I'd say that people arent inherently evil, its the path they choose to take in life after. Perfect example being... Right now, in your city, are most people evil, as in a murderer rapist etc? Most people arent, i mean looking at most of the people on this forum... They havent murdered someone, they didnt rape someone, they didnt go on a killing spree or anything. If people were REALLY inherently evil, this would be an anarchy, every single person would be a vicious backstabber, and everybody would kill without a second thought.
Are people inherently evil?
- Thread starter ??!!?!?_particlename
- Start date
withoutGodIamnothin
Registered Member
Why would they do that? Not at all! Not every person would go around killing everyone. I said ppl have the CHOICE whether to do evil or not.
withoutGodIamnothin
Registered Member
ok then....what is your definition of evil then? huh?
I think we should consider whether or not our terminology is correct. "Good" and "Evil" are such subjective terms that one cannot possibly find true meaning in them. Perspective is kept whenever discussing moral philosophy. Keep in mind that what one man perceives as good another perceives as evil.
Take the September 11th incident of 2001 for instance. The majority of the world saw this as an evil, diabolical act while a sect of individuals saw it as a great and glorious thing. While I do not agree that such an act was indeed good, one must keep an open mind in understanding why such things would occur. If a man commits an evil act, who is to say it is evil? Should the individual judge them or should society? Everything along these lines is subject to what any particular person believes at any particular time. Moral codes are not universal and that is something I think our society seems to lack in understanding. I think we have too much bias in favor of our own views and not those of other groups.
As for whether man is either one of the two, I say he is neither. Man is simply a product of himself and can be equally creative or destructive in his actions. Neither name can be given without closing ourselves off from another point of view.
Take the September 11th incident of 2001 for instance. The majority of the world saw this as an evil, diabolical act while a sect of individuals saw it as a great and glorious thing. While I do not agree that such an act was indeed good, one must keep an open mind in understanding why such things would occur. If a man commits an evil act, who is to say it is evil? Should the individual judge them or should society? Everything along these lines is subject to what any particular person believes at any particular time. Moral codes are not universal and that is something I think our society seems to lack in understanding. I think we have too much bias in favor of our own views and not those of other groups.
As for whether man is either one of the two, I say he is neither. Man is simply a product of himself and can be equally creative or destructive in his actions. Neither name can be given without closing ourselves off from another point of view.
What is YOUR definition of evil, Iamnothinwithoutgod? You are making the claim that people are inherently evil, but that would have to be based on your definition of evil, not ours.
I think that evil is when people dont give a crap about anybody else...
Oh, and welcome to Sciforums Amie!
Oh, and welcome to Sciforums Amie!
withoutGodIamnothin
Registered Member
I respect your inputs....but....
I'm glad to hear everyone's opinion on what evil is. I think evil is the abstance of good (which is what someone said too) . But isn't that an "oxy moron"(used the term lightly) ??
ok sin. sing is evil right? sin is not what is good. just like evil is not what is good. if we are born into sin....doesn't that mean that we were born into evil? or born evil? born sinful. born evil. We are like sheep that have been led astray the Bible says. We are sinful. We can't help it. But we can deal with it.
just like stealing a candybar as to killing billions of jews. sin is sin. evil is evil. of course saying you are evil for stealing a candybar can be pretty harsh. usually ppl will say naughty or bad. but there is no greater sin over another. sin is sin. there may be harder consequences....but its still sin just the same.
Now i realize that I might have gone a little off topic...but this is what I believe evil is. For that is the question I asked of course.
I'm glad to hear everyone's opinion on what evil is. I think evil is the abstance of good (which is what someone said too) . But isn't that an "oxy moron"(used the term lightly) ??
ok sin. sing is evil right? sin is not what is good. just like evil is not what is good. if we are born into sin....doesn't that mean that we were born into evil? or born evil? born sinful. born evil. We are like sheep that have been led astray the Bible says. We are sinful. We can't help it. But we can deal with it.
just like stealing a candybar as to killing billions of jews. sin is sin. evil is evil. of course saying you are evil for stealing a candybar can be pretty harsh. usually ppl will say naughty or bad. but there is no greater sin over another. sin is sin. there may be harder consequences....but its still sin just the same.
Now i realize that I might have gone a little off topic...but this is what I believe evil is. For that is the question I asked of course.
