Good vs. EVIL

[Jadd]

\"Good\" and \"evil\" is something that is made up by humans to make sure that our society is working right. But the meaning of it can differ between from where you happen to be at the moment.
What is \"evil\" for us can be concidered good in another culture. It\'s a fact that it was society that created those things to gain control over people. They invented those things we call \"right\" and \"wrong\", since total chaos can be pretty hard to control.
Things like \"don\'t steal other peoples belongings\" or \"you shouldn\'t kill others\" was created. Those who didn\'t obey the rules was punished.
Mostly of us agree that a lawless culture with a large population would be problematic...

In other cultures however people look at \"right\" or \"wrong\" in a different way, and what is good for one, can be evil to another. Therefore there isn\'t anything like \"good\" or \"evil\". It\'s created by civilization.
Do you think Hitler looked at himself as \"evil\"? He though that he did the world a favor by \"cleansing it\" from the jewish people. Do you think he though \"Oh, I\'m so evil, I\'m going to wreak havoc and exterminate a whole people just to mess with the world\"?
He didn\'t, and from his perspective he was the \"good\" guy, and the people with similar thoughts saw him as a \"good\" person. If the Nazis had won the war and the whole world had been Nazi, People would look upon him as a \"good\" man because their perspective about good or evil had changed.
So Cabal can be \"good\" from their own perspective, although us \"good\" people see them as evil and vice versa. That\'s the way it is.

Look at the USA vs. Irac conflict. Both sides belives they fight for \"good\". They fight against what they think is \"evil\", and the \"winners\" (Like if there is any in a war) will be the good guys.

So everything is relative. Everyone has different views on what is right or wrong.

But anyway, I\'m looking forward to the epic battle between \"good and \"evil\" in Yliakum. I am good, what are you?  

[Draklar]

Originally posted by Jadd
\"Good\" and \"evil\" is something that is made up by humans to make sure that our society is working right. But the meaning of it can differ between from where you happen to be at the moment.

I believe causing suffering was present in the world before society gave the name for it...
Just like cows, cows existed before human called it like that. And he gave it the name so our society would be working right. The meaning doesn\'t differ. The meaning behind \"evil\" happens to be same in any dictionary I looked it up.
Words \"good\" and \"evil\" are working same as the word \"cow\". There is speciffic meaning behind those words.
Also they aren\'t relative.
Hitler caused suffering.
Cabal causes suffering.
Mirth causes joy.
The deeds say what is evil and what is good, not the intentions. Thus even if hitler had good intentions, his deeds were evil.

So yeah, here\'s a question: who actually checked in dictionary what is the real meaning of the words (Instead of basing it on religion, games or TV)?

- Swords

[XpYtZ]

I already had but I\'ll post it and link.
http://www.m-w.com/

Main Entry: (2)good
Function: noun
1 a : something that is good b (1) : something conforming to the moral order of the universe (2) : praiseworthy character : GOODNESS c : a good element or portion

While

Main Entry: 2evil
Function: noun
1 a : the fact of suffering, misfortune, and wrongdoing b : a cosmic evil force
2 : something that brings sorrow, distress, or calamity

While it is true that we (humanity) use sounds to communicate feelings and emotion it does not change the existance of the emotion, nor does it negate the existance of that emotion.
Evil could well be called Marcell and Good Electric and it would not change the emotion that we would have, from our youth or through learning the languge, associate with it; it would only be a different series of sounds. Even languages that consists of clicks, wistles and the like have \'words\' for them.

How can you make up an emotion?

[Jaakon]

Originally posted by Draklar
[That doesn\'t change the fact that protecting it would be good, whilst using it as object of destruction would be evil.
so the whole situation wouldn\'t be neither plain good or evil. But such facts as protecting or destroying would...

But you cant protect something without destroying.
As thers no suffering without joy.
If you disagree on this give an example!

Originally posted by Draklar err yes, without humanity, the nature could regenerate and go back to it\'s harmony? ?(

What harmony? What so different now?
See its absolute normal in nature that a species grows big, dominating their territory...

Originally posted by Draklar
again, I advise to read about other views on existance, before actually believing you know the truth.

Funny, youre saying this...

[Draklar]

But you cant protect something without destroying.

But you can protect (good) and you can destroy (evil).
...And you can protect a plant from being stepped on without destroying anything.

As thers no suffering without joy.
If you disagree on this give an example!

How much joy can you find in tortures?

What harmony?

Keeping balance between destruction and creation. Good and Evil, which are completing each other...

What so different now?

Mass reducing of forest terrains? Leading many species towards extinction by destroying their homelands? Global warming?

See its absolute normal in nature that a species grows big, dominating their territory...

And kills for sport or luxuries. Sure.

Funny, youre saying this...

What\'s so funny? Considering I did actually go through many world views? And by that changing my point of view on many things...

btw: Couldn\'t say it any better, XpYtZ

- Swords

[Merdarion]

Originally posted by Jaakon
This discussion is so amusing.

Thers that guy who states this and that is evil/good.
Muhaha, good and evil are words made up by humans!
So whatever you define as good or evil is it.
An example: you said protection is good. Now I start protecting a very dangerous flesh eating bacteria, is that good?

