EVIL!!!!!!!!

Is there a God? If so, what is She like?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 4743
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm

"if morality comes from God then why is there disagreement about it among believers?"

Post by henry quirk » Sun Aug 25, 2019 8:23 pm

Mebbe cuz God's word is perfect but the ears that hear it aren't.

surreptitious57
Posts: 3440
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:09 am

Re: EVIL!!!!!!!!

Post by surreptitious57 » Sun Aug 25, 2019 8:28 pm

Immanuel Can wrote:
You have made a mistake there by confusing two claims :

I Morality itself is objective ( murder is absolutely wrong for example )

2 It is an objective fact that people want to believe ( subjectively ) in a thing called morality

( People want to believe there is a reason why we cannot murder even though we can )
I Morality is not objective [ simply claiming that it is does not make it so as it has to be demonstrated ]

2 What is objectively true is that the concept of morality exists [ but only subjectively so ]

These two statements are mutually compatible so there is no confusion here at all

Dubious
Posts: 2209
Joined: Tue May 19, 2015 7:40 am

Re: "if morality comes from God then why is there disagreement about it among believers?"

Post by Dubious » Sun Aug 25, 2019 9:07 pm

henry quirk wrote:
Sun Aug 25, 2019 8:23 pm
Mebbe cuz God's word is perfect but the ears that hear it aren't.
That would likely be true if he ever said anything. All we ever hear are humans pretending.

User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 4743
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm

Post by henry quirk » Mon Aug 26, 2019 12:47 am

"That would likely be true if he ever said anything."

As I reckon things: yep. Crom sez nuthin' to nobody 'bout nuthin'. Bastid Absent Deity.

#

"All we ever hear are humans pretending."

Yep.

gaffo
Posts: 2311
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 3:15 am

Re: EVIL!!!!!!!!

Post by gaffo » Mon Aug 26, 2019 1:01 am

f12hte wrote:
Sun Aug 11, 2019 4:19 pm
Evil. What is it's source? Is it just a subjective idea in each person's mind? If God made all things, then is he the ultimate source of evil? Or is 'evil' even a thing? Or is it just a subjective idea? Or is it a human or even universal idea, in some respect? And if it is a universal idea, in what mind or matter does it exist? If evil exists, how did it come to be?

I hold a unique view of the world borne of my unique set of life experiences.

My unique worldview gives me a unique perspective on what is good and what is bad.

When I do a good thing, i think that the good reverberates down through the ages, since good actions engender knock-on good actions.

Ditto for when I do something that I consider bad.

So, the bad that I do is borne of my environment, filled with the knock-on effects of others' deeds, going back an eternity.

So evil, or at least culpability, has no origin? And if it has no origin, then how can it be said to exist?
"evil" is seflishness.

disragerd to outcomes per others.

gaffo
Posts: 2311
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 3:15 am

Re: EVIL!!!!!!!!

Post by gaffo » Mon Aug 26, 2019 1:05 am

f12hte wrote:
Sun Aug 11, 2019 4:19 pm
Evil. What is it's source? Is it just a subjective idea in each person's mind? If God made all things, then is he the ultimate source of evil? Or is 'evil' even a thing? Or is it just a subjective idea? Or is it a human or even universal idea, in some respect? And if it is a universal idea, in what mind or matter does it exist? If evil exists, how did it come to be?

per Christrainity, "I am good yet great evil"

refer to Belial and the Torah on that one.

gaffo
Posts: 2311
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 3:15 am

Re: EVIL!!!!!!!!

Post by gaffo » Mon Aug 26, 2019 1:16 am

f12hte wrote:
Mon Aug 12, 2019 1:44 am
from the old adage; "to thine own self be true"; one tends towards evil.

agreed,

f12hte wrote:
Mon Aug 12, 2019 1:44 am
What do you say about that?
I say anyone that does not know ones self ( forfives/love) is a fool

gaffo
Posts: 2311
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 3:15 am

Re: EVIL!!!!!!!!

