"Good and Evil"

look3467

Council Member
Dec 13, 2006
1,952
15
38
Northern California
What is good and what is evil?
Who decides?
What standard do we use to discern the difference?

Is it a natural trait we all acquire or is it a gift?

If natural, how did we acquire it?

If a gift, how was it given?

What inspires the good in the conscience verses the evil?

Why would good be a better choice?

Take anyone of these questions and share your thoughts.

Peace>>>AJ:love9:
 

Pangloss

Council Member
Mar 16, 2007
1,535
41
48
Calgary, Alberta
What? You want a first year philosophy class for free?

Sounds pretty evil to me. . .

Ok - lots of people have tried lots of different times to define good or evil. The task is made a little simpler in that they are opposite concepts: whatever one is, the other is the opposite.

Kinda like "Liberalman" and "smart." I'm kidding, I'm kidding - it was a cheap joke, I couldn't resist, and I apologize.

Sanctus, please correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't a standard, pretty much foundational definition of evil for the church: "that which is not of God"?

M Scott Peck (smart guy, but an *sshole - I've met him) defined evil as that which diminishes life, and good as that which promotes life. I have yet to find a contradiction to that definition. Mind you, as soon as I post this, someone here will see a great big hole in this idea that never would have occured to me.

Wikipedia sort of copies the dictionaries in their attempts to cover all the bases (sort of "encyclopedic" - go figure) with this one:

Evil is a term describing that which is regarded as morally bad, intrinsically corrupt, wantonly destructive, inhumane, selfish, or wicked. In most cultures, the word is used to describe acts, thoughts, and ideas which are thought to (either directly or causally) bring about withering and death —the opposite of life.

Hope this starts things off.

Pangloss
 

jwv

Nominee Member
May 3, 2007
54
2
8
Ontario
What is good and what is evil?
Who decides?
What standard do we use to discern the difference?

Is it a natural trait we all acquire or is it a gift?

If natural, how did we acquire it?

If a gift, how was it given?

What inspires the good in the conscience verses the evil?

Why would good be a better choice?

Take anyone of these questions and share your thoughts.

Peace>>>AJ:love9:


Too many questions. Too many possibilities. The answer depends far too much on a point of view or moral ethics of the individual. Whose is correct? First determine by what standards you wish this to apply to. Good according to the Catholic viewpoint, the Buddhist, the Hindu.....The atheist or the Jew..whose good or evil?
 

jwv

Nominee Member
May 3, 2007
54
2
8
Ontario
Sanctus, please correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't a standard, pretty much foundational definition of evil for the church: "that which is not of God"?

"Sanctus" is not currently participating here for the time being, just so you know "Pangloss".
 

look3467

Council Member
Dec 13, 2006
1,952
15
38
Northern California
Would the definition fit all mankind alike regardless of what religious beliefs they espouse?

I'm aiming at a certain point.

Peace>>>AJ:love9:
 

Pangloss

Council Member
Mar 16, 2007
1,535
41
48
Calgary, Alberta
"Sanctus" is not currently participating here for the time being, just so you know "Pangloss".

Well, I can only say - darn! If you are in contact with him, tell him I wish him well.

What about you, then? You're RC, aren't you? Ok, I know that was a really presumtious question - and if I gave offense, I apologize.

But I am in the dark about the Catholic definition of evil: is it indeed "that which is not of God"?

Pangloss
 

Pangloss

Council Member
Mar 16, 2007
1,535
41
48
Calgary, Alberta
Too many questions. Too many possibilities. The answer depends far too much on a point of view or moral ethics of the individual. Whose is correct? First determine by what standards you wish this to apply to. Good according to the Catholic viewpoint, the Buddhist, the Hindu.....The atheist or the Jew..whose good or evil?

What if we simply take the central question: the definition of good and evil.

Since these are such basic ideas, the definition would also have to be pretty basic, so as long as we didn't get overly specific, I don't see that much difficulty.