What would you consider worse, bending the truth a little to suit the circumstances, or murdering 12 million people? (Hitler murdered 12 million people total, 6 million of which were Jews.)
Some things are more severe than others, some sin is worse than others. Both examples are sin, but i'd say that near genocide is worse than being slightly dishonest (Ex. Someone forgot to to put away the dishes, but that person, lies about it.)
If we are born into sin, how does that make us evil? Does the evil infect us, we are automaticaly consumed by it, no chance that we resist it? We may be born into sin, but can we not rise above that?
It seems that your definition of good means not perfect... Is that what you mean?
Some things are more severe than others, some sin is worse than others. Both examples are sin, but i'd say that near genocide is worse than being slightly dishonest (Ex. Someone forgot to to put away the dishes, but that person, lies about it.)
If we are born into sin, how does that make us evil? Does the evil infect us, we are automaticaly consumed by it, no chance that we resist it? We may be born into sin, but can we not rise above that?
It seems that your definition of good means not perfect... Is that what you mean?
withoutGodIamnothin
Registered Member
trying to explain.....
You're right! We can rise above sin. I don't mean that we all do evil intentionally (sp), not at all. We can rise above sin with God's help of course.
good isn't perfect. but evil is always bad.
You're right. there are some sins that are greater than others....but sin is still sin. Like i said before....there are greater consequences depending on what has been done.
evil may not be just the 'evil' and really horrible stuff that ppl do like Hitler, evil is evil. some things are more vil than others. like i said, evil is a strong word. but whether we like it or not....we are naturally evil....BUT WE CAN OVERCOME IT AND LIVE A VICTORIOUS LIFE!
i hope i answered your question and confusion. plz ask me again if i'm way off.
You're right! We can rise above sin. I don't mean that we all do evil intentionally (sp), not at all. We can rise above sin with God's help of course.
good isn't perfect. but evil is always bad.
You're right. there are some sins that are greater than others....but sin is still sin. Like i said before....there are greater consequences depending on what has been done.
evil may not be just the 'evil' and really horrible stuff that ppl do like Hitler, evil is evil. some things are more vil than others. like i said, evil is a strong word. but whether we like it or not....we are naturally evil....BUT WE CAN OVERCOME IT AND LIVE A VICTORIOUS LIFE!
i hope i answered your question and confusion. plz ask me again if i'm way off.
Ill try stay away from the religon part then Xev hehe...
Ah, but how are we naturally evil?
Ah, but how are we naturally evil?
withoutGodIamnothin
Registered Member
Xev??
umm...if I'm not mistaken....the first post actually asked for religious views on this topic....
so ya. i think reliegion is fine if the person that asked the question in the first place wanted it.
am I right Xev?
umm...if I'm not mistaken....the first post actually asked for religious views on this topic....
so ya. i think reliegion is fine if the person that asked the question in the first place wanted it.
am I right Xev?
well i do have to admit, that religon and philosophy are permanantly intertwined.... A little religon mixed in with a philosophical topic is nothing to worry about Xev
That person is not the mod - I am.
And "God says so" is not only begging the question, it is not philosophy.
More importantly, even hearing of this nonsense is making me want to either vomit or yell the lyrics to Coven's "Fucking a Nun".
Now, please - just talk like sensible, sane, non-deluded humans do and not about God? I'm not saying, I'm asking.
orthogonal
Registered Senior Member
I don't see what the problem is. You're simply being asked to take your religious discussion to the religious forum. Like-minded people will welcome your ideas there.
Western philosophy does consider the question if there is a God or gods, but it only does so using the methods of philosophical speculation. Discussions about a God or gods constitutes theology. If you think otherwise, I'd invite you to visit the philosophy department of any university and ask to speak to a theologian.
I support Xev in her efforts to keep this forum free for philosophical discussions. It's a daunting task when so many are intent on posting theological and eastern philosophical topics (i.e. "Ying and Yang") in this forum. I notice that JamesR has been similarly deluged with pseudoscience posters in his Physics and Mathematics forum. Another annoyance is those who see this as another "free thoughts" forum. We can all live with an occasionally misplaced thread; that's not a problem. The problem occurs when the "signal to noise" ratio of this forum drops to such a low value that persons wishing to discuss philosophy (such as myself) are driven away.
What is philosophy?
"Logical argumentation is the hallmark of philosophy. Philosophy is characteristically dialectical; it consists of reasoned arguments for philosophical views, as well as presentation and consideration of possible opposing arguments....
