Is "Evil" defined by action, intent, both or neither?
By
Agonus,
Posted on: 2010-03-19 09:52 in CoH and CoV General Discussions
Quote:
*bzzt* Nope, they're not.|
Originally Posted by Westley
They ARE?????
Huh, and here the whole time I thought they were Nemesis Automatons... |
Hey, would you like a *bzzt* trial pass? There's some great *bzzt* stuff coming up!
Quote:
That's a logical fallacy; you cannot prove a negative. You might as well ask people, "Prove there isn't a God."|
Originally Posted by Psyte
And the fun opposite: prove there isn't. |
Anyway, over life I've formed the assumption that "good" does not exist. Everyone is merely varying degrees of evil but evil nevertheless. Just look at the state of the world if you don't believe me.
Quote:
HAHA!!|
Originally Posted by Golden Girl
  |
You get a cookie for that one! *tosses GG a cookie*
@Zethustra
"Now at midnight all the agents and the superhuman crew come out
and round up everyone that knows more than they do"-Dylan
and round up everyone that knows more than they do"-Dylan
Quote:
And they have Hellgate London listed proudly in their resume!!!
|
Originally Posted by Psyte
Cheap shot is cheap. They're people over there too, ya know
 |
Quote:
Isn't that kind of like saying: "I wish the USA hadn't killed all those First Nations people or invaded Mexico!". Japan used the history of the USA as an excuse to invade Korea and China. We were their prime example of how to become 'large' on the world stage. Whatever GG might think, the USA has NEVER been a 'shining light of goodness' in the most basic sense. As a nation, we've done a small amount of good and a hefty dose of selfish 'evil'
|
Originally Posted by Psyte
There's a local peace group that celebrates Hiroshima annually. I know one of leaders (former teacher of mine). I asked about what they thought about Nanjing, plus the various movements of the Japanese government to cover it up, hide it, or at least minimize it (even including news stories and the like for her to reference). Surely that would better show the horrors of war than the bombing of Hiroshima? After all the group tried to raise awareness of things going on in the world at the personal level. And given we're in Hawai'i, its a relevant part of history to more than a small portion of the population, maybe even giving insight into why North Korea likes to fire test missles now and then in Japan's direction, etc.
She never wrote back on the matter. While I don't like it (nukes = yuck), I think it was better than the alternative they thought they had (long, ugly land war). And the US did a lot to help Japan rebuild after that, also. Of course, at the root, I wish Japan never decided to invade anyone. That's one thing to be considered, too - what was the root of things? There's a lot of things that happened, good and bad, that never would've if the problem never happened in the first place! Yes, I'm sure there's stuff going back further, but you still have to be accountable for your own decisions. |
There is no such thing as an "innocent bystander"
Evil is a word that has acquired a very extreme definition. If i was to look up a dictionary definition of evil, though I get these:
- morally objectionable behavior
- morally bad or wrong; "evil purposes"; "an evil influence"; "evil deeds"
- that which causes harm or destruction or misfortune; "the evil that men do lives after them; the good is oft interred with their bones"- Shakespeare
- having the nature of vice
- the quality of being morally wrong in principle or practice; "attempts to explain the origin of evil in the world"
- malefic: having or exerting a malignant influence; "malevolent stars"; "a malefic force"
Problem here is the constant use of the word "morals". Everyone has different morals, this means that everyone's take may be different. In the end, though, given the specific example, I'd say anyone that labels these guys evil would also label Sonic evil as the intention does not seem to be part of the definition of evil, just the actions.
Quote:
You know, the nuking of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and the reasons behind them, bring up another interesting point: Sometimes you can't do the right thing. You have to settle for doing the least wrong thing. Dropping nuclear bombs on a couple cities was a terrible thing to do, but the alternative was a long, agonizing war which would've been even worse.
|
Originally Posted by Psyte
There's a local peace group that celebrates Hiroshima annually. I know one of leaders (former teacher of mine). I asked about what they thought about Nanjing, plus the various movements of the Japanese government to cover it up, hide it, or at least minimize it (even including news stories and the like for her to reference). Surely that would better show the horrors of war than the bombing of Hiroshima? After all the group tried to raise awareness of things going on in the world at the personal level. And given we're in Hawai'i, its a relevant part of history to more than a small portion of the population, maybe even giving insight into why North Korea likes to fire test missles now and then in Japan's direction, etc.
