Does evil exist?

[Guest *Ste***cque**]

Does evil exist or is it just a malfunction of the brain? What are your thoughts and/or experiences on this question. My apologies if some of you have personal experiences.

[Katherine of Halifax 113932]

Evil does not exist except in the human mind. Let me remind you of Buda's main mantra.

 

Suffering only exists as the human mind develops it. In other words life is perfect just as we are right now.

 

We develop maladies large and small according to our needs . We believe we need to suffer so we conjure pain, suffering and even insanity. Most humans need suffering to identify with so we just create it . There it is , we are now that cancer, infection, brain disease or what ever we need to attach ourselves to.

 

All human beings are perfect and totally capable of healing ourselves. However we identify so strongly to our Distress we won't allow happiness into out lives.

 

It is the same with evil, it does not exist until we let in into out lives . If we don't see it does not exist.

 

To try and be more clear we all allow certain things in our lives. Hard as this may be to accept the good, bad and in between is all out our inner thoughts brought into reality.

 

What ever I wish for today will come to me tomorrow , hands down. Those who wish for evil ... I'm not sure.

[Grass_Hopper 18263]

I believe that ''evil'' aswell as its opposite, are creation of the human mind.

 

Sure, we learn at a very young age the difference between good and bad, but my good and my bad are probably not the same as yours, at one point.

 

Does a thief steeling to feed his family is bad?

 

I believe all is in the intentions, and the way they are perceived.

 

I've never seen an animal being evil, and I believe all creatures being equal, so NO, I don't believe in the existense of Evil, although I've been qualified so a couple of times. ;-)

[GentMada 2181]

Yes the devil exists and his name is Donald Trump ;)

[BLUEDEVIL2222 857]

Yes evil exists, I see it daily the likes most of you will never ever see. Most I hope you never see.

[Guest st*****ens**ors]

This question really comes down to definitions and causality. If evil is being defined as an extant malignant force, like the eye of Sauron, weighing humanity down by its simple existence, then most people will question it. If, however, it is defined in simple human terms as the intention to cause suffering, and the derivation of pleasure from that suffering, then the existence of evil really isn't subject to debate; it's simple fact.

 

Then you are left with the causality question, which is trickier to resolve. Conventional psychotherapy considers all behaviours that we might call evil to be pathological in nature, that is, the result of a disorder, an illness or a trauma. However, I know a psychologist and professor of psychology who ultimately left the discipline because he felt the inability to recognize the desire to harm and to derive pleasure from suffering as something that could exist in an individual without pathological source was psychology's great blind spot. In short, decades of clinical experience had led him to believe that evil was both real, and not simply an aberration of brain function.

 

I've certainly seen it, and experienced its effects. My personal morality boils down to kindness vs cruelty, but I have no problem identifying the latter as evil.

[TINCUP 6043]

The devil exist in Canada his name is Stephen Harper

[nearandfar 497]

I think more harm is done with our own apathy. When we do nothing or don't care, then that's when bad things can happen.

 

TLDR: Try not to vote conservative.

[TINCUP 6043]

Evil does exist and some of them are in Canadian Prisons, Such as Paul Bernardo, Robert Picton, Russell Williams, they all murdered women and there is Luka Magnota who decapitated a man and sent body parts to politicians including Stephen Harper. What they did id total evil, at least from my perspective

[roamingguy 300292]

Evil does exist and some of them are in Canadian Prisons, Such as Paul Bernardo, Robert Picton, Russell Williams, they all murdered women and there is Luka Magnota who decapitated a man and sent body parts to politicians including Stephen Harper. What they did id total evil, at least from my perspective

 

And those are the ones the public knows about. I've seen evil people (convicted criminals), not just some that were in the media spotlight, but many more who the vast majority of the public hasn't heard of. Some of their crimes as heinous if not worse than the criminals we know about. What they did to other human beings would make someone sick.

 

And then lets look at the world, dictators like Hitler and the genocide of six million Jews and Stalin with the Purges, the Rwanda genocide where 800,000 Tutsi killed by Hutu, Srebrenica massacre, Pol Pot and the killings in Cambodia, and so on.

The list sadly is likely endless.

 

Does evil exist, yes...and unfortunately, when you look at the world, is more the norm than the exception

What causes evil and why does it exist, I just don't know.

 

RG

[Guest *Ste***cque**]

Good points everyone.

 

Maybe I should have used quotation marks around the word "evil". Without discounting anyone's view, I personally think of "evil" as a word with religious overtones. I do agree that cruelty and indifference exist in abundance and I won't minimize the impact of that on the recipients. I do wonder though if science wont one day discover a mutation in the brain or a faulty gene to explain this, a pathological explanation, as Cuchullain put it in his post.

