The Nature of Evil

WIP · February 14, 2011

Whoever this "Charles Price" is, what happens when he becomes the next big-time evangelist to be taken down in a sex scandal?

betsy · February 14, 2011

Sorry, but the argument that because non-believers believe in similar laws or "do by nature" that which is required by god's laws as proof of god's existence is self referential nonsense.

To argue that banning murder, theft, rape, and other property crimes are laws divinely created is just plain sad. But, Paul didn't have the benefit of sociology, anthropology, psychology, biology nor history to develop such a devine thesis, to him human behaviour must have been a perplexing mystery solved only by God.

The code of Hammurabi was created some 350 years before moses received the 10 commandments. So, if Paul was right, God sat around for a few thousand years (a nod to the young earthers) waiting for somebody to discover him but in the meantime he gave the pagans a natural set of behaviours and attitudes that some smarty pants codified into "law", meaning that God's law was "revealed" long before Moses went up the mountain and long before anyone knew God existed. chicken meet egg.

I'm not referring to the existence of God in this excerpt. Ignore that part about Pastor Price's conclusion regarding the existence of God.

I gave the excerpt because it talked about evil.

Don't you agree that no one says "I'm going to do evil." There is always a justification of good.

Why is there always a need for good?

Edited February 14, 2011 by betsy

cybercoma · February 14, 2011

Don't you agree that no one says "I'm going to do evil." There is always a justification of good.

For once I agree with you. The most horrifying evils are often committed by the religious in their quest for the Good.

betsy · February 15, 2011

For once I agree with you. The most horrifying evils are often committed by the religious in their quest for the Good.

Doesn't only apply to the religious. AlQaeda's motivation is faith-based, but I don't think Hitler's was.

The Rwanda massacre, PolPot, etc.., these are not religion-based....

Edited February 15, 2011 by betsy

BubberMiley · February 15, 2011

Was the Spanish Inquisition "faith"-based?

Jack Weber · February 15, 2011

Was the Spanish Inquisition "faith"-based?

Nope...

It was based on a false sense of theological superiority...

Jonsa · February 15, 2011

I'm not referring to the existence of God in this excerpt. Ignore that part about Pastor Price's conclusion regarding the existence of God.

I gave the excerpt because it talked about evil.

Don't you agree that no one says "I'm going to do evil." There is always a justification of good.

Why is there always a need for good?

Most people do not say "i'm going to do evil". Most people do justify their most heinous actions by claiming a greater good. But not all people. Sociopaths and psychopaths can't tell the difference to begin with hence their diagnosis.

And I don't think there is always a need for good in this context. I think it is often about attempting to gain acceptance for "evil" deeds from others or to appease ones personal misgivings.

betsy · February 15, 2011

Most people do not say "i'm going to do evil". Most people do justify their most heinous actions by claiming a greater good. But not all people. Sociopaths and psychopaths can't tell the difference to begin with hence their diagnosis.

Science is saying something's wrong with the brains of psychopaths hence they can't distinguish right from wrong. Who's to say that psychoanalysis is right? Let alone amateur psychoanalysis?

And I don't think there is always a need for good in this context. I think it is often about attempting to gain acceptance for "evil" deeds from others or to appease ones personal misgivings.

Most of Germany rallied behind Hitler, and approved the persecution/annihiliation of Jews. They saw the same "good" in that....they derived from what Hitler was saying what they wanted to say!

betsy · February 15, 2011

Some psychopaths just go about doing what is required in their day-to-day lives, without concern for anything else or anybody else. It doesn't mean they can't do any good....almost like a utilitarian code of ethics.

In one way psychopaths, as described in psychoanalysis, are similar to atheists, wouldn't you say?

Atheist believe there is no meaning and value in life, and so can't consistently claim the distinction between right and wrong.

Edited February 15, 2011 by betsy

waldo · February 15, 2011

Most of Germany rallied behind Hitler, and approved the persecution/annihiliation of Jews. They saw the same "good" in that....they derived from what Hitler was saying what they wanted to say!

but then... "Most" and "large" are relative terms - hey?

