Is Evil working overtime among us or is it just the result of dope and alcohol?

[HighPlainsDrifter]

If you look at it Biblicaly, Earth is Satans domain. Sometimes the way i look at it Lucifer has timeshares to sell and a wonderful plan for eternity. Its up to us if we want to buy into his timeshares. If you look at the world around us, its a beautiful place. I was fortunate to have seen places that i thought was touched by God. Beautiful landscapes of Guatemala.....the beaches of Brazil. Northern coastline of California. The Pugent Sound. The Ozarks here in Missouri. Evil been here for ages, it happens everday, every second and every hour. Personally i think its hard to stop it because it continues to feed off of those that accept it in their ives. We live in a world in which horrible crimes are committed but across the world a beautiful baby is born or some stranger helps and saves someones life. I think we hear more and more of these horrible and terrible things because of more access to the media like computers and bigger and better communications. There are more channels on cable tv and even more cable providers being available. I guess in a nut shell things stay the same excpet we dont hear or know about the good and beautiful things that happen

[Guest Jim McLean]

If you look at it Biblicaly, Earth is Satans domain. Sometimes the way i look at it Lucifer has timeshares to sell and a wonderful plan for eternity. Its up to us if we want to buy into his timeshares. If you look at the world around us, its a beautiful place. I was fortunate to have seen places that i thought was touched by God. Beautiful landscapes of Guatemala.....the beaches of Brazil. Northern coastline of California. The Pugent Sound. The Ozarks here in Missouri. Evil been here for ages, it happens everday, every second and every hour. Personally i think its hard to stop it because it continues to feed off of those that accept it in their ives. We live in a world in which horrible crimes are committed but across the world a beautiful baby is born or some stranger helps and saves someones life. I think we hear more and more of these horrible and terrible things because of more access to the media like computers and bigger and better communications. There are more channels on cable tv and even more cable providers being available. I guess in a nut shell things stay the same excpet we dont hear or know about the good and beautiful things that happen

While I'm not one to believe in a personification of Evil, I do agree that regardless of how you define wrong acts, they won't go away, and that fear always gives terrible events a wider exposure. We tend to be more aware of what scares us, than what makes us happy. In fact, we are so focused on the fear, we lose sight of those small special moments in life. Many people will never suffer a true tragedy but spend their lives trying to avoid one, and by doing so miss those precious positive ones.

Yes, I think media has made us more aware of the horrors. Fifty years ago and a woman could be beaten and raped by her husband and if she was foolish enough to speak out, because people had no exposure to such possibilities, she was more likely to be shunned for making such comments on her fine and upstanding spouse than offered sympathy.

[hippyroo]

Amen to that, Joe! Now I know why I alaways roll my eyes at those timeshare offers!

Lorado, many people believed they were promoting social justice when they committed horrible evils. You can have a very egalitarian society that is extreamly evil. This is the topic of many, many dystopia narratives.

I suspect you have feminist or liberal values? You would probably jump on examples of Christian missionaries doing evil to indegious peoples in the name fighting evil? Yet, your idea that equality or tolerance is the barameter of "good" - where does that come from? Is it absolutly true that equal means no evil? I think not.

[Raven Wolf]

Fifty years ago and a woman could be beaten and raped by her husband and if she was foolish enough to speak out, because people had no exposure to such possibilities, she was more likely to be shunned for making such comments on her fine and upstanding spouse than offered sympathy.

Yet, at the same time, a hundred years ago or so, if someone within a family did something unspeakable to a child.... or even if it was NOT someone in the family... did something to a child, or even to a woman, all of the men would get together, go hunt the guy down, and either beat him to death or hang him. Things like the atrocities that happen to women and children now just were not tolerated a long time ago. Now... a child is afraid to say anything, because no one will believe him, and he suffers in silence.

(btw, let's keep it civil, guys... Ok? Please?)

[liberty]

The whole point revolves around the fact that we are not ready to give up our petty selfishness. Take the global market for instance. Although it's not "evil" per se, the manner in which is managed to benefit only the rich countries is really shameful. I mean take out the contributions that the state passes on to the various farms and you will allow the poorer countries to compete on an equal base. Not to mention that you'll save a whole lot of money to dedicate to other projects like health, education, environment and research. Are we ready to do that !? I don't think so, judging from the last developments of the last WTO negotiations.

[hippyroo]

Liberty,

I believe that you hit it right on the head; selfishness.

