What is YOUR definition of Evil?

[Doctor Amadeus]

I feel the same.
I too have very few friends I dearly love but even being with them is draining my mental energy (despite me enjoying their company).
In general I am only at peace and truly comfortable when I am alone.

As much as I would like a wife (I'm still human) I don't think I could cope with being with another human every day.

Yep, and you aren't completely alone, and it took me a while before I recognized that isn't soo unique.

Because like so many things I think it is misunderstood.

Like being called shy, is just like someone suffering depression is sad.


It simply because just like I can't imagine ever enjoying people the way others do, some can't imagine me and maybe you aren't out of out minds alone.

It isn't shy, it's just a preference that shouldn't be stigmatized.

[Ichifails]

To me, it isn't about intent to cause harm, at all.

If you put your own self-interest ahead of the welfare of others, that's "evil" to me. Doesn't matter if you say you're only concerned about your well-being and don't care about the harm; that you're willing to allow it to occur is all that matters.

You mean like arguing about letting a bunch of economic migrants, that don't assimilate after generations, invade countries unrestricted and undocumented bringing their cultures and religions that simply can't coexist with the ones of the natives? You're willing to allow the slaughter and rape of locals and taking land and creating a new middle east with sharia law in the heart of Europe just so you can feel good about yourself for a few seconds.

And before you double standard piece of shit even dare to say anything, I invite you and I'll pay for your travel and stay so you can experience what you fought to create.

So in your own eyes, you're evil incarnate. I guess you were going a Satan avatar but since you're as intelligent as you've displayed over and over again, you ended up with a Hellboy one.

People like you are evil, so far away, so stupid and so ignorant that you think you're doing good.

[Doctor Amadeus]

You mean like arguing about letting a bunch of economic migrants, that don't assimilate after generations, invade countries unrestricted and undocumented bringing their cultures and religions that simply can't coexist with the ones of the natives? You're willing to allow the slaughter and rape of locals and taking land and creating a new middle east with sharia law in the heart of Europe just so you can feel good about yourself for a few seconds.

And before you double standard piece of shit even dare to say anything, I invite you and I'll pay for your travel and stay so you can experience what you fought to create.

So in your own eyes, you're evil incarnate. I guess you were going a Satan avatar but since you're as intelligent as you've displayed over and over again, you ended up with a Hellboy one.

So no contemplation as to where and where that began, not appreciation for cause and effect. If early European colonization and expansion wasn't evil, because of whatever curiosity, or search for more resources being used up.

How is migrating to Europe now to survive an evil because like Europeans there is an indifference to another culture. How can anyone be blind that if you take all of something from somewhere else, people are going to have to go somewhere else to get it or get it back?

[Raelbo]

You're out of your mind.

You know, when people open with this, it immediately makes them look foolish...like they didn't bother applying their mind to what I said. Hey, who needs critical thinking when we can just use the knee-jerk method?

Going by this logic, it's not evil to torture a human being because humans also do great harm (worse than a rat ever would).

So your argument is essentially to equate human beings with rats.... and you call me out of my mind?

This person is a gold medallist and a role model for hundreds of thousands of people (and impressionable young minds). They should know better

She grew up in a poor village in a poor province of South Africa. She became an olympic athlete because she can run fast, not because of she was given a world class education and raised by people with your value-set. What basis have you for claiming that she *should* know better? Yes, I get that someone with a priveleged upbringing like you or me should know better. In her own community, the community in which she was raised, her actions wouldn't raise an eyebrow.

That being said, you do make a good point. She is a role model to millions of people, most of whom also have almost no education or exposure to western values. So there is value that can come of this incident by highlighting what is wrong with what she did. But the way that people like you react with your moral superiority is not helpful in that regard.

She can hate the animal all she wants, but that doesn't excuse the actions.

Not saying her actions should be excused. Saying they need to be taken in context, not judged based your own irrelevant context. What she did is rooted in ignorance, not malice. She needs to be enlightened, not crucified.

As for context, get real. They tortured an animal and treated it as some sort of joke. Please tell me what possible context there is for that. He (or she) is a cunt.

You do realise that you're really no better because you're villifying a human being in the same way that she did to the rat.

[Deleted]

Hurting or Killing innocent children or the assholes who force children to become child soldiers.

But what, if that child was hitler?

[Burgerberg]

Which goes against your values. Doesn't make it objectively evil. It makes it objectionable to you. What I am saying is that if you had grown up in a different context (like a village in Africa) you might see things a bit differently.

Of course they're my values. But there's also scientific reasons for it too.

I have a friend who grew up in an African village and showed him that. He was horrified - and that isn't because he lives under Western values either. His mum would have probably beaten him if he did that, and she's a farmer and they've had many problems with rodents. I don't think it's a cultural issue, it's more the individual. Some people are compassionate and have empathy, some do not.