I suspect that most secular definitions, if they are to work, would have to be able to accommodate spiritual definitions - there is just too much common ground on this topic.

But, then again, I could be talking out of my bum. . .

Pangloss
 

Curiosity

Senate Member
Jul 30, 2005
7,326
138
63
California
Good and Evil - cannot exist without the other

What they are is in the perception of the viewer or those who contemplate describing the states. They are polar opposites as are most things for humanity and fluctuate on a scale which is incapable of measuring deeds or events.

They are totally personal no matter how much wisdom has been dedicated to their places in our lives and are rarely described by their one word identifier without additional explanation or description.
 

look3467

Council Member
Dec 13, 2006
1,952
15
38
Northern California
Good and Evil - cannot exist without the other

What they are is in the perception of the viewer or those who contemplate describing the states. They are polar opposites as are most things for humanity and fluctuate on a scale which is incapable of measuring deeds or events.

They are totally personal no matter how much wisdom has been dedicated to their places in our lives and are rarely described by their one word identifier without additional explanation or

That is a good explanation and agree with. Which leads me to point out the purpose of the tree of knowledge of good and evil.

It is a source of it which gives good and evil its strength and credibility.

Peace>>>AJ:love9:
 

Josephine

Electoral Member
Mar 13, 2007
213
7
18
This is a hard one.

I don't personally believe in anything like "pure good" or "pure evil". I think everything and everyone has a bit of both.
 

talloola

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 14, 2006
19,576
113
63
Vancouver Island
I don't think anyone's idea of good and evil has to have any connection with religion at all.

Good for me describes that which is done for the pure good of a situation or person, without
niceties, or reasons , 'just because', it is the right thing to do, or be, naturally and without the
effort of doing it, it is just the way they are, and happy to be, always.


And, evil is a constant cloud some have over their heads, which seems to explain their feelings
toward others/life, and the desire to make others suffer, because they have 'no' good thoughts
for anyone/anything ever.
 

sanctus

The Padre
Oct 27, 2006
4,558
48
48
Ontario
www.poetrypoem.com
To know what is good or bad, we need to know the purpose for each object. The purpose of the radio for example is to give music. If it does, then it is good. If it doesn't, then it is bad.
The purpose of life is to be good and happy. If this were not the case, then we would not try to be good and happy. We would not do such a thing if there were no such thing as Perfect Goodness and Love.
As I have mentioned, there is no such thing as fraction if there were no whole. We are all predestined to be with Who is Perfect Love, Truth, and Life, meaning to say that we ought to be with Him.
Good therefore is a conformity of which is Perfect. If I said 1+1=2, or 1 yard equals 3 feet, it is because I am affirming that there is a standard to which I must conform. Anything moral or good is a conformity of the Law. Anything that is not moral or bad is not a conformity of the Law. Just as a pen is good if it writes, and it would be a bad pen if it doesn't. It is because a pen is meant to write.

To have faith, we must have reason. To have faith is to follow what is Perfect. By reason, we get to know what is Good and what is not. We have reason because we have a conscience. Just as Fulton Sheen once wrote,
"The practical reason that enables a human being to fit particular cases under the general principles touching his final destiny is conscience."
We should then know how conscience works. Fulton Sheen compared the conscience to the U.S. government. Conscience, like the government, is legislative, executive, and judicial. It is legislative because there is an interior voice that gives us a sense of responsibility that we ought to do certain things. It tells us what is good and bad. It is basically the Law that God scripted in our minds.
Conscience is also executive in a sense that it witnesses the fidelity of our actions to the Law. As Sheen has said,
"...it tells us the value of our actions; tells us if we were total masters of ourselves; whether our consequences were foreseen or unforeseen; shows us, as in a mirror, the footsteps of all our actions; points its fingers at the vestiges of our decisions; comes to us as a true witness and says: 'I was there; I saw you do it. You had such an intention' -- it summons me who know myself."
It is also judicial in a sense that it judges me accordingly. It tells me what I did right and what I did wrong. This is why we have a sense of guilt if we do something wrong.

