! Perhaps you should read James 1:13-15. I'll even make it easy for you.

Your approach to what is considered 'evil or good' leaves much to be desired. You need to spend some time with the drug dealers on the streets, or the alcoholics stumbling into their homes, or the tyrant in a household who beats up anyone who doesn't obey him according to his terms, or the rapists hiding behind a bush waiting for some nice young girl to come jogging by. These transgressors need to take one look at you, beat you to a pulp, knock your teeth out, break your nose and leave you for dead. Perhaps that's the only way you will learn the meaning of 'evil'. Oh, gee, that's right. You seem to think that if Deity hasn't said "Thou shalt not beat up thy neighbor, or rape thy neighbor's wife," they are not 'sinful' acts. What are you? A literalist?

quote:

To be sinful a thought or action must violate some rule established by the Deity and brought to us by designated messengers called Prophets

Yeah, sure, according to you; but according to these messengers called Prophets, the law is now written in our hearts so that we know the difference between 'good and evil'!

Unfortunately, nowadays with anti-religious views and 'doing your own thing' being promoted all over the airways, the younger generation does not know evil from good. Young women are more than happy to expose their breasts and butts to the camera, as are men who are more than happy to expose their genitals, and bed anyone who is willing. Wall Street moguls are more than happy to rob you of your money and home; in fact, they delight in it. But gee, that's not evil, is it? Their thoughts planned these schemes well in advance before carrying them out; but gee, if there were no proportional consequences for them, how can such thoughts be sinful?

quote:

Let the old rules stand, I say, but send another Prophet to proclaim rules about deeds like software piracy and fraudulent foreclosures.

He already has.

Sela

quote:

These transgressors need to take one look at you, beat you to a pulp, knock your teeth out, break your nose and leave you for dead.

What a kind and loving idea! Jesus would be so proud of you! And that's only for the philosophical thoughts Sean has which disagree with your own. I wonder what you'd propose if Sean had actually done something sinful!

If your attitude is what religions breed, I'm VERY glad that I've always been--and remain--an atheist.

Jeff

quote:

...I'm VERY glad that I've always been--and remain--an atheist.—Jeff

     That's like standing by a snake pit and saying you are glad you're not in it. To be really glad you should have been in one and then escaped.
Seán

I'm glad enough for my purposes.

I'm glad to be alive. I was held up at gunpoint and shot in 1985--was in critical condition for three weeks. I survived.

I'd rather have skipped the whole thing and be less glad to be alive today, if you catch my drift.

Sela--I keep getting saved. And I don't see any white horses...

Jeff

quote:

I was held up at gunpoint and shot...—Jeff

     I was aware of that. Your recovery gives you ample cause for gladness. But you must still be wondering why your assailant had the evil urge to kill you. Perhaps malice needs no purpose just as opinions can form without prior cogitation.
Seán

quote:

Originally posted by CompGuy:

quote:

These transgressors need to take one look at you, beat you to a pulp, knock your teeth out, break your nose and leave you for dead.

What a kind and loving idea! Jesus would be so proud of you! And that's only for the philosophical thoughts Sean has which disagree with your own. I wonder what you'd propose if Sean had actually done something sinful!

If your attitude is what religions breed, I'm VERY glad that I've always been--and remain--an atheist.

Jeff

Your post is PROOF that the vanity of men is far more frightening than any other strategy of philosophical thoughts.

Oh, really, my attitude is what religions breed?

That blatancy reveals that you obviously haven't read any of my accounts (or chose to ignore it) where I have written how transgressors against my body beat me to a pulp until I was unconscious, broke my nose, punched my eyes until they were black and blue, and left me for dead!

Yet the men posting here do not have the vaguest idea what EVIL is!

quote:

What a kind and loving idea! Jesus would be so proud of you!

Yes, He is proud of me and indeed, reinforces the fundamental principle of religion that "Vengeance Is Mine, I Will Repay," Saith the Lord!

