Is Anything Evil? Does Evil Exist?

PD:You are using literature and speech (words) to tell me this and state it as fact?By your own philosophy you are not stating a fact, but an opinion. So there is no point in disagreeing with me.That is what happens when we buy the lie of postmodernism, in exhange for your our moral liberty; we sacrifice our own words and the power of reason in the process. (Friedrich Nietzsche)If words don't mean anything PD, then you have said nothing. And the same goes for you Friedrich...Suicide of thought. (Gospel of John chapter 1)
Edited by Rob, : No reason given.

I would have suggested social issues.I took Phat's advice by mistake.

Please address my arguments concerning evil.This is the science forum, please give some support if you disagree with what I've said concerning evil, which BTW is supported by your STR quote in Message 63.Are you saying that evil does exist in its own right as an entity or an object? If yes, then please provide support. A picture would be even better and not pictures of people doing evil actions.

---

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

There's certainly no arguing with that.Edited by Tusko, : Context is EVERYTHING!

That's just an empty assertion that doesn't address the issue. I have said that there can be "bad" reasoning behind "bad" deeds. You have claimed that "bad" deeds are caused by deciding to reject reason.How does "rejecting reason" work if there is no such thing as non-reason? Rejecting reason goes from reason to where? I have asked you before and you still still still haven't answered: How can you know my motives? Or anybody else's motives?Especially, how can you reason what my motives are if you claim my motives are not based on reason?

---

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

PD:My apologies for any confusion or lack of clear Words. I have edited my previous post for you.That is not what I am suggesting. I am suggesting that as evil is void of good, darkness is void of light, and nonsense is void of reason, and that in 'Light' of that, you have said nothing.As for the science thread issue... this is misc stuf and I explained in message 92. I should have requested my gut. Edited by Rob, : No reason given.

Ringo:I am not saying your motives are reasonable.But the problem you are trying to expose is not a problem. It would be if I were trying to get into the soul of a cucumber. But as C.S. Lewis said, 'We don't have to gues what men think, We are men.'That is why we have jury's made up of other people. What other choice would we have?But if what you say is true, we might as well fire every prosecuting attorney. There would be no ability to prove motives at all.But that is not true... it is just a convict sitting in his cell insisting that he is innocent. But if you are innocent, you would not be denying what I am saying.

Of course, there is no ability to "prove" motives at all.Judges and juries can only guess at motives. A prosecutor will suggest a plausible motive, if he wants to convince the jury that the crime was premeditated. But there would be no need for juries if motives could be "proven".What juries do is try to understand the mental processes of the accused in terms of their own mental processes. That is reasoning, by necessity.As I have said, and you still still still still have not addressed: The "evildoer's" actions are reasoned, or there would be no basis for the jury to guess what his motivations were. Your claim of "lack of reason" just doesn't work.

---

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

quote:

---

That is not what I am suggesting. I am suggesting that as evil is void of good, darkness is void of light, and nonsense is void of reason, and that in 'Light' of that, you have said nothing.

---

Actually nonsense would be void of sense. So how can you console me with your nonsense? Nothing is left of your answers but falsehood! (Job 21:34)The Bible is replete with personifications. Numbers 16:32 (and the earth opened its mouth and swallowed them up, and their...)Wisdom in Proverbs 8.The Adversary in JobWe aren't talking about voids, we are talking about the existence of evil.

---

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

Ringo: Rob: Rob, do you see how you are dodging the question. Ringo asked how you can detemine the motives if you DON'T UNDERSTAND the reasoning.You're reply is that there is NO REASONING.That's just covering your eyes. Just because you don't understand something doesn't mean it doesn't exist. 'Sound' reasoning implies only that given a set of facts, one can draw a logical conclusion.But you are mistaking all "facts" to be "good" or that the logical conclusion of those facts is "good". This is a mistake.The 9/11 hijackers had a number of facts. They drew reasonable conclusions based on those facts. They acted on those conclusions.Therefore, by your argument, the 9/11 hijackers are "good".

Proving motive is really the least important part of a criminal case. In fact, the "motive" really shouldn't play a part in the case at all.If I can prove that you were present, that you had a gun and that you killed the person, I don't need to know why in order to send you to jail.However, if I can prove that you wanted someone dead and they ended up dead, but I can no prove that you committed the crime, a jury should not find you guilty.(yes, I know, juries make mistakes)

Fallacy of false categories.This is dumb, Rob. You should have caught this.Reality is reality. It includes good and evil. It also includes light and dark, life and death, yin and yang, Elvis and Elvis impersonators.Reality includes everything real. This includes all the phenomena we describe using paired opposites.Nothing changes about this if you assert 'darkness is only the absence of light, impersonators are only the absence of Elvis' and the like. Reality naturally includes both the 'presence' and 'absence' states of whatever feature of it you are discussing.Swiss cheese is real. That means the cheese is real and the holes are real.Now I'll go back to your post and start Sentence 2. It's hard to expect anything worthwhile after such a disastrous start, but we'll see._______Edited by Archer Opterix, : clarity, with cheese.Edited by Archer Opterix, : brev.

---

ArcherAll species are transitional.

quote:

---

Rob writes:
If human beings are not evil by nature, then we do not need a savior.

​

Larni writes:
Now if you assert that we do not need a saviour if evil is not real it is encumbent on you to provide evidence of your assertion that evil is real.

​

Rob writes:
We need a savior. And it is not the government (other men).

​

So you refuse to answer and retreat from your original assertion?

​

Way to debate Rob.

​

Why don't you give some evidence instead of circular reasoning?

​

Rob asserts that we need a saviour because if are evil.

​

Rob asserts we are evil.

​

Rob asserts we need a saviour.

​

Bullshit.

---

Can you please address this post?BTW: Why not ask admins to move this forum into Faith and Beleif?

Larni, I agree with you and will do so right now.

Thread moved here from the Miscellaneous Topics in Creation/Evolution forum.