When God made the world, He gave man free will. Our conscience directs us to conform to the Law. We however, have the free will to either obey it or not. Once we disobey the Law over and over, we become tired and we ignore the guilt. This is why we would hear the argument of "no moral absolutes." These people believe that right and wrong is a conformity to a person's feelings instead. Let us examine why they say this.
People ask "why be moral?" because they cannot keep up with the Law. So instead of adjusting themselves to the Law, they adjust the Law. For example, a person would say, "I don't have to study the multiplication table because I don't feel like it." They would not feel this if they can do what they ought to do.
All they are doing is picking and choosing from the objective standard what they want to keep. There can only be morality and ethics when there are ones who cannot keep it. The reason why there is bravery is because there are cowards. Sacrifice is possible when there is such a thing as selfishness.
I would love to hear the reason why skeptics "feel" what is right because this is an excuse for not being able to follow the Law. I have not heard a good reason why people believe in subjective standards. For example: the purpose of food is to fill one's body so he won't be hungry. If a person says an apple pie is not good because it "tastes bad," is it bad? Well, an apple pie is still food and it makes a person full.
The subjective standard therefore is derived from the objective standard. Anything beyond the Law is wrong and anything less is wrong. Just as less food would make a person still be hungry, and too much food would make the person sick. Just as less rain would not help the crops, and too much rain will destroy the crops as well. Everything needs to be perfect just as He is Perfect (Matt 5:48).

God is perfect goodness. One might ask, "Why did God make this world?" It is because God, who is perfect goodness, wanted to bring forth His goodness. Just as the sun is good and gives off its light and heat. In Genesis, we read that when God was making the Earth, He "saw how good it was." It is not because He felt goodness, but because he brought forth part of Himself, which is goodness. It is something of the object which makes it good, not just the feeling.
While God was making the Earth, He also made each object very distinct from one another. For example, a tree is a tree because it is different from a monkey. The idea of a tree is true if it conforms to the material thing before me that my senses represents to be a tree. A tree is different because of its internal participation or reflection of the Archetypal Idea that makes it a tree. What makes a painting different from the others is the idea behind who made it.
We see that not every created thing reveals the depth and variety of His wisdom, but what one cannot reveal, the other does. Just as one man cannot sing a bass and a tenor at the same time, but a whole choir can make a harmony and make one great music. As we see the harmony of each created being, we see more of the fullness of God. We don't invent, but we discover. As Fulton Sheen said,
"Every material thing in the universe is made up of matter and form. Matter makes it individual; the form, which is the architect within, is the reflection of the divine idea."
Then we see that God also made something in His image. This is what we call man. He made man so that man could love God. How can man love God? Simply by giving him free will. One cannot say that he loves another if he cannot choose to love him. He wanted man to love Him with his whole will and above all things. And to do this, God made the forbidden tree. We all know if man ate the forbidden fruit or not. And we know he did. Everything man has done, we did. We always have the choice to eat the fruit or not and when we see this tree, we know that this is a symbol of the moral limit God made to prove our obedience and love.
God who is still Perfect Goodness, like the first creation, cannot keep His goodness. He cannot see man eat the fruit over and over. He cannot watch man be tested alone. He wanted to bring forth Perfect Goodness Himself to help man overcome the temptation. To do this, He would have to kill the forbidden tree. And so, He gave the world His only begotten Son, One who would die upon a tree to kill the tree. The tree is gone, but the fruits of the tree still exist.
We know for sure that there is a supreme Goodness that has overcome this tree and will help us to crush the fruit.
 

#juan

Hall of Fame Member
Aug 30, 2005
18,326
119
63
Hey Sanctus. Glad to see you back...:smile:.....I'm on my way to visit relatives...be in later..