Is there even such a thing as "Evil?"

[Kismet]

Not suffering, evil.

Is there such a thing? I am willing to say at this point that "evil" if it is, exists only in the "moment" and that as soon as one backs out of this particular vantage point, evil ceases to have any viable existence. In fact, it can't ever be said to have existed.

Evil has not only to do with our judgments, but also the bent and shape of our attitudes which go in tandem with such judgments. We, after having been convicted in the "moment", illegitimately bring along with us these attitudes after the fact and give them an absolute status, that status then undergirds all our "moral" judgments which then seemingly allow us to hold "responsible" those people at large or generally who do such and such act.

I have a concrete example of what I mean. I remember not too long ago watching the movie "Reservoir Dogs" by Quentin Tarantino. I recall the scene in which the gangster starts spraying the mutilated (cop?) with gasoline while he begs for his life. Something struck me about this scene as so heinous, as so diabolically loathsome that I felt completely justified in my hatred of the guy doing the ill deed at that moment. More importantly, I felt complete and utter conviction that what he was doing was pure unadulterated evil. Now, after watching this scene and taking some time out, I reflected back on it and an interesting thing happened. I felt absolutely nothing for it. It was simply another scene out of life. I was no longer at a dead interface with it, but had "stepped back" and gotten a "meta" point of view. In this new p.o.v I had no judgments one way or the other. I simply saw the way people behaved as the way people behave. There is nothing right or wrong about it, it simply "is." I could not justifiably condemn all such instances of horrendous activity, or even the same instance, without some degree of hypocrisy in this, my newfound attitude.

Now, I know what you might think. "Haha, but that's a movie, if you witnessed something like that in real life you would still be convicted of evil!" Okay, but is that an argument? Appealing to "real life"? It is true I might have a different attitude. But that would only be because my experience of it in real life would be more intense. I could still, if I were not so much "trapped" in the moment, reflect again and see these things from a "meta" or absolute point of view, though I might not want to.

My point is: what does this say about our own ability to throw moral claims at others? Are they only justified some of the time or when in accordance with our own feelings? And if so, are we mere hypocrites when we legislate merely on the basis of "common sense" assuming that universal laws have universal applicability? How exactly is it we know, after all.

[Choir Loft]

Hi Richard .

This is a fallacious appeal to emotion. The fact that humans are, due to evolutionary processes, wired for an emotional sense of fairness and retribution often termed "justice" is irrelevant to the existence or nonexistence of objective "good" and "evil." All you have shown is that human beings react in a certain way in response to certain stimuli; you haven't shown that evil objectively exists.

My post was written to show the evidence of the objective evil you wish to see.
The evil revealed is relative opinion and morality.

You write that 'justice' and 'revenge' are some sort of reflex action. It isn't. They are both justified by assault upon the individual or community. Both inspire continuous action and sometimes well thought and planned responses. They are far from reflex. In fact, your statement that they are is subjective since you haven't provided a shred of evidence to support your assertions; that humans are merely reacting to stimuli.

You also wrote, "many people -- including Jesus -- would disagree with you on revenge being "good." I didn't say revenge was good, merely that it was a natural response. I also find evidence of your subjective attitude in your quote of Jesus. You pick one of His words and deny another; that being that He witnessed Satan (objective evil) fall from heaven like lightning. You're playing fast and loose with subjective opinion; the very fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Your own words are evidence of it.

You state that evidence of prison overpopulation due to subjective opinion of good and evil is not acceptable. I imagine you'd say the same for Stalinist gulags, Chinese work farms and the historic evidence of German concentration camps. All of them were created by atheist governmental policy, all of them resulted in pain and suffering of innocents and all of them are clear and present evidence of objective evil.

The fish does not 'know' the hand that baits the hook it bites. The fish knows only that it is caught. The fish does not 'know' its death is near even when the knife is poised above its head. It does not know the intent of the intelligence directed at it and it doesn't understand the design behind its capture and death. Despite the inability of the fish to see it and understand it, capture and death await.