Post by gaffo » Mon Aug 26, 2019 1:23 am

Immanuel Can wrote:
Mon Aug 12, 2019 2:12 am

I say that Shakespeare deliberately put that utterance in the mouth of a fool, Polonius, in Hamlet. It didn't work out well for him -- but he "got the point" in the end. :wink:
tell me more - not know of Shakespeare, my view is man being good, self knowledge/and self love.forgineancence is a good thing.

tell me more per shakepseare how that is "evil".


imo evil = selfshiness (from an non sefl actualized entitity) - ego ruled dolt (Belial being the poster boy of).

gaffo
Posts: 2311
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 3:15 am

Re: f12

Post by gaffo » Mon Aug 26, 2019 1:29 am

henry quirk wrote:
Mon Aug 12, 2019 2:13 am
We can waste a whole of time debatin' the source of evil: I prefer to just deal with what is -- on a practical level -- 'evil'.

In a nutshell: willingly, knowingly, deprivin' another of his life, liberty, or property is evil, yeah? Evil, then is not thinkin', but action (acts).
too simple mindset Sir.

do to think the state is evil if you are Tim Mcviuegh. and you were jailed for killing 168 folks.

you did right, but the State jailed you, so the state is evil.

lol.

use your mind. you do have one yes?

whole world my be "us vs them" but your mentality is shit-nindless.

refer to McVeigh/ISIS nitwits - all "denending themselves" against the world.


no the world is more complex than then your adulesent mentality - unless you are a-ok with McVeigh and Isis,. then they are "great americans/etc" and a-ok and carry on and more power to you.

lol.
Last edited by gaffo on Mon Aug 26, 2019 1:35 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
henry quirk
Posts: 4743
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm

"if morality comes from God then why is there disagreement about it among believers?"

Post by henry quirk » Mon Aug 26, 2019 1:31 am

That would likely be true if he ever said anything. All we ever hear are humans pretending.
I think if I were seriously lookin' at Christianity: I'd find myself the cleanest translations of the oldest books and go with that.

I think I'd avoid preachers and congregations and folks keen to tell me what God wants or sez.

I think it was Kierkegaard who wrote about Scripture as a personal letter from God to who ever happens to be readin'. If this is the case: what the hell does such a reader need with self-proclaimed intermediaries?

gaffo
Posts: 2311
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 3:15 am

Re: EVIL!!!!!!!!

Post by gaffo » Mon Aug 26, 2019 1:39 am

Lacewing wrote:
Mon Aug 12, 2019 5:55 am
I think of "evil" as the other end of the spectrum from "divine". Both terms can be applied in many different ways -- so intent is made clear by the context they're used in. They do not have to be associated with a religious mindset. They represent extremes of potential... whether it be in reference to people or energy. And our experience of it can seem as real as any other experience we have. Still, I think, we can take anything seriously or not...or commit ourselves to anything or not... and we can change channels. So, amidst so much potential, which channel(s) do we tune to...when it's all available? Evil is just one act on the stage.
evil = selfishness, pride. ego (any trait that boosts the ego) vanity etc (all of the "seven" sins)

good = selflessness, humility.

gaffo
Posts: 2311
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 3:15 am

Re: f12

Post by gaffo » Mon Aug 26, 2019 1:49 am

f12hte wrote:
Mon Aug 12, 2019 3:39 pm
henry quirk wrote:
Mon Aug 12, 2019 2:13 am
We can waste a whole of time debatin' the source of evil: I prefer to just deal with what is -- on a practical level -- 'evil'.

In a nutshell: willingly, knowingly, deprivin' another of his life, liberty, or property is evil, yeah? Evil, then is not thinkin', but action (acts).
So you, yourself, decide what is evil. What's more, you and 11 other jurors decide what is evil. Does that make the person's acts absolutely evil, or just evil in your eyes?

I'm reminded of the story of the Taoist farmer, where events are first recognized as evil, but subsequently turn out to be instrumental to a good outcome, rendering the original judgement of 'evil' null and void.
My mind is more turned toward the Zinger trial, where the jurors know full well Zinger as a journalist who exposed the king and his men as scouderals - and knew that zinger as "gulity of libal against the king" (which the kings was deserving of such in print via zinger's newpaper) - but since "legally" of late it became illegal to dissparage the king - even if deserved and self evident............the jurors, using conscience rather than affirming the latter immoral law making it illegal to dissparge the king in all cases (inculding if he deserved dissparagement)) - ignored the law and rulled Zinger "innocent" (even after being locked up without food for 2-3 week to force a guity verdict!!!!!!!!!!! (histroy and knowledge of is important for those that value libery/rule of law).

