Is Anything Evil? Does Evil Exist?

Nuggin"The most emperically verifiable reality is the depravity of man. Yet, at the same time, it is the most intellectually resisted fact!" (Malcomb Muggeridge)Like matter, evil is manifested into the physical world. Gravity is emperically verifiable too, but we do not know what it is. We see the effects, so we know it exists. The same goes for good and evil. Pinning down the precise definitions of any of the above is an impossible proposition.What we can say with absolute certainty, is that all of the above exist.Nuggin:So in ytour opinion, and depending upon one's worldview, it could be reasonable for some people to ravage an 18 month old baby girl after consuming a mind altering beverage all the while planning and deciding to do so while sober?The action itself, is only the manifestation of the cause. It is the cause that I am attempting to shed light upon.Nuggin:It is only the motivation of the individual that exposes the objective evil. It is the intentional laying down of one's reason and thinking process (conscious) so as to indulge and plunder physical pleasure at the expense of another persons (or society's) well being.Evil is wrongdoing. It is not an accident. It is intentional. It is the denial and suppression of truth and the temporary fascination with power. It is the willfull misuse of free will.Edited by Rob, : No reason given.

God is only asking for a voluntary confession. No coersion necessary.

If motivations can not be observed objectively, how can they "expose objective evil"?

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

It is subjective, obviously. Whether it is completely subjective is an unwarranted assumption.Reason and emotion are not opposites. They are two functions of a healthy personality. As such they can should, and often do, have a profitable dialogue with one another. Emotion can be informed by reason and reason can be informed by emotion.If I notice myself getting angry, for example, I may ask myself 'What do I cherish that feels threatened here?' It's a very useful question. Reason takes notice of my emotion and asks it for more information. I can examine where I have invested my emotions and reassess the wisdom of the attachment. I can evaluate whether the perceived threat to what I cherish is really so great and, even if so, whether my present response is the most useful one in reducing that threat. It's a common fallacy on this board to equate subjectivity with pointlessness.Subjective as the definition is, I think you will find that, in practice, my criteria are universally valid.Every person recognizes as 'evil' that which threatens what he or she most cherishes.

​

Every person recognizes as 'absolute evil' that which threatens what the individual cherishes absolutely.Don't take my word for it. Run your own experiments. I'm confident you'll be able replicate the results.It's also not logical to assume that subjectivity requires the 'imposition' of beliefs. Other possibilities exist. One is that people will continue to have different ideas, and that's just how it will be. Another is that free and open discussion might yield the discovery that healthy human beings universally love pretty much the same kinds of things. On that basis people might build a consensus.____Edited by Archer Opterix, : clarity.Edited by Archer Opterix, : html.

---

ArcherAll species are transitional.

Phat:I have two words for you Phat:1. Boot2. LickerPhat:If human beings are not evil by nature, then we do not need a savior.Phat, have you ever actually read a Bible?

Ringo:I think you meant, 'If motivations cannot be observed directly.'Evil is not hard to prove. Neither is motive.What are the motives of the perpetrator in the following cenario? It would be evil and ill-motivated for you to deny it.

No. I meant what I said.Direct or indirect observation is irrelevant - it's only objectivity that counts. If you can't objectively observe motivations, you can't reach objective conclusions about them. I have no idea about his motivations, and neither do you. The fact that we both subjectively find his actions "evil" has nothing to do with his motivations.In fact, since we can not fathom any "reasonable" motivation for his actions, our observations become less objective.

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

Here, Taz, is an excellent example of what I was talking about in Message 34.Rob is angry because he perceives a threat to something he cherishes. The thing being threatened, apparently, is his belief that he needs a saviour.This belief is so cherished by Rob that he places its validity beyond debate. He demands that Phat regard the contemplation of any alternative as taboo on its face. He circles the wagons around his cherished belief and strikes out aggressively--though name calling, in this instance--to ward off the perceived threat.[AbE] The name he chose is interesting. He tries to shame Phat for 'boot licking.' Rob asks us to believe that Phat's point of view can only be maintained by a person who neglects to think for himself and who adopts a subservient, kowtowing posture toward others.It seems Rob intends to recognize Phat as an individual who thinks for himself only when Phat manages to repeat, as the result of shaming if necessary, those things Rob wants to hear. An ironic outcome at best. [end AbE]It would be well now for Rob's intellect to have a dialogue with his emotions in the manner I suggested above._____Edited by Archer Opterix, : html, AbE.

---

ArcherAll species are transitional.

Archer:Those are the words of a king and sovereign lord who reigns over his own (my will be done).Allow me to say, 'Very interesting'. You've confirmed far more than you could possibly imagine.So you do believe evil exists, and is in opposition to you?Archer:Don't forget that the opposite is also true. If you forget that your enemy is God.Listen to this: (Jesus Christ / Luke 14:31-33)

That is an awfully self-righteous thing for someone to say. Did you miss the message of the New Testament about humility?

Archer:You're projecting.All I see is a guy who thinks Percy is God. EVC is not primarily for me a place to evangelize any longer. I do that face to face every day. This is a place for me to study my opponents and learn their arguments.Their is no-one here that threatens me or my god.

Rob I have two words for you1. Jesus2. JerkWe have all heard of a Jesus Freak well you are a Jesus Jerk.While driving to work i occasionally listen to a local Bible channel. The preacher i was listening to yesterday, was actually not that bad.He even had a message for you. He said be sure they hate you for your righteousness and not just for being a jerk. I immediately thought you.

Angalard:Not if it's true. it's just a fact.Jesus said the same thing in 1st Century terms. And the Pharisees were as offended as all of you:Matthew 23:1-12
1 Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples: 2 "The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat. 3 So you must obey them and do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach. 4 They tie up heavy loads and put them on men's shoulders, but they themselves are not willing to lift a finger to move them. 5 "Everything they do is done for men to see: They make their phylacteries wide and the tassels on their garments long; 6 they love the place of honor at banquets and the most important seats in the synagogues; 7 they love to be greeted in the marketplaces and to have men call them 'Rabbi.'

Treat others as one would like to be treated.I read the Bible and I'm sure Phat has as well. I did not read that self-hate and the resultant hatred of others was a requirement.Which god do you worship anyway, Rob? I am unfamiliar with the hate others as you would hate yourself type god except as a counterexample.

Good lord, Rob when you are going to quit comparing yourself to Jesus.Your bolded section in the quote doesn't even relate to your stupid charge against Phat - it is just stupid and inane.