As far as the Jews were concerned, it was common knowledge in Germany that they had disappeared after having been sent to the East. It was not exactly clear to large segments of the German population what had happened to them. On the other hand, there were thousands upon thousands of Germans who participated in and/or witnessed the implementation of the "Final Solution" either as members of the SS, the Einsatzgruppen, death camp or concentration camp guards, police in occupied Europe, or with the Wehrmacht.

WIP · February 15, 2011

Some psychopaths just go about doing what is required in their day-to-day lives, without concern for anything else or anybody else.

Those are key identifying characteristics of a psychopath.

It doesn't mean they can't do any good..

Yes it does! In the sense that someone who meets the clinical definition of psychopath has a limited sense of empathy, understanding of the needs of other people, and are impulsive, highly attracted to seeking rewards, along with risk-taking....so how much capacity are they going to have to identify what is good, and do good? This isn't a matter of choosing! Someone who is a psychopath fits that definition because of distinct abnormalities in brain function that manifest these problems: Psychopaths' Brains Wired to Seek Rewards, No Matter the Consequences

..almost like a utilitarian code of ethics.

Are you just trying to create word salads here? If you pulled that out for some reason, utilitarian ethics is based on careful deliberation...weighing the balance of maximizing benefits, while minimizing harms. Utilitarian ethics would appeal to the careful, deliberative thinker, not the impulsive psychopath, who is not going to follow any ethic other than selfish self-interest....so the psychopath will find Ayn Rand's Objectivism more to his liking....if he actually reads about ethics!

In one way psychopaths, as described in psychoanalysis, are similar to atheists, wouldn't you say?

NO, I would say: once again you don't know what you're talking about, unless you can elaborate and provide some useful examples.

Atheist believe there is no meaning and value in life, and so can't consistently claim the distinction between right and wrong.

And just as I figured. Nihilists believe there is no meaning or value in life, and atheists are not necessarily nihilists. An existentialist believes that we live in a universe that has no meaning or purpose that we can perceive, so we have to find meaning in our interactions with others. A positivist believes we can find purpose in the Universe through using the scientific method to learn more about it and how everything works. The only thing that atheists will agree on is that proposing the existence of a god does not provide any useful answers for valuing life.

pinko · February 15, 2011

Betsy:

You state:

"In one way psychopaths, as described in psychoanalysis, are similar to atheists, wouldn't you say?"

I am wondering if you could explain to me how you have reached this conclusion.

"Atheist believe there is no meaning and value in life, and so can't consistently claim the distinction between right and wrong."

I am not sure where you get the impression that atheists see no meaning and value in life. Are you suggesting that I (an atheist) am unable to distinguish between right and wrong?

cybercoma · February 15, 2011

Doesn't only apply to the religious. AlQaeda's motivation is faith-based, but I don't think Hitler's was.

The Rwanda massacre, PolPot, etc.., these are not religion-based....

You're absolutely right! So, I guess we can agree then that religiosity is not able to help people distinguish right from wrong, nor does it necessarily lead to a heightened sense of morality.

Atheist believe there is no meaning and value in life, and so can't consistently claim the distinction between right and wrong.

Oh.... :unsure:

Bonam · February 15, 2011

In one way psychopaths, as described in psychoanalysis, are similar to atheists, wouldn't you say?

No.

Atheist believe there is no meaning and value in life, and so can't consistently claim the distinction between right and wrong.

What an utterly idiotic and insulting statement.

wyly · February 15, 2011

You're absolutely right! So, I guess we can agree then that religiosity is not able to help people distinguish right from wrong, nor does it necessarily lead to a heightened sense of morality.

Oh....

hitlers persecution of jews wasn't faith based?...that's just another attempt of christians to distance themselves from times when their religious beliefs go so wrong...that slant has been promoted many times by the christian right, "hitler was socialist pagan or atheist"...while he was in fact a right wing catholic who was responsible for the largest ethnic/religious cleansing ever known...

cybercoma · February 15, 2011

Hitler also had a mustache. His religion really had very little to do with his atrocities.

Edited February 15, 2011 by cybercoma

betsy · February 16, 2011

Betsy:
In one way psychopaths, as described in psychoanalysis, are similar to atheists, wouldn't you say?

Atheist believe there is no meaning and value in life, and so can't consistently claim the distinction between right and wrong.

I am saying that atheist cannot consistently claim the distinction between right and wrong. Take note that I stressed on the word "consistently."

