Define evil

Real World: The ability to act on thoughts that most people would not even think about or would find shocking and cause revulsion in.
Are shock and revulsion taught by society and if so, does that not make these “evil acts” just a standard (good or bad) of that society?

Overriding self-interest, to the point of malice.
But that over-riding self-interest may be the preservation of ones life and malice is often a perception. For example; if I killed you because I honestly perceived you would kill me first. It could be done with malice because I believe you want me dead, but does that make me evil for killing you to save myself, even if I was wrong about the your intent?
 

log in or register to remove this ad



Some guy from Ohio said:
Are shock and revulsion taught by society and if so, does that not make these “evil acts” just a standard (good or bad) of that society?
Yes.
Evil is defined by our times and who we are as a people, it is ever changing, it is a concept created by man and defined by man in his life time. It is the ACT that is evil.
 
Last edited:

But that over-riding self-interest may be the preservation of ones life and malice is often a perception. For example; if I killed you because I honestly perceived you would kill me first. It could be done with malice because I believe you want me dead, but does that make me evil for killing you to save myself, even if I was wrong about the your intent?
True on the malice as perception point, but the distinction here would be malice is a matter of perception from the viewpoint of an outside observer. People rarely think of their own actions as malicious; they usually rationalize it to themselves, or don't think on the issue.

If you killed me because you honestly thought that I was going to kill you, then you're acting out of self-preservation (albeit proactive self-preservation), rather than malicious self-interest. If you killed me because you wanted my car, or my shoes, or my wife - that would be evil. You'd be acting in self-interest ("I want X), to the point of malice ("and I'll gladly kill you to get it.").
 


Mallus said:
What if you ate the kittens afterwards? [let's say you weren't drowning them so much as brining...]

I guess that'd be a question of your personal ethics, but since it happens already to other animals, unless you were part of a dogma in which cats are sacred (such as Ancient Egypt)...

...EAT UP!
 

Now that's a good one. It's hard to defend that as anything but evil.
Said small creatures are inflicted with an uncureable, hideously painful, mind-wracking, debilitating disease such that would make life an act of cruelty, and you have no way to offer them succor. Admittadly, drowning may not be the best method for a mercy killing, but if it's the only (or the most merciful) method available... *shrug*
 

Savage Wombat said:
Granny Weatherwax says evil starts as treating people as things.

I'm nodding at this. Most people I think of as evil in RL have no empathy for other people. Of course, then there is the fine line between lack of empathy and actual metal disorders and then question becomes when is someone truly evil as opposed to being just mentally derranged.
 

dave_o said:
I can't quite remember where I read this -- I think it was on a thread on another board entitled "What is the most evil thing you have done to another human being?"

But: "True evil is drowning [kittens, babies, etc.] not because you can't take care of them or don't want them, but because you are stronger than them."

Obviously, it might be a requirment for all villans ever to spout some form of this line.
That's why children are pure, unadulterated evil. Ever seen a child rip the wings off a butterfly just because it can?
 

Remove ads

Top