Good vs Evil

[Jmayer20]

What is good? How do you define good? What is evil? How do you define evil? There are the obvious things like risking your life to save a child from a fire is clearly good and murdering a child is clearly evil. However there is a gray part of morals. Example if you saw a train coming and it was going down some tracks that a group of ten people were on. The people could not move. You can save the group by switching the tracks and having the train go another way. However on those other tracks is another person that cant move either. You don't know any of these people. Would it be evil to sacrifice the one person to save the group? Would you be good because you saved the group? Would it be evil to let the group die when you could save them? Now lets change it a little. Lets say the individual was a loved one of yours and the group were still strangers. Would that change your decision? Would you be evil for letting the group die to save your loved one? SO what do you think good is and what do you think evil is?

[science-is-fun]

At 7/20/12 09:21 PM, Jmayer20 wrote: What is good? How do you define good? What is evil? How do you define evil?

Generally the happiness of all sapient beings is good, reducing suffering and increasing enjoyment. Though not always, you need to be sapient to be happy so we have to look at this more philosophically. It wouldn't be good to kill someone just because you think they wouldn't enjoy their life as much as their replacement. What kind of existence is it where you live in opulent splendor but only live 30 years like in Logan's Run?

Example if you saw a train coming and it was going down some tracks that a group of ten people were on. The people could not move. You can save the group by switching the tracks and having the train go another way. However on those other tracks is another person that cant move either.

Not to split hairs, switch tracks. Simple mathematics, 10 is greater than one. Of course in the real world there may be some other factors at play, of those 10 people were terminally ill cancer patients and the person on the other track was a child prodigy who would cure cancer then it would be better for those 10 to die, this is splitting hairs though.

Lets say the individual was a loved one of yours and the group were still strangers. Would that change your decision?

It might change my decision but it wouldn't change the ethics of it. Emotions like sympathy are not necessarily guides to what is ethical or not.

[MultiCanimefan]

Anything that violates the sovereignty or will of a non-consenting sentient being, including coercion and/or forced "choices," is objectively evil in all possible universes.

[science-is-fun]

At 7/20/12 11:47 PM, MultiCanimefan wrote: Anything that violates the sovereignty or will of a non-consenting sentient being, including coercion and/or forced "choices," is objectively evil in all possible universes.

What if you stop someone killing themselves?

[Iron-Hampster]

At 7/21/12 01:10 AM, science-is-fun wrote: What if you stop someone killing themselves?

well life isn't a choice, its forced on you. so committing suicide is a fundamental human right.

[science-is-fun]

At 7/21/12 01:21 AM, Iron-Hampster wrote:

At 7/21/12 01:10 AM, science-is-fun wrote: What if you stop someone killing themselves?

well life isn't a choice, its forced on you. so committing suicide is a fundamental human right.

So someone has a mental illness and you stop them, cure their illness and they live to age 95 and live a fully happy life instead of dying at 16 in the gutter and you're evil for doing that.

[Jmayer20]

How far do we let people have free choice because obviously rape and murder are not acceptable but nether is the government taking away all our right and liberty's. So were do you think the middle ground should be?

[science-is-fun]

At 7/21/12 11:25 AM, Jmayer20 wrote: How far do we let people have free choice because obviously rape and murder are not acceptable but nether is the government taking away all our right and liberty's. So were do you think the middle ground should be?

You will always live under a protection racket, if you don't pay a sheriff to keep order you will end up paying protection to a gang of outlaws, the point is to make the best trade-off.

[MultiCanimefan]

At 7/21/12 03:35 AM, science-is-fun wrote:

At 7/21/12 01:21 AM, Iron-Hampster wrote:

At 7/21/12 01:10 AM, science-is-fun wrote: What if you stop someone killing themselves?

well life isn't a choice, its forced on you. so committing suicide is a fundamental human right.

So someone has a mental illness and you stop them, cure their illness and they live to age 95 and live a fully happy life instead of dying at 16 in the gutter and you're evil for doing that.

Mental illness is an entirely different jurisdiction and grey area altogether, making the call even tougher to make. Everyone should do everything in their power to either cure or minimize it for the sufferer. As it is, no, we wouldn't be evil for doing that even against the sufferer's will.

[morefngdbs]

often good or evil is a matter of perspective.

For example where it IMO is twisted is most of the worlds major religions have somethign along the line of the Judchristian 'thou shall not kill' rule.

But while we may agree, not killing people is good.
religions often have other writings where if its the death of someone who believes in a different all powerful , invisible , diety...it can not only be ok, it can be what is required !

Back to something a bit harder....a previous posters said... killing babies is bad.
What if you live in a society where the baby is deformed or ill & could never be anything but a burden that a hunter gatherer group for example couldn't care for properly anyway .

Or even in our society, where they know the child won't live long, there is nothing that can be done with all our present medical know how... the child will be in agony until it dies eventually on its own, or we can allow it to die quickly & painlessly with an over dose of pain killer ?
IS it then evil to kill it quickly & humanely ?
Or is it evil to allow it to suffer & eventually die after a period of pain , misery & suffering ?
Is there any 'good' answer to those above questions ?

[Gario]

Good and evil are different for everyone in some way or another, and it's based entirely on a combination of their experience and beliefs. In my opinion? From a non-religious point of view, it is an action that pushes oneself toward perfection, or convince those around him/her to pursue the same course. When I take my religion into account, because God is perfect, this deduces to actions that make one more in tune with God. "Evil" is merely the opposite/absence of good.

[kakalxlax]

good and evil are so relative concepts that we can trully say they dont exist

people call "good" to things that they think are of thier convenience

and people call "evil" to things that they think are of thier inconvenience

[DoctorStrongbad]

Most people will tell you that evil is smarter and stronger than good. I agree with these people.

[PMMurphy]

Another interesting topic.

Good and Evil originate from a thought. My guess is, its all emotional responses to actions that determine if something is good or evil. If something provokes positive emotions, it can be viewed as a good deed. Where as if something provokes a negative emotion, it would be viewed as a bad deed.