 

Of course it's not as simple as a faulty gene. I also believe that an erosion of empathy could be at work as well as other factors. Some people are born, or raised, with little or no sense of empathy and this trait is important for developing prosocial behaviours. Without a strong sense of empathy, cruelty or apathy become much easier. We already are very good at casting people as "outsiders" if they disagree with us and that's usually a first step towards demonization and dehumanization.

 

And what about technologies ability to inure us to an onslaught of the worlds readily available problems 24/7? Does it makes us more, or less, empathetic? It is much harder to walk away from a friend in front of you with tears in their eyes than it is to keep scrolling past a plea for sympathy on FB or post a worthless like or ignore an email asking for help outright. I'm not laying the blame at technologies feet but aren't we kidding ourselves if we think encouraging rampant computer use, as opposed to face to face gatherings and companionship or even phone calls, makes us MORE empathetic? It's easier to say no or be uncaring online than it is face to face where they can react immediately.

 

These are just some of my own thoughts I wanted to express.

[Grass_Hopper 18263]

Being raised with Paigans beliefs, we tend to see it more of a lack of something.

 

We don't have so called ''morality'' as per say.

 

What you consider ''evil'' is a way for somebody to express a ''need'' of something. Adrenalin, recognition, power, ... You name it.

 

Bottom line, for me anyways, is: if you see pain and can sooth it, do so. It will always come back to you, at some point. (Some may call it Karma) If you don't, it'll also get back at you.

 

As for kindness and cruelty, that's a different game. Being cruel is the essence of what I am, but still, very kind, generous, and loving.

 

What you guys are qulifying as ''evil'' would be more of ''unexcusable''. And as so, it cannot be covered with any tags, as those things, eventhough meant to happen (humankind is not perfect), are still extremely shocking, as they directly attack our most intrinsic values.

[YoungBeautyMirella 5600]

I truly believe that evil exists. There is seriously evil people in this world (like people who murder for the 'pleasure of it' and who kill/rape women and children and of course innocent men, and then there is evil people who have no emotion or remorse for their actions, are devil worshippers and so on, so to answer your question, yes I do believe evil exists. Maybe a lot of stuff happened and made someone 'cold hearted' or they were born that way. Either way, I have met a couple mean people in my life but thankfully I don't think I've encountered anyone evil. knock on wood!

[Guest st*****ens**ors]

[quote name=Grass_Hopper;733862

 

As for kindness and cruelty' date=' that's a different game. Being cruel is the essence of what I am, but still, very kind, generous, and loving..[/quote]

 

Definitions and language are clearly at the heart of an issue like this one. What you're claiming as cruel, the essence of your nature and not incompatible with kindness and generosity, is not what I'd consider cruelty, but a specific kind of playfulness carried out with a willing partner.

 

Taking pleasure in causing suffering -- the real deal agony like those two boys in Alberta last week charged with burning and breaking the limbs of a puppy, scaling up to any number of atrocities you could name -- that's what I refer to with the word "cruel."

 

Consent is probably key. If you enjoy causing pain to someone who hasn't agreed to what you're doing and is desperate to escape, then cruel, the way I would use the word does apply to you.

 

I deeply doubt that's the case.

[Grass_Hopper 18263]

For me, being cruel is something that happens deep down inside, and not only to be playful.

 

I can be extremely hurtful and mean, even pushing one's border to its limits, and it will be a game for me. Just as cat and mouse.

 

I you hurt me pretty bad, or someone I love, you will remember me for the rest of your days. And if you are just a little bit too weak, I will play with your mind just for the sake of my own satisfaction.

 

I may have shot myself in the foot with this one, but my frankness and honesty are part of what makes me so ''evil'', as you may say.

 

But then again, respect me (not asking to venerate me), my choices (eventhough you don't agree with them) and my integrity, remain frank and honest, and we will have absolutly no problems whatsoever.

 

But still, killing, hurting innocents, brigning useless pain to any form of life, and taking someone's integrity or liberty away, is unexcusable.

 

Eventhough you might consider me twisted, evil and cruel, I still can make the difference between good and bad, again, according to MY values.

 

Definitions and language are clearly at the heart of an issue like this one. What you're claiming as cruel, the essence of your nature and not incompatible with kindness and generosity, is not what I'd consider cruelty, but a specific kind of playfulness carried out with a willing partner.

 

Taking pleasure in causing suffering -- the real deal agony like those two boys in Alberta last week charged with burning and breaking the limbs of a puppy, scaling up to any number of atrocities you could name -- that's what I refer to with the word "cruel."