That is the Day I wait for every day, Judgment Day !! as shown by the many posts on this religious forum with Donald. And when it comes, I will be the first in line to STAND UP FOR JESUS, for at last, JUSTICE will prevail!

That is the Day of Triumph!

Sela

quote:

But you must still be wondering why your assailant had the evil urge to kill you.

No. He was a drug addict and wanted money. I said something dumb when he asked, and he pulled the trigger. I don't think he wanted to kill me. He just didn't want any trouble in getting the money in my wallet.

Sela, sorry to hear of your past incident. I'm glad you survived.

quote:

you obviously haven't read any of my accounts (or chose to ignore it)

And where would I have read about that? I don't remember you posting anything about it here, and I'm pretty sure I would have remembered that if I had read it.

You really think that justice involves the end of the world (with its billions of humans dead) and the saving of only a relative handful?

When I said "What a kind and loving idea! Jesus would be so proud of you!" I was being sarcastic. You have condemned to hell virtually anyone who has tried to discuss issues with you on this board. And by what you post, you feel the same fate awaits most people. You particularly seem to hate men, although I've never understood why we're singled out. I'm only an ignorant atheist, but if faith in Jesus means anything at all it must help you be loving and kind to your fellow humans. Sadly, I see you justifying hatred and vengeance by your faith, just the opposite of what Jesus preached.

Jeff

quote:

He just didn't want any trouble in getting the money in my wallet.—Jeff

     If your assessment is correct, mine must be revised. I thought you assailant did an evil thing by shooting you, but if he felt no malice, what he did was merely very bad. I had not considered someone could be so devoid of human feeling as to attempt a murder coldly.
     I don't think such coldness should be attributed to drugs; more likely it comes from a major defect in the person's character that preceded his addiction.
Seán

     I am beginning to see that sin can be associated with emotions other than malice and, therefore, may not be evil. The all time favorite sin of concupiscence, for instance, is driven by lust, a separate emotion, and bears no taint of malevolence. Instead it brings joy and pleasure to the lustful and assures species continuity, so it is, in truth, a good or virtue and not an evil thing at all.
     Unfortunately, at the time when lust was unrestrained, it begat grave doubts about an individual's lineage. The patriarchal Prophets deemed such uncertainty unconscionable, so they forthwith condemned lust as sinful and decreed cruel punishments for it. These penalties, both temporal and eternal, were designed to frighten the faithful into continence.
     Now that fertility can be controlled by medication and DNA testing verifies paternity, let us hope the Prophets will relent a little and maybe even lust a bit themselves. I see signs indicating many of the faithful have already adapted to the new realities.
Seán

I think sexual lust has some inherent evils, and is not merely a matter of paternity issues. Relationships among people can be poisoned by it, both through inappropriately acting upon it and also, perhaps more importantly, through the mental models we create of people. If we are in the habit of sexualizing others, then we are seeing them more for what we may get out of them than for their inherent value as persons. We may also judge them by whether we find them attractive or not. All of this feeds into a carnal and self-centered way of thinking, which is very short-sighted at the least and tends toward futility, dissipation, emptiness, destruction. I think all of the great philosophies and religions of the world would agree that that's not the way to attain to a 'good life'.
--
Stephen

quote:

I think sexual lust has some inherent evils...—Stephen

     I almost agree. Lust, like any other strong emotion, can be abused to disastrous effect. I think it is the abuse that's evil, not the lusting.
     I sense that by the promptings of my Conscience (the inner sense of what is right or wrong), which apparently is shared by every normal human. Therin is a mystery: How do we acquire consciences? The Wikipedia article lists many explanations I find unconvincing. I suspect it is a neural pattern that became embedded in our DNA by natural selection, as we evolved into thinking social animals. That hypothesis however is devoid of any insight as to how a conscience works or what it really is. If you have a better understanding of it, I will listen eagerly.
Seán