Good and Evil question

[Tossica]

If people ceased to exist, so would good and evil. It doesn't exist without some human frame of reference to compare it to.

[Diekan]

Santiago Cajal (the father of neurobiology) once said that there are phenomena simply beyond the ability of the human brain to comprehend. That's a rough paraphrase because I'm too lazy to dig out his book and quote it word for word, but I'm sure you get the idea. I interpret this to mean that there are *things* that cannot be understood due to the limits of our 3 dimensional thinking. In other words or brains cannot physically / chemically understand said phenomena. Of course, however, human arrogance argues that we can indeed understand any and everything through the spectacles of math and science.

I, personally, believe in a higher power - a creator if you will - that set in motion the steps to our creation and existences. Having studied biology for many years now, I feel comfortable in my personal assessment of the science behind human evolution. First off, human evolution is not a theory. The word "theory" is the most abused term in all of science. A theory must satisfy the scientific method and be supported by not only empirical evidence via observation, but be qualified through the proving or disproving of many hypotheses.

In short, evolution is a reality - it can be proven in a laboratory setting (yes there is a difference in evolution and human evolution). Human evolution on the other hand is bunk. Sorry, but there's the no way the sheer complexity of the human being, the human phenomena, is the result of random collisions of some organic molecules in an ancient primordial soup some 4.5 bya. When you understand the intricate workings... the firing of neurons... the chemical reactions... the symphony of biology all working in concert for even the most trivial of tasks (such as moving your finger) you can't possibly conclude that we've been derived, the product of happenstance. However, this is my opinion. And, we haven't even touched on the areas of consciousness, love, etc... and etc.

What does this have to do with good and evil? Simple. If there is a higher creator, which there is, in my opinion, surely there are rules set by said creator. Dos and Don'ts that we are subject to follow. I don't believe evil, nor good for that matter, are simply constructs having risen from the human interpretation of morality.

[Lyion]

As God from Time Bandit's said, I think it has something to do with Free Will.

It's also interesting your views on evolution mirror mine, Diekan. Shhh, don't tell others, though, or they might label you a Neoconservative!

This also reminds me of a math professor I knew who had a fascinating philosophy in regards to good and evil in relation to energy and Quantum Mechanics.

[Tikker]

true enough, but rules or no rules, but to state that the above is some form of "survival" is kind of reaching, don't you think?

I'm not claiming it's survival

it'd be an aberration from standard behaviour

it's when a society/civilization develops that they arbitrarily decide what's good/evil/indifferent

dogs normally will kill cats, but when a dog adopts a kitten, it's an aberration from normal (but society somehow judges that to be good)

[Yamori]

My oversimplified view in a nutshell is:

Good: Things and actions that nurture life and things that make living better/easier.
Evil: Things and actions that destroy life or things that attack/destroy the things that make living possible.

In my own view, the center of "good" under that definition is man's capacity to think and the power to create and produce using that thinking, since that's how he survives. Any ideologies, societies, organizations, groups, and individuals that seek to stifle, subvert, destroy, or pillage those things are evil, according to the degree they do it.

So in this sense, I actually think the Thomas Edisons of the world are the biggest benefactors of humanity, far more so than the Mother Theresas or the Roosevelts.

If I had to outline a moral/ethical code, it would basically be summarized in the maxim:
1) Don't initiate physical force or fraud against any being that has the capacity to reason. That code applies to governments and societies as much as to individuals.

So while I think there generally is an objective good and evil (or perhaps good and bad would be the better terminology), it IS relative to our species. Obviously whales and rhinos use different means of survival, so their good and evil are of a different nature than peoples'.

thaTs my philosafee, i hope u enj0yed itt>

[Sithos]

In the days before religion or the notion of good or evil was around we had Ug. Ug was a caveman. Ug see woman. Ug have urges. Ug have problem though. Object of Ug affections is mating with Glub. So one day Ug smash Glub in head with club.Glub fall down make weird noises almost like mating noises then Glub smell funny and do weird twitches, then not move ever again. Ug not mad at Glub but Ug not know why he have these urges. Ug just know he needs to act on them. So now Ug can mate with woman. Ug and woman make beautiful caveman love until Grunk smashes Ug's head in. Through it all the human species grows. The strongest survive and the species grows. Was Ug evil?

Back then there really was no notion of good or evil. You acted upon instinct.

Then came religion in it's myriad forms. Some valued ideas that by todays standards were obscene. There was human sacrifice, there was sex with underage girls and boys, there were popes selling/trading guaranteed spots into heaven, there were witch hunts and many many other horrible stuff done in the name of "good"
Many folks suffered atrocities for the "betterment" of mankind in the name of religion.

Nowadays if Egbert has a crush on a girl and offs her boyfriend so he can have sex with her he would spend a long long time in jail. Isn't he hearkening back to the days of Ug? Just using more up to date methods?

Over the time that the human race has been around and evolving so has the notion of good and evil. Without one there is no other as there would be no way to judge. If everyone in this world did nothing but absolute "good" day in and day out we humans would still find some "evil" in it somehow. Bessy only gave 15 hours a day for 20 years helping the world, whereas Melissa gave 20 hours a day for 15 years and died of exhaustion. Is Bessy evil as she did less good than Melissa? Or maybe Melissa is evil as she worked to hard and cut short her time to help, the selfish bitch.

Good and evil are human terms used to quantify an ideal or a notion. For those that are religious God is the supreme good being and Satan is the supreme evil being. But Satan didn't kill off most of humanity in a flood because they didn't all worship him. Nope, that was God. Satan didn't turn people into pillars of salt, or make other people believe that in order to earn his favor and trust he had to sacrifice his firstborn son. To me God and Satan are what people use to quantify good and evil. If there is a God out there then by todays standards he is petty and cruel and has long since abandoned humanity to it's own designs.