[Guest Jim McLean]

Lorado, many people believed they were promoting social justice when they committed horrible evils. You can have a very egalitarian society that is extreamly evil. This is the topic of many, many dystopia narratives.

There can be indeed. But as I said, you'll find just as many of those in the past as we have now. The only factor that IMO can be used to favour an argument that things are worse now, is the increase in population. Other than that, I think everything that's happening now, has happened before and quite often on a far more vicious scale.

I suspect you have feminist or liberal values? You would probably jump on examples of Christian missionaries doing evil to indegious peoples in the name fighting evil?

I'd jump on anyone who does cruel and violent acts. The ethos of Christianity is "Love Thy Neighbour" and if you are doing evil acts to anyone, I don't think you are ethically following a mantra of understanding and non-judgment. I've know a few very narrow minded missionaries (who believe in a very dogmatic and literal Biblical interpretation) who I disagree with firmly on their ideology on many social subjects, but when they'd go out into Africa, they kept their work focused on helping people, regardless. They didn't pick fights, spread mantra, they put themselves at risk to make life better for kids, women and men who were poor, beaten and requiring help they could get no where else. Compared to the violence and ills made in the name of God for the Christian Crusades or Spanish Inquisitions, I am very happy to see that many contemporary missionaries of God can work in ways that put their own personal beliefs and intolerances aside, and help people who simply need help.

Am I a feminist? Does it matter? Do I have liberal values? Not entirely, no. All good philosophies tend to take rationales from both sides of a problem to find fair and balanced solutions. I don't think trying to pigeon hole my ideas and beliefs holds relevance here.

We're talking by evil, and as I said before, I think evil is a very backward term which is unsympathetic and short sighted. To deal with a problem you have to understand it, and by labeling any issue as merely "evil" fails to do this. That's not to say all "evil" problems have to be solved by being sympathetic and soft. It means if you understand the nature of the problem, your chances of finding proper solutions becomes more viable. If it means having to take a hard stance to protect the society in question, that is a possible outcome.

You can be non-judgmental and rational without being soft. Evil is just a blanket term which allows people to box up problems in a neat, simple bow and apply whatever action they wish, when if they have to understand the nature of the problem, that makes such simple conclusions a little harder to make. Sometimes the results maybe the same either way, but one way is easier than the other, and the "easy" way tends to be a path to wrong doings in itself - ask Anakin Skywalker. :)

Yet, your idea that equality or tolerance is the barameter of "good" - where does that come from? Is it absolutly true that equal means no evil? I think not.

Turn the tables: does having no equality means you have no evil? Since good and evil are absolutes, one way is right, one way is wrong. I think one would be hard pushed to argue that intolerance and inequality are the building blocks of a good society.

I'm not saying that we can ever have a truly "good" society. I said that earlier. We can still try to make it as "good" for everyone as possible; where people can live their lives fairly, free from hatred and intolerance, with an equal right to safety and non-abuse.

Yet, at the same time, a hundred years ago or so, if someone within a family did something unspeakable to a child.... or even if it was NOT someone in the family... did something to a child, or even to a woman, all of the men would get together, go hunt the guy down, and either beat him to death or hang him. Things like the atrocities that happen to women and children now just were not tolerated a long time ago. Now... a child is afraid to say anything, because no one will believe him, and he suffers in silence.

(btw, let's keep it civil, guys... Ok? Please?)

Natural justice. However natural justice was, quite often, erroneous. It also favoured the powerful, and those in many cases, were males. If a husband raped his wife - or child - very often there would be no natural justice. Because it wasn't spoken of, people would rarely believe such things would go on, particularly from people you knew.

Sure, if a servant, woman or outside was caught with a finger in the pot, then natural justice would prevail. But largely, the really deviant, nasty evils went unnoticed. If you were preganant with someone elses child, or a woman caught having an affair, again, mob justice prevailed. Always, mob justice sat against outsiders and woman in preference of men.

Mob justice was - and still is - very fickle. It wasn't fair, it wasn't tolerant, it wasn't understanding and quite often, motivated by whoever was dominant in that community and your luck would depend on perhaps how close you were to that man and/or maybe how much you feed the guy's ego.

The same terrible crimes happened, the same injustice occurred, just on a larger scale with little tolerance for evidence, fairness or a decent punishment. I don't think things were better or safer "then", they just looked it. Hence so many white middle class males look back to the 1950s with a nostalgic look in the eye. Sure, that was a wonderful, safe time... if you were a middle class, white male.

And don't worry, I don't get angry Raven. It's just a civil debate.

Edited June 27, 2007 by Jim McLean