She never wrote back on the matter. While I don't like it (nukes = yuck), I think it was better than the alternative they thought they had (long, ugly land war). And the US did a lot to help Japan rebuild after that, also. Of course, at the root, I wish Japan never decided to invade anyone. That's one thing to be considered, too - what was the root of things? There's a lot of things that happened, good and bad, that never would've if the problem never happened in the first place! Yes, I'm sure there's stuff going back further, but you still have to be accountable for your own decisions. |
BackAlleyBrawler: I can't facepalm this post hard enough.
ShoNuff: If sophisticated = bro-mantically emo-tastic, then I'm going to keep to my Shonen loving simplicity dammit.
The lesser of two evils doesn't make something right.
Unlike some of the stuff I read...
Good is Good
Evil is Evil aka (Bad is Bad)
And lots of people like to live in the shades of grey and make excuses for the actions/inactions of the choices they make.
And that pretty much sums up my post.
AV
Quote:
|
by Star Ranger 4 WIN LOSE OR DRAW, WE WILL FIGHT. WE ARE HEROES This is what we DO! |
Decide that this will be another day in which you Walk The Talk.
MA #14724 Operation: Discredit @American Valor
Sentinel Of Liberty SG
Quote:
Yeah, it is. I wish we human beings weren't such schmucks to each other. I wish I could win the lottery too (significantly better odds of happening).|
Originally Posted by BigFish
Isn't that kind of like saying: "I wish the USA hadn't killed all those First Nations people or invaded Mexico!". Japan used the history of the USA as an excuse to invade Korea and China. We were their prime example of how to become 'large' on the world stage. Whatever GG might think, the USA has NEVER been a 'shining light of goodness' in the most basic sense. As a nation, we've done a small amount of good and a hefty dose of selfish 'evil'
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Bitt_Player
You know, the nuking of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and the reasons behind them, bring up another interesting point: Sometimes you can't do the right thing. You have to settle for doing the least wrong thing. Dropping nuclear bombs on a couple cities was a terrible thing to do, but the alternative was a long, agonizing war which would've been even worse.
|
Quote:
Sounds about right to me. I figure there will be peace either when we are all dead or reduced to mindless drones. Needless to say I'm waiting for my dirt nap.|
Originally Posted by Psyte
Pretty much. Crazy thing is some of the military leaders wanted to keep going even after that O-o
|
edit: Not saying they should have kept going, I just don't see people running out of stupid reasons to kill another person anytime soon.
"YOU DID NOT READ THE THREAD. GO READ THE LONG, LONG THREAD.
Then, perhaps your butt cheeks will relinquish their grip on your chin." -The_Zekiran
Quote:
Stupidity is part of the human condition, so yeah, you're right. I think that's one thing that most people (regardless of their other beliefs) can agree on.|
Originally Posted by MortisEques
I just don't see people running out of stupid reasons to kill another person anytime soon.
|
Heck... Darwin Awards. Stupidity can be self-inflicted
Quote:
And City of Heroes. Only Roper so far as I know had ties to Flagship, and before that he worked on Warcraft, Starcraft and Diablo while he was at Blizzard.|
Originally Posted by Starsman
And they have Hellgate London listed proudly in their resume!!!
|
I'm reasonably sure the fans have far more hate for Cryptic than Paragon Studios does.
If you believe the means are justified by the ends then you might be a villain.
Need help making your own CoH comics or read other's comics at cohcomicindex.com
www.jkcomics.com for Justice-Knights comics series and more!
Storylines:
Introductions, Obey,
I tend to agree with Lestat's savage garden concept, from the earlier Anne Rice vampire novels. Morality is nothing more than aesthetic preference.
