the existence of evil

[arcturus88]

Crime Library: Donald "Pee Wee" Gaskins | Crime Museum

Please read and indicate what you think these "bothersome feelings" Gaskins described were ?

 

[arcturus88]

Obviously, his cheese fell off his cracker very early in life.

In other words, mental illness, rather than he was somehow "possessed by evil". No such trait exists. One has seen too many horror flicks if one believe it does.

you don't believe in evil?

 

[tecoyah]

Evil is a term man has created to define incidents unacceptable to one section of society or another. What one considers to be "Evil" another does not...thus is it an arbitrary term.

I personally consider the Pro-Life movement to be unacceptable attempts at forcing opinion on the lives of others...you could call it evil. Those who wish to ban abortion will call me evil for believing as I do.

 

[arcturus88]

Evil is a term man has created to define incidents unacceptable to one section of society or another. What one considers to be "Evil" another does not...thus is it an arbitrary term.

is the evil detailed in the url above...arbitrary? would you say its evil to some in society and not evil to others?

 

[arcturus88]

In other words, mental illness, rather than he was somehow "possessed by evil". No such trait exists.

Sure! I have used many of the synonyms for the word...

it exists or it doesn't? please make up your mind.
within two posts you've said it doesn't and then that it does.

 

[arcturus88]

another old tale of evil....

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/short-hed-article-1.2281387

“It’s a rotten world. There’s no answer to it but meanness. That’s all anybody understands — meanness. Burn down the man’s barn-he’ll understand that. Poison his dog. Kill him.”

 

[tecoyah]

is the evil detailed in the url above...arbitrary? would you say its evil to some in society and not evil to others?

Yes....I would. I as a matter of fact would not term this man as evil. He was a mentally screwed up person made eve worse by life circumstances and opportunity. His "Actions" were certainly disturbing and terrible, but the term evil does not come to mind.

 

[arcturus88]

Why are you fixated on evil?

one thread dedicated to noting evidence of evil does not equal fixation. you have more threads than that dedicated to homosexual dreams.

:giggle:

 

[arcturus88]

rationalizing and intellectualizing evil reduces reduced one's anxiety, allowing one to feel safer and more in control.

"if I can contain it in this box I am in control and don't have to worry".

 

[David]

Good and evil are arbitrary constructs used to describe a position on a society's moral compass. The closest you'll come to an objective good/evil is various moral situations in which a view is commonly held across time and culture, ie. murder being evil and charity being good. Even then it's simple coincidence (and hardly universal) rather than a true objective fact.

 

[arcturus88]

"...discussing cultural relativism with cultural relativists is like playing tennis with some guy who says, 'Your ace is just a social construct.'"

Mark Steyn

 

[arcturus88]

So is that a good or a bad thing

"good" or "bad" are a social constructs too, so it's kind of hard to say. in fact hard is a social construct as well, so it's hard to say it's "hard" to say.

 

[David]

"good" or "bad" are a social constructs too, so it's kind of hard to say. in fact hard is a social construct as well, so it's hard to say it's "hard" to say.

Hard is actually objective. Something that requires little work is easy, something that requires a lot of work is hard.

 

[arcturus88]

Now you sound like Bill Clinton saying it depends on what the definition of is, is.

What do you think of Bill doing this?

 

[arcturus88]

Hard is actually objective. Something that requires little work is easy, something that requires a lot of work is hard.

Hard and easy are arbitrary constructs used to describe a position on a society's work compass. The closest you'll come to an objective hard/easy is various work situations in which a view is commonly held across time and culture, ie. sawing a redwood being hard and slicing butter being easy. Even then it's simple coincidence (and hardly universal) rather than a true objective fact.

 

[David]

Hard and easy are arbitrary constructs used to describe a position on a society's work compass. The closest you'll come to an objective hard/easy is various work situations in which a view is commonly held across time and culture, ie. sawing a redwood being hard and slicing butter being easy. Even then it's simple coincidence (and hardly universal) rather than a true objective fact.

But I already demonstrated that's not true. Nice try though.

 

[tecoyah]

But I already demonstrated that's not true. Nice try though.

I propose a terminology change to simplify. Difficult vs. Simple.

It is difficult to gather wool, weave it into a blanket and survive a winter storm.
It is simple to huddle in a a cave near a fire to do the same thing. Avoiding stealing anothers blanket is a simple act of morality in culture...doing so when it will save your child is not as easy.

It would be "Good" to not take the blanket yet easily considered "Evil" to let your child die.

The two terms are indeed arbitrary as they are entirely based on personal opinion of the individual.

 

[arcturus88]

But I already demonstrated that's not true. Nice try though.

I agree that you tried to demonstrate that it is not true. but is that truth you mention...subjective or objective?

What I highlight (or attempt to) is that one really just cherry-picks the things they want categorized as objective or subjective.

To the point, I think there are ultimate objective truths. However, I also believe that all are in some way subjective in their ability to capture or grasp these truths. It doesn't mean we shouldn't try to grasp it or that our conception of them are "arbitrary or random", rather they are reasoned grasps at the objective truth.

 

[David]

I agree that you tried to demonstrate that it is not true. but is that truth you mention...subjective or objective?

What I highlight (or attempt to) is that one really just cherry-picks the things they want categorized as objective or subjective.

To the point, I think there are ultimate objective truths. However, I also believe that all are in some way subjective in their ability to capture or grasp these truths. It doesn't mean we shouldn't try to grasp it or that our conception of them are "arbitrary or random", rather they are reasoned grasps at the objective truth.

Hard/Easy is a matter of relevance, not subjection. Morality on the other hand is the opposite, name 1 example of an objective moral position. You can't, even people living within the same culture can't agree.

 

[arcturus88]

Hard/Easy is a matter of relevance, not subjection. Morality on the other hand is the opposite, name 1 example of an objective moral position. You can't, even people living within the same culture can't agree.

no they're subjective.

for proof of their subjectivity, I offer you my disagreement.
since we disagree = they are subjective.

morality has an objectivity at its core (as does hard or easy or quality or truth) but people only grasp at it subjectively. charity (as good) or murder (as evil) as you mentioned, are areas where people have come closer to this objectivity, not randomly but through reason.

by example:

a car runs a stop light and hits a kid on a bike and speeds off.

three people (witnesses) are interviewed by the police.


one says, "it was a black man driving a white Mustang"

a second says, "it was an arab man driving a yellow Camaro".

a third says, "it was a white woman driving a red Nova."


All have had a subjective experience of the hit and run, but their subjective experience of the hit and run does not negate the objective hit and run.


(footnote: the perpetrator was actually a heavy-set white man with bushy blonde white hair driving a diesel, maroon, smart car. )