What is the point of pointing out objective evil? There's no such thing. Good and evil are man-made constructs, and change over time.

It's not right to, from your priveleged position, judge the actions of people from a far less priveleged background. It's pretty offensive actually.

You're assuming I've been privileged all my life. What the hell do you know of my struggles growing up?

And sure I can judge people's actions. Being poor isn't an excuse to torture animals. You find criticism to that more offensive than the person doing the torturing? I'd say that's pretty offensive, actually. Let's be crystal clear, no matter the background, there'll always be jerks. That is just a fact.

And for being a racist elitist who and prejudices people based on their gender, I call you evil. FULL STOP. Don't even try to deny it, or make excuses, or even a reasonable argument. Not going to bother reading it. Because I have decided. So there.

What have I said that was racist? What have I said that prejudices people based on their gender? I'm judging based on their behaviour, not their race or gender.

How can you go from criticising someone torturing an animal to a racist elitist? A big leap with no landing. Apparently calling someone a Hermaphrodite is worse than deriving pleasure from torturing an animal. Wow, okay then. And you call me evil.......

[Deleted]

Nature and Life are evil. Death is pure and the incarnation of all good since it ends Life.

[Deleted]

Not always, I think that is a myth, that is perpetuated by one type of person and not so much about others, and by default some get pegged as being creepy, rude or anti social.

Actually, not being able to be social is a mental disorder, called Psychopathy.

Still it depends heavily on the shape in which your live is. If you dont know how to get a living, it is more likely you cant share a lot. If peoples lives are in good shape, they have more time left to share and to be social.

Still that has no influence on the character of a person, if he even is willing to share. If he wants to be part of a community or to be a selfish guy, who doesnt care about the people and the world surrounding him.

At the end, everyone is able to be social, if he just is willing to be. No matter how much money someone earns.

- - - Updated - - -

Nature and Life are evil.

Nature and life have no emotions. They are mechanics.

Humans are sentient conscious beings and therefore able to chose to be good or evil.

Social darwinism doesnt work.

[Akka]

Well it isn't a positive use of the same word that could also relate to helping someone out or looking out for them.

I think if you mean being aware and conscious of our social and other kinds of environment, I don't think one has to be concerned about others to do that. Over all I don't think that is GOOD.

Anymore than Concern in a negative way is Evil.

I think hurting people is stupid, I think having a lack of concern for ones own environment is self harm as well. I would say most might agree.

I am not going to plug wholes in the ship I am on along with everyone else, help anyone else, or hinder those maybe aware there are holes in the ship, and trying to make sure it doesn't sink so none go down or sink.

Your post is rather difficult to read clearly, but from what I gather, it seems you're basically "I'm not going to purposedly hamper others, but I'll only help if it's benefitting myself and won't bother with others".
Which is more or less exactly my point : lack of concern for others and only giving them value if it relates to oneself, is the root of evil. Unless I've misread what you mean, you just look like some sort of low-level sociopath.

---

Don't think that this is accurate, being evil has nothing to do with intentions but I do agree with the rest.

Of course it does, morality is all about intentions.

[Selastan]

Evil is not wanting to learn, pure and simple. Every single evil thing ever done has been done of ignorance.

[Granyala]

Actually, not being able to be social is a mental disorder, called Psychopathy.

Psychopathy, sometimes considered synonymous with sociopathy, is traditionally defined as a personality disorder[1] characterized by persistent antisocial behavior, impaired empathy and remorse, and bold, disinhibited, egotistical traits. Different conceptions of psychopathy have been used throughout history. These conceptions are only partly overlapping and may sometimes be contradictory.

Not quite. Being a loner does not automatically make you a psychopath, as I am very much able to empathize with others.

[Doctor Amadeus]

Actually, not being able to be social is a mental disorder, called Psychopathy.

Not true

Still it depends heavily on the shape in which your live is. If you dont know how to get a living, it is more likely you cant share a lot. If peoples lives are in good shape, they have more time left to share and to be social.

Still that has no influence on the character of a person, if he even is willing to share. If he wants to be part of a community or to be a selfish guy, who doesnt care about the people and the world surrounding him.

Also completely untrue and it is this kind of thinking along with unqualified diagnosis that lead to people actually being harmed and getting worse. Your expectation as to what YOU would want for yourself isn't a model from which to based what others should do, or me.

At the end, everyone is able to be social, if he just is willing to be. No matter how much money someone earns.

No they aren't it's very similar to philosophy that suggest if you think you are or whatever placebo nonsense. Not being social represents different things to different people and it isn't any more of a problem or abnormality than anything else someone may or may not be interested in.