 

Consent is probably key. If you enjoy causing pain to someone who hasn't agreed to what you're doing and is desperate to escape, then cruel, the way I would use the word does apply to you.

 

I deeply doubt that's the case.

[Guest st*****ens**ors]

 

 

But still, killing, hurting innocents, brigning useless pain to any form of life, and taking someone's integrity or liberty away, is unexcusable.

 

.

 

That's the essence of what I was saying. We're differing over terminology, but our base values line up pretty well.

[TorontoMelanieJolliet 4458]

I truly believe that evil exists. There is seriously evil people in this world (like people who murder for the 'pleasure of it' and who kill/rape women and children and of course innocent men, and then there is evil people who have no emotion or remorse for their actions, are devil worshippers and so on, so to answer your question, yes I do believe evil exists. Maybe a lot of stuff happened and made someone 'cold hearted' or they were born that way. Either way, I have met a couple mean people in my life but thankfully I don't think I've encountered anyone evil. knock on wood!

 

But how do you know that there exists people who murder for pleasure? We don't know that. Hence never being able to find out what is truly in the mind of a serial killer (for instance). They keep trying to get inside a mind like that but fail. Murder could be done to gain power or respect or have control. It could be done for revenge. It could be done to hide other intentions/actions. It could be done for curiosity as a person may have been so isolated from others as to let their personal thoughts take over without an outside influences to set a norm or even occupy their minds with other things? That doesn't mean 'evil'.

 

And to say for sure that their are people who have no emotion or remorse is an assumption. If you are facing the rest of your life in jail (no doubt horrible thought to accept) why would you show emotion? And why would show remorse if you know there is not a damn way you could ever correct your action. Remorse doesn't help people you've hurt. And it won't keep you out of jail, you still have to pay. And emotions...why show emotions when you know that also will solve nothing? You will have to steel yourself against what is ahead in order to survive it.

 

And what if your action was a reaction and you still have to pay? Why would you show remorse when it was you or them? Why would you show emotion? That would only please the people looking for justice. Why would you want to be further humiliated and imprisoned by the pleasure of those who want to see you suffer?

 

I think that more evil exists in individuals who don't commit heinous crimes that those that do.

[Mikeyboy 27133]

... If evil is being defined as an extant malignant force, like the eye of Sauron, weighing humanity down by its simple existence, then most people will question it....

 

That's an interresting example. Kirill Eskov, a Russian fiction writer famously wrote a book called "the Last Ringbearer" which is a retelling of The Lord of the Rings, but from the perspective of Sauron's forces. It was based on the proverb "History is written by the victors". The men are the evil ones who are infringing on their territories, and must be stopped at all costs. Food for thought.

 

Evil often is a matter of perspective. It is a moral judgement that we make based on our own values of right and wrong, which vary drastically from culture to culture, as well as from individual to individual.

 

To the gazelle, the lion is evil. To the lion, the gazelle is dinner.

[YoungBeautyMirella 5600]

But how do you know that there exists people who murder for pleasure? We don't know that. Hence never being able to find out what is truly in the mind of a serial killer (for instance). They keep trying to get inside a mind like that but fail. Murder could be done to gain power or respect or have control. It could be done for revenge. It could be done to hide other intentions/actions. It could be done for curiosity as a person may have been so isolated from others as to let their personal thoughts take over without an outside influences to set a norm or even occupy their minds with other things? That doesn't mean 'evil'.

 

And to say for sure that their are people who have no emotion or remorse is an assumption. If you are facing the rest of your life in jail (no doubt horrible thought to accept) why would you show emotion? And why would show remorse if you know there is not a damn way you could ever correct your action. Remorse doesn't help people you've hurt. And it won't keep you out of jail, you still have to pay. And emotions...why show emotions when you know that also will solve nothing? You will have to steel yourself against what is ahead in order to survive it.

 

And what if your action was a reaction and you still have to pay? Why would you show remorse when it was you or them? Why would you show emotion? That would only please the people looking for justice. Why would you want to be further humiliated and imprisoned by the pleasure of those who want to see you suffer?

 

I think that more evil exists in individuals who don't commit heinous crimes that those that do.

I agree with you in a sense, but whether someone murders or hurts people for pleasure or because they are mad etc that in my opinion is 'evil'. Maybe at the time they blacked out and regretted it after, but at the time they must have 'turned evil' even in a split second. I've watched many documentaries and a lot of those serial killers or rapists or terrorists look very evil in my eyes. No one can really get inside someones mind, but to 'normal' people, the people that commit crimes such as I described seem evil or twisted.