Then the animals. Who said they cant think?
We eat when were hungry, sleep when were tired and drink when were thirsty. Good god! Were ruled by instincts!!! Animals on the other hand can think about how to get food from us (begging) can remember punishment and can think about lots of stuff.

Its so funny, because the two subjects fit so well together, just ask an animal whats good or bad! :)

Would be the opposite good. Killin\' the Bacteria to protect the humans? You would destroy life.
So any action would be balanced between good and evil. And the only thing that differs them are in the heads of humans.

And , thoug, anybody says how useless this thread is, there are many posts.

*<(:-)#  Happy XMas

[Jaakon]

Sure its useless, but its fun

But you can protect (good) and you can destroy (evil).
...And you can protect a plant from being stepped on without destroying anything.

No, you cant, cause then youll have to stand elsewhere, destroying the other plant. And as soon as this plant is destroying something (every living beeing needs to or die) you made it possible by saving it.

How much joy can you find in tortures?

Dont know what you ment...

Keeping balance between destruction and creation. Good and Evil, which are completing each other...

lol, how is nature supposed to do that if it isnt even as strong as humans in your eyes?

Mass reducing of forest terrains? Leading many species towards extinction by destroying their homelands? Global warming?

Ever heard about grasshoppers eating up masses of plants?
And even the dinosaur changed the shape of the world by reducing forests...

And kills for sport or luxuries. Sure.

Luxury is a human thing, but cats hunt for sports...

What\'s so funny? Considering I did actually go through many world views? And by that changing my point of view on many things...

Havent seen a change since Im here...

[Merdarion]

Well if it\'s fun, it\'s not useless.

And if you kill an animal or so, you make the lifeground for other organism. So no evil can exist. If you let the animal survive the organism can\'t. So there is no good.

[Draklar]

Sure its useless, but its fun

To you it may be useless. But some people actually like talking about philosophy and factors that rule our world and our behaviour. And what Merdarion said.

No, you cant, cause then youll have to stand elsewhere

how about on side-walk? Or rock for that matter? Glad to see you consider all possibilities before posting.

Dont know what you ment...

You don\'t understand question about how much pleasure you get from tortures?

lol, how is nature supposed to do that if it isnt even as strong as humans in your eyes?

Wow... yet another paradox. How can part of nature be stronger than nature itself?
Could you give any valid argument showing your question has anything to do with keeping balance?

But maybe this will answer your doubts:
Human is (thanks to dumb religion and society) fearsome force of destruction, thus destroying balance in nature. So if destruction is greater than creation, that would mean our Mother Earth goes towards destruction... And you know what? It does!

Ever heard about grasshoppers eating up masses of plants?
And even the dinosaur changed the shape of the world by reducing forests...

Great... the biology classes will come to use
In the moment when there\'s too many creatures in speciffic region, their food goes towards reduction. And once there is not enough food, the creatures begin to starve (and migrate, but at some point they can\'t go any further). And since they starve, they die. And since they die, there is less of them. And since there is less of them, the plants can grow once again. Once there is more food, the creatures reproduce more. And we have a circle. That is the harmony \\o/

But human is different. He doesn\'t die out. He just keeps destroying and destroying. And if it keeps on, he will keep destroying untill there is no non-toxic water or air. Making world pretty much impossible to live on...

but cats hunt for sports...

Never heard about that... I always thought they hunt to increase their ability (and chance of course) to survive. Could you please link me to any source proving that? That is, of course, if it isn\'t cartoons...

Havent seen a change since Im here...

No comments...

Merdarion: By any chance checked the definitions?

Bah! I could actually read something worthy instead of wasting my time here. This discussion isn\'t making me any smarter
So whatever, right, human doesn\'t destroy Earth, good and evil isn\'t what dictionaries are saying. Heck, these terms don\'t even exist. You\'re absolutely right. There.

- Swords

[Merdarion]

OK! Good & Evil are very, ... , variable. So let\'s go out from our 3 Main D&D Anligments. What\'s the good thing of being Evil? Whats the good thing about being good? What\'s with the neutral ones?

my idea: Good means not willingly harm someone who doesn\'t first harm you, and trying to help someone ho doesn\'t first help you.

Wvil means willingly harming others, and only offer help if you get much more in exchange.

This is a very primitive definition so there are many points to discuss it, but it\'s better than that \"PROTECTION\"-Definition.

[XpYtZ]

Do you mean that you want to change to the subject of alignements rather then debating weather good or evil actually exist? If yes then keep reading.

By their definition the D&D alignements tell the other players how your character views and reacts to the world around him.
If you are a good aligned character you will:
* Never attack an unarmed foe, even if he/she is threatening your life.
* Never steal an item, or take anything without express permission.
* Use good manners and treat others with respect.
Etc.
Basicly your character will try and see the world in the best possible light and treat others as well as possible.
This does not exclude other things from happening; a good character may for instance kill someone to keep a friend from being killed. I am not saying they are the ultra pacifist, I am only making a generalization from the D&D idea.