Atheist believe that we exists by sheer chance. There is no purpose. Our existence has no meaning. Therefore, life has no value.

Anyway psycopaths was given as an example...hence I say again:

Who's to say that psychoanalysis is right? It's not provable.

Edited February 16, 2011 by betsy

cybercoma · February 16, 2011

Atheist believe that we are created by sheer chance. There is no purpose. Our existence has no meaning. Therefore, life has no value.

You have no idea what atheists believe. All you can say about any atheist is that (s)he does not believe in any divine mythologies. As far as what they do believe about anything else, you cannot say.

betsy · February 16, 2011

You have no idea what atheists believe. All you can say about any atheist is that (s)he does not believe in any divine mythologies. As far as what they do believe about anything else, you cannot say.

As far as I know, atheists believe there is no God or gods/goddesses/deities.

Care to enlighten me then about what "anything" else they do believe in?

betsy · February 16, 2011

but then... "Most" and "large" are relative terms - hey?

"Most"..."large"...it doesn't matter really. Okay, let's concentrate on those "thousands upon thousands" who witnessed and participated in the Final Solution. The SS, the concentration camp guards, the police, the German citizens who turned in Jews that were hiding.

They saw the "good" behind Hitler's vision.

Edited February 16, 2011 by betsy

Bonam · February 16, 2011

Atheist believe that we exists by sheer chance. There is no purpose. Our existence has no meaning. Therefore, life has no value.

Repeating nonsense does not make it so. Unsurprisingly, as a religious zealot, your logical abilities appear to be hopelessly stunted. The 2nd, 3rd, and 4th sentences in the above quote do not in any way follow from the first. First, the purpose of any lifeform is to survive and reproduce. Second, the meaning of a human's existence is whatever that individual wants and makes it to be. Lastly, human life is precious and irreplaceable, because once it is extinguished, that person is gone forever.

betsy · February 16, 2011

Repeating nonsense does not make it so. Unsurprisingly, as a religious zealot, your logical abilities appear to be hopelessly stunted. The 2nd, 3rd, and 4th sentences in the above quote do not in any way follow from the first.

Which particular quote?

First, the purpose of any lifeform is to survive and reproduce. Second, the meaning of a human's existence is whatever that individual wants and makes it to be. Lastly, human life is precious and irreplaceable, because once it is extinguished, that person is gone forever.

If you are an atheist you don't believe what you said. So you're probably not an atheist. You're a relativist. You seem to imagine that everyone is his own god.

If you think everything is truth....then there is no truth.

If you think life has some value, then you're not an atheist.

Edited February 16, 2011 by betsy

betsy · February 16, 2011

Repeating nonsense does not make it so. Unsurprisingly, as a religious zealot, your logical abilities appear to be hopelessly stunted. The 2nd, 3rd, and 4th sentences in the above quote do not in any way follow from the first. First, the purpose of any lifeform is to survive and reproduce. Second, the meaning of a human's existence is whatever that individual wants and makes it to be. Lastly, human life is precious and irreplaceable, because once it is extinguished, that person is gone forever.

Well Bonam, here's the logic of what you said.

You're born to eat. You eat to survive. You survive to reproduce. Then you die. Is that the meaning of your life?

I don't know what you mean by "hopelessly stunted." But if you imagine I'm a zealot, by definition I wouldn't be logical. But that's an ad hominem argument anyway, so we'll just ignore it.

Shwa · February 16, 2011

Well Bonam, here's the logic of what you said.

You're born to eat. You eat to survive. You survive to reproduce. Then you die. Is that the meaning of your life?

I don't know what you mean by "hopelessly stunted." But if you imagine I'm a zealot, by definition I wouldn't be logical. But that's an ad hominem argument anyway, so we'll just ignore it.

Gosh Betsy, even as a person with such a wide, encompassing faith, your world seems so very small and narrow. I pity that.

pinko · February 16, 2011

Well Bonam, here's the logic of what you said.

You're born to eat. You eat to survive. You survive to reproduce. Then you die. Is that the meaning of your life?

I don't know what you mean by "hopelessly stunted." But if you imagine I'm a zealot, by definition I wouldn't be logical. But that's an ad hominem argument anyway, so we'll just ignore it.

Not too worry you are anything but logical.