[Guest st*****ens**ors]

That's an interresting example. Kirill Eskov, a Russian fiction writer famously wrote a book called "the Last Ringbearer" which is a retelling of The Lord of the Rings, but from the perspective of Sauron's forces. It was based on the proverb "History is written by the victors". The men are the evil ones who are infringing on their territories, and must be stopped at all costs. Food for thought.

 

Evil often is a matter of perspective. It is a moral judgement that we make based on our own values of right and wrong, which vary drastically from culture to culture, as well as from individual to individual.

 

To the gazelle, the lion is evil. To the lion, the gazelle is dinner.

 

Actually, it's an interesting counter-example, as I said that if that's how evil is defined, most rational people will question it.

 

The moral relativism argument tends to break down when one has been touched by the thing itself. There is nothing of lion and gazelle in rape. There is no justification in, "History being written by the victors" for the elderly gentleman I worked with who lost his arm, and every member of his family in Auschwitz.

 

Bring me your case of justified rape. I'd like to interrogate that.

[Mikeyboy 27133]

Actually, it's an interesting counter-example, as I said that if that's how evil is defined, most rational people will question it.

 

The moral relativism argument tends to break down when one has been touched by the thing itself. There is nothing of lion and gazelle in rape. There is no justification in, "History being written by the victors" for the elderly gentleman I worked with who lost his arm, and every member of his family in Auschwitz.

 

Bring me your case of justified rape. I'd like to interrogate that.

OK. Dangerous ground challenging me to defend rape. (Yes I see what you did there ;) ) I will carefully attempt to argue my points using the parameters you set forth, but remember thsee were your examples not mine.

 

I can't personally justify rape because it is against my moral values. I personally judge it to be wrong. Arguably against the beliefs of most in our society. Unfortunately the prisons are full of those who disagree and feel justified at least under certain conditions. (Many more on the streets who were never convicted. ) There are also societies who view rape as a deserving consequence to immorality of other sorts. There are armies who view rape as a justified means of enforcing their will on a population. No, I don't agree (obviously) with any of these positions, but that is my perspective based on a belief system I have developed through my culture and environment.

Some moral judgements are agreed upon by larger portions of the population than others, but that doesn't make it less of a judgement. My point was never to condone or belittle horrible acts. Just to point out that it is a judgement. Not a thing. I am certainly not above passing those judgments myself.

 

As far as the Holocaust goes. (More dangerous ground) I absolutely condemn it. I judge it to be a horrible blemish on our history as a species. That is my personal belief. At the time however, they had much support by those who judged differently. Those people did not consider themselves evil. They felt justified and even right. Thankfully, history for the most part has judged them differently.

[Guest st*****ens**ors]

Thanks for your response; very interesting.

 

Your arguments beg the question; that is they can only function as arguments if one begins by assuming the truth of the position they are meant to prove.

 

The OP question is whether or not evil is real/objective. You would argue that evil is relative to the circumstance of the individual. I posit extreme cases to test the argument, cases so clear and fundamental that virtually every rational person will say that what took place is wrong. Your response in its essence, is that since the perpetrators of the very atrocity itself felt they were justified, then the morality of the act is entirely subjective.

 

For your argument to work, you need the audience to already be committed to your conclusion, that evil is relative to individual circumstance.

 

Now, if you could get a fair cross section of functional society, including a majority who do not themselves engage in the activity to agree that, for example, rape is morally acceptable, then that might work as a defense for the relativist position.

 

But the judgement of the perpetrators themselves cannot be used as evidence for moral relativism, as it is their action that is in the process of being defined as objectively evil or not.

 

Thanks for the discussion!

[Mikeyboy 27133]

Thanks for your response; very interesting.

 

Your arguments beg the question; that is they can only function as arguments if one begins by assuming the truth of the position they are meant to prove.

 

The OP question is whether or not evil is real/objective. You would argue that evil is relative to the circumstance of the individual. I posit extreme cases to test the argument, cases so clear and fundamental that virtually every rational person will say that what took place is wrong. Your response in its essence, is that since the perpetrators of the very atrocity itself felt they were justified, then the morality of the act is entirely subjective.

 

For your argument to work, you need the audience to already be committed to your conclusion, that evil is relative to individual circumstance.

 

Now, if you could get a fair cross section of functional society, including a majority who do not themselves engage in the activity to agree that, for example, rape is morally acceptable, then that might work as a defense for the relativist position.

 

But the judgement of the perpetrators themselves cannot be used as evidence for moral relativism, as it is their action that is in the process of being defined as objectively evil or not.

 

Thanks for the discussion!