Good and Evil are also situational. I'll use an extreme example. We have a nuclear war and there is left on this planet 50 people who by some miracle are all together in the same part of the world. 40 are male and 10 are female. You can bet that within a few years those 10 poor woman even if they don't want to will be popping out kids one after another with various partners as the males fight for dominance and likely the right to mate. Is this evil? Or survival?

After having said this I still stand by todays notion of what is right and what is wrong. I don't want to see human sacrifice, nor people being killed so that others can get some hot nasty action.I don't want to see some 14 year old girl working the streets or a woman forced to have sex. But I also firmly believe that in 1000 years from now (if were still around) we as a race will be viewed as horribly misguided cretins. In 1000 years much of what we consider nowadays as good or evil could be viewed as the complete opposite.

As was stated by other posters I don't think it's just black and white.To many variables involved.

[Zanchief]

The concept of Good and Evil is very infantile. I don't believe it at all.

Everyone's actions are governed by motivation. The definition is solely how it affects other people afterwards, given the context.

[Kramer]

i agree that humans have generally had an idea of what is beneficial to individuals and/or groups and what is not beneficial to indidivuals and/or groups.

i also agree that these can be vastly different from state to state (in the USA), country to country, culture to culture.

i am not sure "evil" has been defined. if by evil you mean the behavior on the outer extreme of the "what is not beneficial to individuals and/or groups" that is typically acceptable in most human cultures/societies, then that is certainly a pretty clear definition.

though the term "evil" brings baggage of connotation of religion that assume a certain state of a persons mind/heart, etc...

i think that i am comfortable acknowledging agreed upon definitions for words, though the assumptions about the person being defined are what i have trouble with....

someone who has an organic brain disorder and lives in a psychotic state, necessarily being seperated from what culture/society define as acceptable, is not "evil" if they do things that are heinous, etc... any more that someone who has acquired a chronic disease of the liver or kidneys is evil...

i would tend to see someone who behaves like a serial killer/rapist, etc... as someone who's mind is deeply broken

i don't understand what the need/use of the word is good for i guess...

there is a statement that it helps us clarify because there is good and there is evil and we know there is one because of the other....

well, how about there are avocado people and celery people and there can't be one without the other and it helps me clarify and be more confident that i know thingsin my own mind...
it still doesn't speak to a person as an idividual, it labels them with all of the nebulous assumptions that go along with the label.

i don't care if you think if someone is evil. i care what i can do to assist that person to live a life they want to live and to protect others from harm if the person chooses to threaten others.

[ClakarEQ]

Not sure if it was said, but there is no such thing as good and evil.

There is however right and wrong, it seems many folks have these terms confused or perhaps used synonomously(sp).

You kill someone, it is wrong. You save someone, it is right.

I did see a few posts that follow my opinion regarding good and evil i.e. labels humans place on things.

Just my 2cps

[10sun]

Not sure if it was said, but there is no such thing as good and evil.

There is however right and wrong, it seems many folks have these terms confused or perhaps used synonymously(fixed spelling for you).

You kill someone, it is wrong. You save someone, it is right.

I did see a few posts that follow my opinion regarding good and evil i.e. labels humans place on things.

Just my 2cps

You kill a 90 year old to save a 9 year old. Is that right or wrong?

You kill a 9 year old to save a 90 year old. Is that right or wrong?

"Right and Wrong" are subjective measurements just like "Good and Evil". You cannot measure it in degrees, it is just something that is arbitrarily assigned based upon one person's belief sets and mental state, however the next person could come up with completely different measurements and still be correct.

Trying to say anything else is simply arguing your opinion and everybody knows that your opinion is wrong.

[Yamori]

I'd sure like to hear some examples of where a 9 year old would require a 90 year old to be killed for survival, in which there are no alternative and more beneficial solutions, in which you are the sole arbiter of said decision and by what authority it falls to you to kill said 90 year old.
:P

[10sun]

To distract the monster and let the kid make a quick run for it and escape out of an air shaft that only he/she can fit through. duh.

[Diekan]

To distract the zombie and let the kid make a quick run for it and escape out of an air shaft that only he/she can fit through. duh.

Fixt.

[Xaiveir]

To distract the zombie and let the kid make a quick run for it and escape out of an air shaft that only he/she can fit through. duh.

Fixt.

Well done sir.

[Harrison]

You don't need to make a quick escape from a zombie.

[Tossica]

You don't need to make a quick escape from a zombie.

If you find a zombie, chances are you will be surrounded by hundreds of them in a matter of minutes. Sacrifice the old people and run!

[Arlos]

You don't need to make a quick escape from a zombie.

Not true! You had to be damn fast to escape from the zombies in 28 Days Later.

-Arlos

[araby]

You don't need to make a quick escape from a zombie.

Not true! You had to be damn fast to escape from the zombies in 28 Days Later.

-Arlos

those zombies had the rage though. regular zombies aren't that fast.

[10sun]

derailed into zombie semantics.

[Diekan]

success!

[Zanchief]

Danny Boyle claims there are no zombies in 28 Days Later...

[Tikker]

i have a hard time believing we actually have 33 active posters like this thread would seem to indicate

[Zanchief]

Never underestimate the NT lurkers.

[Tikker]

I suppose

I just assumed Lyion was doing a bush impression and rigging the vote florida stylez

[Zanchief]

HAHAHA that would be another explanation.