Quote:
There's so much wrong with this.|
Originally Posted by Steele_Magnolia
First, let me explain where I am coming from. I am a Christian. As such, evil is a matter of intent. It involves free will, choice.
To kill deliberately a million people, regardless of your ultimate intent, is an act of evil. Despite any good intentions you are lending yourself to evil in this action. Even if your goal is to save the world and you consider yourself to be the savior of mankind, you've comitted an act of evil. Despite the purity of your intentions you have defiled yourself and committed murder. |
Evil is a matter of intent. Your words.
To kill millions to save the world is evil. i.e. Your intent does not matter, it's what you did that sets your state.
That's a logical contradiction.
Evil is a matter of intent.
It involves free will, choice.
Highly debateable, but, given the example above: if I choose to let the entire world die when I could have saved the world by killing a few members of it, that makes me a good person?
The problem you are faced with here is that defining Good and Evil in absolute terms, the way you have done, is simply wrong. I don't believe even the Bible is that absolute, but setting that aside, pigeon-holing people as Evil because they don't fit into your moral view of reality, or worse, because you don't understand their moral standpoint and don't like it much, now that's evil.
Disclaimer: The above may be humerous, or at least may be an attempt at humour. Try reading it that way.
Posts are OOC unless noted to be IC, or in an IC thread.
Quote:
This just doesn't work for me. Helping the loyalists does not neccercarily mean you are evil. Remember Preatoria is built around Emporer Cole's Propaganda machine. Hero A Could believe that propaganda and help stop the resistance from planting the bombs that would kill innocent civilians. This doesn't make him evil just because he helped an evil ragime. His ends may have unwittingly had and ultimate evil outcome, helping Tyrant, but to him he was protecting the innocent, an act of good. |
Originally Posted by BrandX
However, I kinda think GR will be less about intent and more A & B (A: You help Resistance you're good. B: You help Loyalists you're evil).
Loyalist: We need your help stopping a Resistance Member from planting a bomb in a public building, that will kill 25 civilians. A hero would stop the Resistance Member from planting a bomb, to save the civilians. He just did something evil however as he helped the Loyalists. |
I'm sure if GR Is going to work as you predict the missions would be more obvious you are doing evil while working with the guys who claim to be the good guys.
How I think they will work though is, there will be acts of "Good" and "Evil" on both sides, as that is basically what GR is about isn't it? The shades of grey. Heros doing evil and villians doing bad and such. So I would expect that there will be loyalist missions that will boost your good stat while some resistance missions boost your evil stat. Like taking part in your example mission, planting a bomb in a public building which would kill innocent people. Your working for the good guys, but performing an evil act by killing innocents!
So, as to the OP's question, it can be any combination. Performing act's of good with an intent for evil is still evil. As is performing acts of evil with the intent of good... the ends do not justify the means. Even performing good for good intents could enable an evil outcome. Killing an evil tyrant to save the world could allow a worse tyrant to take his place and make things even worse than they were.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Forbin_Project
Then it's time for them to get off the cross, use the wood to build a bridge, and get over it.
 |
Quote:
The "argument from ignorance" fallacy is claiming that something is true simply because it hasn't been proven false. The only time this isn't a fallacy is in court, because you're innocent until proven guilty.|
Originally Posted by Psyte
And the fun opposite: prove there isn't.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Scythus
That's a logical fallacy; you cannot prove a negative. You might as well ask people, "Prove there isn't a God."
|
However, Psyte's "fun opposite" is still an attempt at argument from ignorance. Or, possibly, one could interpret Psyte's post as an example of shifting the burden of proof from the ontologically positive side which has yet to present evidence ("there is absolute good, and there is absolute evil") to the ontologically negative side which has no need to present evidence until there's something to contradict. Without the asymmetrical burden of proof, the debate can't be much more than "yuh huh!" "nuh uh!".
But then, that's generally how a conversation with Golden Girl goes, anyway.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Psyte
And even more fun: try to get everyone to agree on definitions of what constitutes absolute good and absolute evil. I think its one of those things where you're exceptionally unlikely (regardless if there is or isn't) to come to an agreement @_@
|
http://www.fimfiction.net/story/36641/My-Little-Exalt
Taking someone off the street and locking them up without due process.