The truth is the methods behind ideas such as everyone is able to be social if they are willing is partly why ignorance about the differences when it comes to people leads to unintended consequences.

It's actually pretty prudent to listen to the words coming out of peoples mouths when they tell you what they are going through and listening, and having the qualifications only after that to make suggestions.

[AlmightyGerkin]

Eating the last bit of ice cream and having someone buy more.

[Doctor Amadeus]

Not quite. Being a loner does not automatically make you a psychopath, as I am very much able to empathize with others.

You are very much correct, there are different degrees in which people are effected one way or another, going from personality to disorder, and simply being an introvert who isn't social or doesn't enjoy social situations is not automatically a disorder.

And when there are people who have a disorder or sometime pushed into one, behind certain misguided notions such as trying to force someone to do something they are very clearly uncomfortable with can and does lead to some pretty horrific situations.

Too many of the kind that wind up on the news with people saying "Well they were so nice" or "They never behaved that way before". The Idea what one considers torture another couldn't be completely calm with is projecting.

[Fargus]

You know, when people open with this, it immediately makes them look foolish...like they didn't bother applying their mind to what I said. Hey, who needs critical thinking when we can just use the knee-jerk method?

Like the critical thinking you're displaying when calling someone racist from simply calling out someone for their cruelty? Talk about knee-jerk methods.

So your argument is essentially to equate human beings with rats.... and you call me out of my mind?

No, my argument was that you can't use the ills of individuals to justify the brutality of others (especially when said 'ills' are instinct-driven and are not malicious). If you want to be objective, the universe doesn't care if it's a rat or a human being, the fundamental principle remains the same. But since we are still working in a strata where animals such as rats still get killed, do not have the same rights as human beings, etc your straw-man argument is completely useless.

She grew up in a poor village in a poor province of South Africa. She became an olympic athlete because she can run fast, not because of she was given a world class education and raised by people with your value-set. What basis have you for claiming that she *should* know better? Yes, I get that someone with a priveleged upbringing like you or me should know better. In her own community, the community in which she was raised, her actions wouldn't raise an eyebrow.

Her background is irrelevant. She is a world-class athlete who travels around the world, competing, who now leads a relatively luxurious lifestyle thanks to her being in that position. She would no doubt have a manager to handle her sponsorship endorsements, as well as charity events (and that costs lots of money). She is much more privileged right now than me, so to bring up that is pointless.

So, yes, she should know better. This person's an adult who is bright enough to be where they are now, not a child.

In her own community, the community in which she was raised, her actions wouldn't raise an eyebrow.

You don't know that for sure.

But the way that people like you react with your moral superiority is not helpful in that regard.

With brutality like that, are you surprised?

Not saying her actions should be excused. Saying they need to be taken in context, not judged based your own irrelevant context. What she did is rooted in ignorance, not malice. She needs to be enlightened, not crucified.

That's not the impression I'm getting. You've been defending this person to the tilt.

No malice? Bullshit. Do you really think she's dumb enough not to recognise the animal she's torturing being in terrific amounts of pain? They went out of their way to prolong that pain, filmed it. Said the animal deserved it. That's not ignorance. Knew full well what they were doing.

You do realise that you're really no better because you're villifying a human being in the same way that she did to the rat.

Calling someone a cunt is on the same level as deliberately causing another animal prolonged, excruciating pain?

I guess this is something I should expect from someone who said actively torturing an animal while filming and joking about it isn't malicious. I wait for your further mental gymnastics.

[Doctor Amadeus]

Your post is rather difficult to read clearly, but from what I gather, it seems you're basically "I'm not going to purposedly hamper others, but I'll only help if it's benefitting myself and won't bother with others".
Which is more or less exactly my point : lack of concern for others and only giving them value if it relates to oneself, is the root of evil. Unless I've misread what you mean, you just look like some sort of low-level sociopath.
Of course it does, morality is all about intentions.

You got it, but my point is counter to yours in bold, lack of concern for others I don't agree is evil.

I would say it is ignorant. It could also stupid (meaning knowing it's wrong choosing otherwise) which in itself serves evil, not sure I would say that makes the person evil. Just wrong.

[Fargus]

Unless I've misread what you mean, you just look like some sort of low-level sociopath.

You're right there. In one thread he condoned torturing rodents or other animals he deemed of little or no value to him.

[Lucifer Morningstar]

Intentionally causing harm for your own gain or pleasure, when said harm could be avoided or is unnecessary.

(Edited quote)

Exactly how I would define "Evil".

[Cæli]

evil only applies to life

evil is against life

so it's both lacking respect to life, and causing pain to life, so answer 1, not sure how other answers could fit the definition

to check if something is evil, we must know what happens in his mind, evil is evil when it tries to

[loppy88]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Bundy