too few do today - do not value liberty nor know of history.

sadly.

refer to Jury Nullification/Pardon- "the State" (insisting rights are granted (and Jury Nul is not right!!!!! (it IS BTW - regardless of The STATE damanding it is not a Right) rather than affirmed in principle) has been at war with it for 250 yrs, even though the one of the First SC justices John Jay has affirmed it in writting 230 yrs ago.

gaffo
Posts: 2311
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 3:15 am

Re: GIA

Post by gaffo » Mon Aug 26, 2019 2:09 am

henry quirk wrote:
Mon Aug 12, 2019 8:00 pm
"Yet if you saw a bank robber about to kill an innocent by-stander, and you could and did not kill him and allowed him to kill, you would likely be jailed as well."

No, that's not the way American law works. If I were I cop, I'd have a legal obligation to intervene, but I'm not a cop. That's not to say I wouldn't have a moral obligation to intervene if I had the means to stop the bad guy (cuz I would have such an obligation if, and only if, I had the means).


State law also appiles. i rem 15 tyr ago in Mass (i think it was) - some perp was raping a small girl in a bathroom and the mass citizen walked away (fully legal - though maybe not moral) - since that time mass law has been amemded to demand citizens to not walk away, but instead intervene.


henry quirk wrote:
Mon Aug 12, 2019 8:00 pm
But, to risk myself against an armed man when I'm unarmed is just stupid
yes but irreliven per the rule of law prior to 2006 in mass,

have gun, ak or nothing, fine to just walk away while another is being raped in the other stall.

a-ok.

..................there are 50 other states, and a bet most have not amended their laws, so most state are prob a-ok with walking away regardless of there concel/open or non carry,,,,,,,,,,,,,,let the perp rape the kid and you can walk away.

a-ok and legal for you do so.

gaffo
Posts: 2311
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 3:15 am

Re: GIA

Post by gaffo » Mon Aug 26, 2019 2:19 am

Greatest I am wrote:
Mon Aug 12, 2019 8:49 pm


What natural law gives you the right to life?
enaliemable rights are:

life
liberty
property/happiness

and

association
marriage

last two added my me.

Greatest I am wrote:
Mon Aug 12, 2019 8:49 pm
Liberty is a legal term and your right to liberty can be taken from you by the law whenever it wants.
No!

the State may try to deny or take away those rights, but they are still "rights of men" regardless of the state.

I affirm Enlightnement ideals, so i deny any state they denies such inborn fundemental rights.

others may not have my values and instead view said rights as granted by the state when the state deems fine, that is their error, i do not agree with that mindset.

gaffo
Posts: 2311
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 3:15 am

Re:

Post by gaffo » Mon Aug 26, 2019 2:29 am

henry quirk wrote:
Mon Aug 12, 2019 9:13 pm
"The only right anyone has is what he can claim and fight for on his own."

No, your self-ownership, your right to your life, liberty, and property, is intrinsic to you. Whether you can successfully defend yourself or not doesn't negate that self-ownership or right to life, liberty, and property, no, it only means someone one else is wrong in depriving you of yourself (life, liberty, or property).
agreed. adding association (right to claim whom are your friends) and marriage (I'n mot married - it that matters lol - i affirm said right)

these last two items were never written in any Natural Law codex, but such rights date to a very early time and should (imo) be assumed to be grafted and affirmed as natural rights for all persons.

henry quirk wrote:
Mon Aug 12, 2019 9:13 pm
#

"What natural law gives you the right to life?"

Natural law describes what it 'is (the individual self-owns)'. It doesn't stop fire from singein' my keister or thieves from takin' my wallet. No my keister and wallet have to be defended by me.

#

???

henry quirk wrote:
Mon Aug 12, 2019 9:13 pm
"Liberty is a legal term and your right to liberty can be taken from you by the law whenever it wants."

Locke would disagree; I do disagree. Liberty is not merely a legal term, and -- yeah -- bad law, by bad law makers, can be exercised against me but that doesn't make it right.

#
count me in with you a Locke here!

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests