what is evil?

[Enforcer Talen]

that's always a fun one to ask. heh. I am curious what you say it is, so I can steal it and make it my current character's next atrocity, and how he can justify it by saying it's not really evil.

[Andrew J.]

Evil is what I say it is!

How will that do?

[Lusankya]

How about something's evil if you believe that it is not the best thing you can do for the world.

(eg. you could kidnap two innocent babies, but because you are doing it for the good of the whatever, then you are not evil. But if you kidnap two babies just for the hell of it, or to extort money from their rich mother then you are evil.)

[Lord of the Farce]

What is evil? Simple: letting rednecks and ignorant dumb-asses vote
Seriously, Lusankya has got a good point. Although you might ask, what if for the good of the world, you kill everyone to end their suffering? Would that be evil?

[Enforcer Talen]

so, lusankya, personal gain is evil? are the muslim fanatics right? is capitalist usa the great satan?

[Lusankya]

I think you're using the slippery slope argument there.

Picard: "Where do we stop? Would you still help them if there was a plague?"
Crusher: "Yes"
Picard: "How about a war?"
[Everyone else looks at each other]
Picard (gloating): "See, you're not so keen to help any more, are you?"

(A lot of paraphrasing there. Mike has the proper quote on his site, though.)

[Enforcer Talen]

quite possibly. how do you think my character justifies atrocities? lol.

[Lusankya]

you could wipe out all of the middle east, say.

[Enforcer Talen]

easier, and more profitable, to set up a funeral home monoply, and wait a yr.

mission acheived and money in the bank.

[Lusankya]

and I didn't say personal gain is evil. I said harming others for personal gain is evil.

[Enforcer Talen]

but isn't gain for me not gain for you? look at legitimate ceos. 15 mil in their bank is not 10k in hundreds of others.

[Enforcer Talen]

I think you're using the slippery slope argument there.

Picard: "Where do we stop? Would you still help them if there was a plague?"
Crusher: "Yes"
Picard: "How about a war?"
[Everyone else looks at each other]
Picard (gloating): "See, you're not so keen to help any more, are you?"

(A lot of paraphrasing there. Mike has the proper quote on his site, though.)

right. we should drop plagues on the war.

[Lusankya]

But once you reach a certain standard of living, does it really matter much who's richer than who?

Look at the west. you have multi-billionaires and your average Joe, but even the poorest Joe in the west is better off than your average Joe in central Africa.

And in modern society, the richest few give their unwanted jobs to the poorest. Hence WEstern businesses putting up factories in CHina. Because the cost of living in these countries is lower, the factories may pay their workers a lower amount. While these people may be poor by western standards, they are quite able to afford to feed and clothe themselves. (and damn, I wish I could write that last sentence in CHinese, they have lovely grammar pattern that would have been perfect to use in that situation.)

So if I earn $1,000,000,000 a year, and you only earn $60,000 a year we can both live reasonably well, it's just that I can go on a better holiday than you when I have some time off. Is it evil of me to deny you this better holiday? Or is it just selfish?

[Mr Bean]

Those that act thinking only of them selves are not Evil, but those that Harm others to help themsleves are

Is usaly the simplest method


For the Good of All is a nice catchphrase anyway

[Joe]

Evil is what ought not to exist.

[Master of Ossus]

Evil is anyone who goes out of their way to hurt others, or who takes steps against societal values.

[Darth Wong]

Evil is a lack of sympathy; it is a callous disregard for the suffering of other human beings. It's that simple.

Hitler? Did not care about the suffering of his victims. Stalin? Did not care about the suffering of his victims. Every serial killer you ever heard of? They don't care about the suffering of his victims. Child abusers? They don't care about the suffering of their victims. Catholic priests? They don't care about the anal suffering of their altar boys. N'Sync? They don't care about the auditory suffering of their victims. See the trend?

An evil person sees other human beings as mere objects, to be used, destroyed, or discarded if it suits his goals or brings him pleasure. Even if his goal is to improve the world, if he lacks the ability to sympathize with the suffering of others, he will be evil, and he will inevitably cause pain and suffering. Good intentions don't mean dick; Hitler genuinely thought he was improving the world by ridding it of the "Jewish infestation". Does this change the fact that he was evil? With all due respect to Lusankya, I have to strenuously say no; he's definitely evil.

[Enlightenment]

What is evil?

Microsoft.
Social darwinist conservatism.
Capitalist fundamentalism.
Religious fundamentalism.
The Associations of America (MPAA, RIAA, etc, etc)
The Shrub.
Asscroft.
US-style psudeo-captalism (don't like the competition? Ban it.)
US-style psudeo-free trade (labor dumping? What's that?)
Nationalism.
Republicans.

[Wicked Pilot]

What is evil?

Microsoft.
Social darwinist conservatism.
Capitalist fundamentalism.
Religious fundamentalism.
The Associations of America (MPAA, RIAA, etc, etc)
The Shrub.
Asscroft.
US-style psudeo-captalism (don't like the competition? Ban it.)
US-style psudeo-free trade (labor dumping? What's that?)
Nationalism.
Republicans.

You forgot boy bands and telemarketers.

[Darth Yoshi]

Evil is a lack of sympathy to the plight of others, or even worse, reveling in it.

[Lusankya]

I set a clear distinction between "n(very) bad" and "evil".

I actually think it takes a lot to be truly evil, and if you believe you are doing the right thing, then it shows that you're making an attempt (even if it is misguided).

Of course, if you believe that to improve the world, you must purge every member of the Jewish race from existence, then saner people would probably believe it was "good" to somehow kill you.

[beyond hope]

I'd be nervous about labeling "actions against society's best interests" as necessarily being evil. I would balk at labeling an act "evil" because it hurts society... not wearing seatbelts and speeding costs society billions in injuries and claims hundred of lives a year, but I don't think anyone here would say it's "evil" to not buckle up. Dangerous (and foolish,) yes, but not evil. I wouldn't evil define drug dealing or trafficking as evil: yes, you're selling poison, but then again so do thousands of liquor stores. Illegal yes, and maybe immoral, but not evil. To me at least, the word evil has a very specific meaning: it means the acts in question showed either a total failure to empathize with the suffering of the victims of the person or worse that the person reveled in the harm they were inflicting. I can picture the theory of moral development being formulated today, with negative numbers to account for the sort of people who drown their own kids.

This is actually something I've been very curious about: could empathy (by which I mean the capacity to relate to and understand the feelings of others, and not ESP) be a genetically determined characteristic? What's everyone think: could there be an empathy "gene" (more likely groups of them that contribute) and if so what would it mean?

[Master of Ossus]

Evil is a lack of sympathy; it is a callous disregard for the suffering of other human beings. It's that simple.

Hitler? Did not care about the suffering of his victims. Stalin? Did not care about the suffering of his victims. Every serial killer you ever heard of? They don't care about the suffering of his victims. Child abusers? They don't care about the suffering of their victims. Catholic priests? They don't care about the anal suffering of their altar boys. N'Sync? They don't care about the auditory suffering of their victims. See the trend?

An evil person sees other human beings as mere objects, to be used, destroyed, or discarded if it suits his goals or brings him pleasure. Even if his goal is to improve the world, if he lacks the ability to sympathize with the suffering of others, he will be evil, and he will inevitably cause pain and suffering. Good intentions don't mean dick; Hitler genuinely thought he was improving the world by ridding it of the "Jewish infestation". Does this change the fact that he was evil? With all due respect to Lusankya, I have to strenuously say no; he's definitely evil.

By that definition, nearly every German citizen during WWII was evil. I find that difficult to swallow. I think evil should be reserved for people who go out of their ways to make other people suffer.

[IRG CommandoJoe]

Well, whether you like it or not, Germany was a fucked up place to be at that time.

[Patrick Degan]

Brannon Braga.

EVIL! EEEEE-VILLE!