Examples too numerous to list are available. All unseen. None of them are understood or can be accepted by the one who relies upon subjective opinion to guide its conclusions and build its philosophy. The bait has been taken and the hook is set. The mindless creature, not knowing the design behind its sudden pain, can only struggle in futility against some unseen force.

It is written in a previous post that human response is little more than reflex. But there is more. The Lord of heaven and earth has provided a second sight, a higher view if you will, a revelation of objective behavior and knowledge of design that the worldly man cannot understand.

It begins in the Mosaic code; the ten commandments - written in stone.

It continues with the actions and words of God written in the lives of men to whom He has chosen to reveal Himself. Its revelation is that sin is an objective evil, a personality, that dominates the mind and soul of the worldly man and it is that sin like a perverse parasite, which leads to self-destruction.

It is met upon the cross with the death of God Himself in the person of Jesus. His death satisfies God's desire for justice and revenge. Justice is a sacred thing, a quality of the divine character and not simply a reflex action on the part of man. Jesus' resurrection warrants hope and the promise of life for those who accept Him.

It ends with the second coming of Christ upon the earth; the establishment of His kingdom and the renewal of objective moral behavior among men.

Until that time nation shall war against nation because their motivations are purely introverted and subjective. Only when the Son of God appears to establish the high moral standard of God will the universal dream of world peace be realized.

Immediately before that day, however, the Bible states that subjective opinion and self-justified wickedness will rule the day. Right will be called wickedness and sin will be honored justified and worshipped. All of these things are happening today in and among us all.

They are evidence of objective evil and subjective justification of sin. I welcome the situation because Jesus said, "when you see these things come to pass look up and rejoice for your redemption draws near.

It is so, even to this day. Come Lord Jesus.

but that's just me, hollering from the choir loft...

[Bust Nak]

Now, I know what you might think. "Haha, but that's a movie, if you witnessed something like that in real life you would still be convicted of evil!"

This is exactly what I am thinking.

Okay, but is that an argument? Appealing to "real life"? It is true I might have a different attitude. But that would only be because my experience of it in real life would be more intense. I could still, if I were not so much "trapped" in the moment, reflect again and see these things from a "meta" or absolute point of view, though I might not want to.

I don't know. Never experienced anything like you said. I still feel certain actions are right/wrong no matter how calm I am.

Are they only justified some of the time or when in accordance with our own feelings?

I would say I don't need any more justification than my feelings.

And if so, are we mere hypocrites when we legislate merely on the basis of "common sense" assuming that universal laws have universal applicability? How exactly is it we know, after all.

I think we can legislate universal laws without thinking they are objective/absolute. It's conditional, as in you want to live with us, you got to follow these rules.

[Dantalion]

I'm an expressivist as to morality, so in my view "evil" is simply a term of disapproval used by some people in response to events / actions that they strongly dislike. There is no transcendent "evil" or "good," and acts themselves cannot be intrinsically "evil" or "good."

my 2 cents on this.

i think we can have a pretty good understanding of what is 'evil' even in the absense of true objective morality.

like any word in the history of all languages, what matters is what meaning we choose to give to it (ofc, that meaning has to be pretty much universal among the group of people who communicate with eachother).

Imagine the worst amount of suffering you can inflict upon a human being, with the intent of causing the worst amount of suffering imaginable on said human being.

My claim is that we should be able to call that act 'evil'.

If a word like that is to mean anything at all, surely this is what it means.
otherwise we an throw any word that does not refer to something objectively demonstrable right out of the dictionary.

afterthought:
to me all that is keeping us from actually placing objective meaning (not objective absolutes!) behind words like good and evil is because socially outdated religious thinking is keeping us from it.
you know, that the absense of moral absolutes can only lead to absolute moral relativism, which is false. this is the thinking of primal, tribal societies sprung from the inability to explain 'stuff' in the natural world without resorting to supernatural claims, which leads to fear of the unexplained, witch leads to deification of objects, forces and animals, which in turn leads to theism.

(this kind of magical thinking has no place in this day and age, but I assert this as opinion, not fact.)