Hey gang, I have question: If one preforms evil tasks from a place of righteousness is the evil act pardonable? Is it no longer considered evil? What is evil? What is good? Is our perception of evil/good warped? Thank you, Novalis
No. Still evil. Good and evil are dictated by the society you live in. There are general guidelines that all societies have and they are basically do not do to others what the average person would not want done to him. No, we only think other peoples perceptions of good/evil are warped. You're welcome.
L LET ME REPHRASE THIS: If your mother was dying and she asked you to put her out of her misery by injecting a fatal chemical into her blood allowing her to die peacefully, and you did it, were you then not doing something evil out of love and thus justifying your actions?
Does the end justify the means? Sometimes. No. Evil means are still evil even if they are "justifiable" as the lesser of two evils. It depends on the situation. Killing a man to prevent him from hurting a child might be good. Executing him after the fact might be evil. Your perception may not match somebody else's perception. Whose is warped?
If it's all relative to the individual then who get's to decide who is guilty and who is innocent if an evil act is committed? Can this ever be done fairly?
It isn't relative to the individual. It's relative to society, a given culture at a given time. Lawmakers decide what an "evil act" is. Judges and juries decide the extent of evil in any given set of circumstances. "Fairness" is relative.
You would be found guilty of murder. It would be prudent to just take your mom to Oregon and have her wishes granted there for they allow for assisted suicide and she would be treated mush better and you wouldn't have the guilt of killing your own mom on your conscious for the rest of your life. Good and bad many times are spelled out in the laws of your state, county or country that you reside in. Follow the laws and you are doing right break them and you are doing wrong.
Aiding a suicide is a very taboo subject and some people might see this as an evil act because it's unnatural.
If lawmakers decide what an evil act is then there is a potential for them to warp the meaning of the word evil to suit their agendas and goals. Very corrupt.
As opposed to what? What system of good and evil would you propose that is not subject to the possibility of corruption?
Like I said it dependes on the society what is good and evil. The point is that there is no inherent good and evil, it is what society dictates. For instance in the US there is a movie about an american hero who shot 120 (or whatever the number was) people in the head. It seems to me that anyone who chooses to systematically kill 12o people is evil. Society says I am wrong. Oh well....
I understand that corruption is just a reality we must live with, but what I have an issue with I understand corruption will always live alongside anything righteous, but I’m wondering why we allow a selective few people to hold the right to decide what is evil and what is good? I mean it’s a big part of our lives and it frightens me that only an elite group of people hold the power to decide what is evil, you know? It’s such a massive part of our everyday lives.
You're talking about two separate issues: "What are good and evil?" and "How should society decide?" If society lets political/economic elites tell it what is evil, that's no better than letting a "god" tell it what is evil. Of course, in the long run we do decide for ourselves whether the elites or the gods know what they're talking about.
Sure... Might makes right is an aphorism with several potential meanings (in order of increasing complexity): In English, the phrase is most often used in negative assessments of expressions of power. The second related idea associated with the phrase connotes that a society's view of right and wrong is determined, like its perspective on history, by those currently in power. The term can be used in the descriptive, rather than prescriptive way, in the same sense that people say that "History is written by the victors." Since every person labels what he/she thinks is good for himself/herself as "right," only those who are able to defeat their enemies are the ones who can push their idea of what is right into fruition. In terms of morality, those who are the strongest will rule others and have the power to determine right and wrong. By this definition, the phrase manifests itself in a normative sense. This meaning is often used to define a proscriptive moral code for society to follow, as well as while discussing social Darwinism and Weberian themes of the authority of the state (e.g. 'Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft'). Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
But the laws in many states do not allow for assisted suicides so depending where you live you could be found guilty of murder no matter what or who you killed. Killing anyone, family included, is not being a good person in the eyes of the law. A merciful act the way you want goes against what is considered bad by many other people including me.
