Many moons ago when the earth was young, between mammoth hunting trips that Josh and I would take up north (because it's fucking hot down in the south) I posted a thread for the discussion of good and evil. It was derailed into an entirely different conversation. Eon's later... I attempt to try again.
For the purpose of discussion, I ask that we all say we believe Good and Evil exist. That we all say that we believe that Good and Evil are Objective, that is what is good and what is evil are such despite the opinion of the viewer. In such case, what is the nature of good and the nature of evil?
To clarify I'm not asking for a laundry list of good deeds or evil practices, but to boil it down to the essentials. What makes something good and what makes something evil?
The Nature of Good and Evil.
Moderator: Charon
- frigidmagi
- Dragon Death-Marine General
- Posts: 14757
- Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2005 11:03 am
- 19
- Location: Alone and unafraid
#1 The Nature of Good and Evil.
"it takes two sides to end a war but only one to start one. And those who do not have swords may still die upon them." Tolken
- Josh
- Resident of the Kingdom of Eternal Cockjobbery
- Posts: 8114
- Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 4:51 pm
- 19
- Location: Kingdom of Eternal Cockjobbery
#2 Re: The Nature of Good and Evil.
Pulling the Pleistocene Mountain Oyster gag on your buddy definitely qualifies for dark side, IMO.
Okay, if we're defining good and evil as objectively existing things, are we stripping intent from the equation? Smacking somebody on the back is kind of a berk thing to do, but if you're squashing a Black Widow that's heading for their neck, you're redeemed.
While I'm awaiting clarification on that, I'll toss my vague and barely-formed thoughts into the pool. It's all about how one applies their innate selfishness. Everything we do is rooted in some form of personal payoff, and to me evil starts at some degree when the payoff is at the loss for others.
Of course, there's a million and one circumstantial modifiers to be applied there.
Okay, if we're defining good and evil as objectively existing things, are we stripping intent from the equation? Smacking somebody on the back is kind of a berk thing to do, but if you're squashing a Black Widow that's heading for their neck, you're redeemed.
While I'm awaiting clarification on that, I'll toss my vague and barely-formed thoughts into the pool. It's all about how one applies their innate selfishness. Everything we do is rooted in some form of personal payoff, and to me evil starts at some degree when the payoff is at the loss for others.
Of course, there's a million and one circumstantial modifiers to be applied there.
When the Frog God smiles, arm yourself.
"'Flammable' and 'inflammable' have the same meaning! This language is insane!"
GIVE ME COFFEE AND I WILL ALLOW YOU TO LIVE!- Frigid
"Ork 'as no automatic code o' survival. 'is partic'lar distinction from all udda livin' gits is tha necessity ta act inna face o' alternatives by means o' dakka."
I created the sound of madness, wrote the book on pain
"'Flammable' and 'inflammable' have the same meaning! This language is insane!"
GIVE ME COFFEE AND I WILL ALLOW YOU TO LIVE!- Frigid
"Ork 'as no automatic code o' survival. 'is partic'lar distinction from all udda livin' gits is tha necessity ta act inna face o' alternatives by means o' dakka."
I created the sound of madness, wrote the book on pain