On the other hand an Evil character will:
* Attack without cause or reason, on a whim, sparring no one.
* Steal items just because they can.
* Treat others without any form of respect.
Again generalizations.

Now there are plenty of Evil characters that treat other with respect and keep them selves from obvious forms of evil. These are Devious persons who deal in pain and dispair through actions that fortify themselves or their position without regard for others.
Why are they considered evil though? They are bringing good to themselves and their employees. While bringing all forms of interesting things to the city in which they live. In this case, they are evil only in the eyes of those who they are injuring. Like the wealthy merchant who sells a single loaf of bread to a starving widow for ten times its worth. Is he Evil for that act? Perhaps in the eyes of some, yet to others, those he is using that gold to pay, he may be a hero, allowing them one more day with food or heat.
\"Indeed, who can know the oucome of an action other then the gods.\"
So, from that perspective -the RPG perspective- Evil and Good are extreemly hard to define. Each character decides what is good for their own perspective. From that idea, a good character is one who puts the needs of his fellow players before his own, while an evil character will seek after personal gain and purposely dring pain and anguish on his fellow players.

[Merdarion]

Well, that stealing thing and good chars doesn\'t fit.

Would it be evil to steal some bread from a baron to save someone other from starving?

Would it be bad to steal the ring that gives the power to an evil emperor, so he can be destroyed?

[Jaakon]

To you it may be useless. But some people actually like talking about philosophy and factors that rule our world and our behaviour. And what Merdarion said.

And how is this thread supposed to be usedul then?

how about on side-walk? Or rock for that matter? Glad to see you consider all possibilities before posting.

How old are you? On side-walks and rocks live things too...

You don\'t understand question about how much pleasure you get from tortures?

Someone will, otherwise the torture wouldnt exist.

Wow... yet another paradox. How can part of nature be stronger than nature itself?

This was sarcasm, but if you dont want to understand, thers not much I can do...

But maybe this will answer your doubts:
Human is (thanks to dumb religion and society) fearsome force of destruction, thus destroying balance in nature. So if destruction is greater than creation, that would mean our Mother Earth goes towards destruction... And you know what? It does!

Oh yea, theres nothing humans build up, they are always destroying....
Again, where is the great disaster, I cant see it.
And how do humans destroy this planet???

Great... the biology classes will come to use
In the moment when there\'s too many creatures in speciffic region, their food goes towards reduction. [...] Once there is more food, the creatures reproduce more. And we have a circle. That is the harmony \\o/
But human is different. He doesn\'t die out. He just keeps destroying and destroying. And if it keeps on, he will keep destroying untill there is no non-toxic water or air. Making world pretty much impossible to live on...[/qoute]
First he only survived till now because he is NOT destroying everything. We wouldnt have enough food a long time ago, but we learned to \'create\' food by inventing farms and ranches.

And secondly you start saying humans are bad because they dont get to die, then theyre evil because they will die...

Never heard about that... I always thought they hunt to increase their ability (and chance of course) to survive. Could you please link me to any source proving that? That is, of course, if it isn\'t cartoons...

lol, a few posts ago you wrote animals cant think, but now theyre planning their skill-advancement...
Example: My cat doesnt eat what it hunts. It gets much better food from me. Still it goes out hunting.

Bah! I could actually read something worthy instead of wasting my time here. This discussion isn\'t making me any smarter

No wonder youre not arguing, or think about arguments, so why should it?

So whatever, right, human doesn\'t destroy Earth, good and evil isn\'t what dictionaries are saying. Heck, these terms don\'t even exist. You\'re absolutely right. There.

My opinion: human arent destroying the planet, they do alot bad to their enviroment, but if it causes problems they try to solve them. And the word ghost is in the diary, so I can assume you belive they exist too...

Ok, sorry for the offend, lets end this.

[Draklar]

How old are you? On side-walks and rocks live things too...

heh... that reminds me the joke of kid, who when asked why he\'s riding over a puddle with his bike, answered that he\'s killing bacterias
Guy can hang himself on a tree or levitate for all I care... :rolleyes:

Someone will, otherwise the torture wouldnt exist.

I assume you believe in a cruel and sadistic god... because I have no other explanation of how can be your (for example) mental, not revealed, intensive suffering, a pleasure to someone else...

This was sarcasm, but if you dont want to understand, thers not much I can do...

Was that supposed to be valid argument, I asked for, showing that what you said had connection to what I said?

Again, where is the great disaster, I cant see it.

lol, a few posts ago you wrote animals cant think

Funny, I thought I wrote that they can...

And the word ghost is in the diary, so I can assume you belive they exist too...

I believe there are deeds that cause suffering.
Also I\'m not denying any believes unless I can find valid proof that the belief is false...

- Swords

[Hatchnet]

Draklar in that pic I see no disaster only nature. Also I think he is refering to my post where I said that animals were not inteligent in the same way we are. Jaakon your cat goes hunting even though you feed him because he does not realize that he does not need to. I never said that animals were stupid or could not think I mearly said that they could not reason like we do. So he is not hunting for sport but out of instinct or desire to hunt not because he wants a trophy. This does not make him evil because if he was hungry at the time he caught the prey he would eat it.