 

OK. So you don't feel that the perpetrators themselves constitute an acceptable portion of society for an alternative view. Perhaps, but I don't necessarily agree. The acceptance or lack there of from their relative time or place determines the degree of atrocity. How about another example from our own western society but from a different time frame? It was common to accept rape as a part of warfare in our past. Promise of the "spoils of war for the Victor" was commonplace, and the spoils was understood to mean not only silver and coins, but the wives and daughters of the slain men from the places you conquered. Acceptable by today's standards? Absolutely not. Even perhaps questionable at the time, but common practice. It was all simply a matter of convincing your own men of the evil of the other side. Then you can justify anything. The problem is that both sides were usually so convinced of their own righteousness and the evil of the other side that they could justify anything. God's will of course. Could both be right that the other side was evil? They both believed it and felt that god was on their side against the evils of the other side. It was their duty to fight that evil.

 

OK let's take another approach to the question. If evil exists outside the mind of humans, then does it follow suit that it would continue to exist after we are gone? If there are no humans to see it, or blame it for things they deem wrong, would it exist? This is a trickier question as it calls into account your beliefs in a god and therefore some sort of evil anti god. My beliefs are that what we percieve as evil would not exist. The lion would continue to eat the gazelle because it was hungry. Not because it was evil.

 

I am also not using these arguments to let people off the hook for their actions. On the contrary. I am using them to hold people perfectly accountable for their actions. If you hurt someone or do something horrible, then that was all you. You can't blame some devil or fictional force to lighten your responsibility. People can be a**holes admitted but they choose to be. Nobody and nothing made them do it.

[Guest st*****ens**ors]

Again, thanks for the response!

 

It isn't that I "feel" the perpetrators themselves don't constitute an acceptable portion of society for the argument to work, it is that, according to the rules of systematic reasoning, they can't.

 

Question: Is evil subjective?

Test: Select an atrocity and see if it can be justifiable

Selection: Rape

Your argument: The rapist believes his rape is not evil. Since evil is subjective, as long as he believes it isn't evil, it isn't evil.

Conclusion: The example of the rapist proves that evil is subjective.

 

You cannot have your argument, which is designed to prove one outcome to the original question, depend upon the assumption of the outcome you want. It's a logical fallacy, petitio principii, or "begging the question."

 

Unquestionably, rape has occurred regularly in many wars. It's an atrocity. There are lots of atrocities, and generally the people who commit them feel justified/excused by special circumstances in committing them. I'm not sure that proves that evil is subjective though.

 

And I'm fairly sure I excluded an extant, Sauron-like source of evil in my first post. I agree with you; that's far too easy and lets people off the hook for their own actions.

 

However, the moral relativism argument ultimately does that just as effectively, as far as I am concerned. In the case of rape (again, its the most convenient), the moral relativist is forced to say, "Well, in circumstances x, y and z, I guess it was all right." Isn't that the ultimate in letting the perpetrators off the hook?

 

Cheers

 

OK. So you don't feel that the perpetrators themselves constitute an acceptable portion of society for an alternative view. Perhaps, but I don't necessarily agree. The acceptance or lack there of from their relative time or place determines the degree of atrocity. How about another example from our own western society but from a different time frame? It was common to accept rape as a part of warfare in our past. Promise of the "spoils of war for the Victor" was commonplace, and the spoils was understood to mean not only silver and coins, but the wives and daughters of the slain men from the places you conquered. Acceptable by today's standards? Absolutely not. Even perhaps questionable at the time, but common practice. It was all simply a matter of convincing your own men of the evil of the other side. Then you can justify anything. The problem is that both sides were usually so convinced of their own righteousness and the evil of the other side that they could justify anything. God's will of course. Could both be right that the other side was evil? They both believed it and felt that god was on their side against the evils of the other side. It was their duty to fight that evil.

 

OK let's take another approach to the question. If evil exists outside the mind of humans, then does it follow suit that it would continue to exist after we are gone? If there are no humans to see it, or blame it for things they deem wrong, would it exist? This is a trickier question as it calls into account your beliefs in a god and therefore some sort of evil anti god. My beliefs are that what we percieve as evil would not exist. The lion would continue to eat the gazelle because it was hungry. Not because it was evil.

 

I am also not using these arguments to let people off the hook for their actions. On the contrary. I am using them to hold people perfectly accountable for their actions. If you hurt someone or do something horrible, then that was all you. You can't blame some devil or fictional force to lighten your responsibility. People can be a**holes admitted but they choose to be. Nobody and nothing made them do it.

[AUTUMN RAINE 15548]

As you may all not know ..

my daughter is a doctor and she just went to Haiti for drs without borders

during the last week she was raped while doing surgery on a child ..

i believe this is without blinking EVIL DOES EXIST ..

and I have felt its hand this week ..