Is that evil, or merely an infringement of liberties.
What if that person is carrying a highly infectious disease and needs to be quarantined, even if it is against their will ?
What if the person is accused of thought crimes, and polluting the population ?
@Catwhoorg "Rule of Three - Finale" Arc# 1984
@Mr Falkland Islands"A Nation Goes Rogue" Arc# 2369 "Toasters and Pop Tarts" Arc#116617
If you intentionally cause harm to another person - or seek to cause harm as the ultimate objective of your actions - that action is evil. But that does intrinsically mean that you are evil.
If you intentionally cause harm to another person - or seek to cause harm as the ultimate objectives of your actions - for no reason - or for the reason of "evil" - you are evil.
Therefore, very few people are evil. But a great deal of people are good.
In regards to Team Dark - although it would be simple to discover the answer from the above - are consequently not evil, although their actions are.
Bad Voodoo by @Beyond Reach. Arc ID #373659. Level 20-24. Mr. Bocor has fallen victim to a group of hooded vigilantes who have been plaguing Port Oakes, interfering with illegal operations and pacifying villain's powers. He demands that revenge is taken on these miscreants and his powers are returned! You look like just the villain for the job. Challenging.
Quote:
4 rights dont fix a wrong of such epic proportions!!!|
Originally Posted by Psyte
And City of Heroes. Only Roper so far as I know had ties to Flagship, and before that he worked on Warcraft, Starcraft and Diablo while he was at Blizzard.
I'm reasonably sure the fans have far more hate for Cryptic than Paragon Studios does. |
Besides, you don't judge some one based on what he did 10 years ago, you judge him based on what he did in the last 3 years.
Also, it may be only him, but he is sitting in the driving wheel!!! And from all I gather, he was just a passenger in all the other projects.
As I've said, before. Discussing Good and Evil from different viewpoints is -fine-. But without the same definitions you're discussing apples to oranges.
My definition of Good and Evil is simple, clear, concise, and handles every situation absolutely. If it spreads or inflicts emotional or physical pain it is evil. If it fosters emotional or physical wellbeing it is Good.
Notice that I didn't say "Good" things make people happy, or raises someone's emotional quotient to a positive place. Why? Because you can't expect to make people -happy- with every good act. But keeping them from harm is a damn fine goal.
Is killing a man in cold blood evil by my definition? Yes. You inflict pain and emotional distress on him in the last moments of his existence, and a lasting emotional pain on any family members or friends that might survive him.
Is killing a man in self-defense evil by my definition? Yes. You inflict pain and emotional distress on him in the last moments of his existence, and a lasting emotional pain on any family members or friends that might survive him.
Whether or not something is justifiable becomes the subjective part.
So, OBJECTIVELY, the act of killing is Evil. SUBJECTIVELY it can be the right thing to do by being the lesser of two evils based on personal perception.
Without a definition for evil you're going to waste your time arguing in circles until someone starts quoting a Bible. And then the thread will lock and we'll all be annoyed. Agree on a definition of evil and stick with it as a -group- or expect a mod-hammer.
-Rachel-
Quote:
At the same time, you'd think he went to some players house and ate their puppies.
|
Originally Posted by Starsman
4 rights dont fix a wrong of such epic proportions!!!
Besides, you don't judge some one based on what he did 10 years ago, you judge him based on what he did in the last 3 years. Also, it may be only him, but he is sitting in the driving wheel!!! And from all I gather, he was just a passenger in all the other projects. |
Quote:
Ironic how your "logic" is colored by verses straight out of the bible... d;D
|
Originally Posted by Bill Z Bubba
.
Morality handed to someone by something outside of one's own logic and perceptions is meaningless to me... |
Quote:
Only Siths speak in absolutes... d;D
|
Originally Posted by Golden Girl
Good and evil are not relative - there is absolute good, and there is absolute evil.
People who are more inclined to evil are also more likely to claim it doesn't exist. |
Huh, and here the whole time I thought they were Nemesis Automatons...