People uneducated in academic philosophy often have trouble distinguishing philosophy from anthropology, mythology, or folklore, which all have as a primary objective to report, catalog, and compare what people believe. The common misunderstanding is that philosophy is just "what you believe"....A simple uncritical inventory of beliefs is not a statement of philosophy in the academic sense....
Philosophy never takes beliefs at face value. Many people believe patently false and irrational things. Philosophy’s task, rather, is to put beliefs to the test of critical analysis, to determine which beliefs are well-supported by reason and which are not....The philosopher’s question is: is it rational to believe X?
There is more to philosophy than logical analysis; there are standard topics to which philosophers apply their tools: topics like the existence of God, the nature of reality, the relation between mind and matter, what it means to be a person, the fate of a person after death,....But note that in order to count as philosophy, the approach to these topics must be critical as well as speculative. Joseph Campbell’s work is often (wrongly) thought to be academic philosophy because it describes and compares beliefs about these topics; but description and comparison are not critical analysis. Religious beliefs are commonly conflated with philosophy, but the religious approach is generally grounded in faith, which is quite different from critical analysis.
These misunderstandings lead to a vexing result for philosophers around the world today.....Since most people do not understand philosophical method – i.e., since they think philosophy is "just what you believe" – they conclude (wrongly) that any culture that simply has beliefs about any of these topics has "philosophy", whether or not it has a sustained tradition of dialectic....
Folk thought, as a rule, consists of bald assertions without argumentative justification, but philosophy in the narrower sense must contain not just theses. Without argumentation and clarification, there is, strictly, no philosophy."
Professor and Dept. of Philosophy Chairperson, S. LaFave
Michael
Western philosophy does consider the question if there is a God or gods, but it only does so using the methods of philosophical speculation. Discussions about a God or gods constitutes theology. If you think otherwise, I'd invite you to visit the philosophy department of any university and ask to speak to a theologian.
I support Xev in her efforts to keep this forum free for philosophical discussions. It's a daunting task when so many are intent on posting theological and eastern philosophical topics (i.e. "Ying and Yang") in this forum. I notice that JamesR has been similarly deluged with pseudoscience posters in his Physics and Mathematics forum. Another annoyance is those who see this as another "free thoughts" forum. We can all live with an occasionally misplaced thread; that's not a problem. The problem occurs when the "signal to noise" ratio of this forum drops to such a low value that persons wishing to discuss philosophy (such as myself) are driven away.
What is philosophy?
"Logical argumentation is the hallmark of philosophy. Philosophy is characteristically dialectical; it consists of reasoned arguments for philosophical views, as well as presentation and consideration of possible opposing arguments....
People uneducated in academic philosophy often have trouble distinguishing philosophy from anthropology, mythology, or folklore, which all have as a primary objective to report, catalog, and compare what people believe. The common misunderstanding is that philosophy is just "what you believe"....A simple uncritical inventory of beliefs is not a statement of philosophy in the academic sense....
Philosophy never takes beliefs at face value. Many people believe patently false and irrational things. Philosophy’s task, rather, is to put beliefs to the test of critical analysis, to determine which beliefs are well-supported by reason and which are not....The philosopher’s question is: is it rational to believe X?
There is more to philosophy than logical analysis; there are standard topics to which philosophers apply their tools: topics like the existence of God, the nature of reality, the relation between mind and matter, what it means to be a person, the fate of a person after death,....But note that in order to count as philosophy, the approach to these topics must be critical as well as speculative. Joseph Campbell’s work is often (wrongly) thought to be academic philosophy because it describes and compares beliefs about these topics; but description and comparison are not critical analysis. Religious beliefs are commonly conflated with philosophy, but the religious approach is generally grounded in faith, which is quite different from critical analysis.
These misunderstandings lead to a vexing result for philosophers around the world today.....Since most people do not understand philosophical method – i.e., since they think philosophy is "just what you believe" – they conclude (wrongly) that any culture that simply has beliefs about any of these topics has "philosophy", whether or not it has a sustained tradition of dialectic....
Folk thought, as a rule, consists of bald assertions without argumentative justification, but philosophy in the narrower sense must contain not just theses. Without argumentation and clarification, there is, strictly, no philosophy."
Professor and Dept. of Philosophy Chairperson, S. LaFave
Michael