Evil..

[fajrdrako]

diurnal_lee had an interesting question on her LJ today: What is evil?

She defined it as 'neglect', which is interesting. I'll have to think about that, follow through her reasoning, which she explains.

She ends: What is evil to you?

My answer: That which causes suffering, especially if caused deliberately.

So: what is evil to you?

Comments

[topgeargirl2.livejournal.com]

Evil to me can mean a lot of things good and bad.

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

How can evil be good?

[topgeargirl2.livejournal.com]

When kink's involved

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

Aah, that's not evil. That's good all the way.

[mmegaera.livejournal.com]

Sadism for the fun of it. From small and personal to large and political.

Your definition is interesting, but I would want the term suffering defined clearly. Then again, I suppose I ought to define sadism clearly, too, but not right now, thanks.

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

Yeah, there's always something to define.

I think I was defining "suffering" as any kind of pain, mental, emotional or physical.

[mmegaera.livejournal.com]

That works.

[filkferengi]

I thought you'd just say "Dag's mom" & be done with it.

;)

[mmegaera.livejournal.com]

Nah. I did consider just saying "Baron Ryoval," but even he's a bit too specific [g].

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

Interesting thoughts....

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

Good one.

[cionaudha.livejournal.com]

It's one of those questions like "what is beauty", isn't it: to which the answer is usually "I know it when I see it."

Thousands of years of philosophers have worked on it. I'm not going to get anywhere, except that whenever I think of that word, I picture Dick Cheney. The man is stone cold evil, and I'm not sure I could articulate why.


That which causes suffering, especially if caused deliberately.

Does this also apply to the suffering of evil people, let's say, incarcerated with due process of the law?

Does it apply to God, tormenting Job?

Does it apply to all those times we break up a relationship?

I know it applies to my knee surgeon. (Kidding.)

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

to which the answer is usually "I know it when I see it."

So true. And the answer often seems to shift.

Interesting re Dick Cheney. I don't (off the top of my head) know what he looks like, though of course I've heard about him.

Does this also apply to the suffering of evil people, let's say, incarcerated with due process of the law?

Since this is an imperfect world, I would say that the important thing is always to mitigate suffering, and do what causes less pain rather than what causes more - as best we can determine it. So if incarcerating an evil person (and making him suffer) to save others from suffering causes the lesser amount of suffering - which the law is there to determine and ensure - then it's the right and good thing to do.

Does it apply to God, tormenting Job?

Ah, now, that's a religious question and since I don't believe in a Christian God, I am hardly qualified to answer this. As an atheist or pantheist, I would answer that yes, I do think that was evil, and it's one of the reasons I can't or won't believe in such a God. Is that a fair answer?

Does it apply to all those times we break up a relationship?

Not if we are causing ourselves or our lover (or ex-lover) less pain than staying would cause. If breaking up will cause the less pain in the end, then yes, it is the right thing to do. Been there, done that.

I know it applies to my knee surgeon.

Yeah. Dr. Torquemada, right?

[countrycousin.livejournal.com]

How about "knowing, unnecessary selfishness that injures others"?

That would cover both causing pain/injury for the fun of it and knowingly accumulating resources in a way that winds up materially depriving others.

This is very similar to cionaudha, except for the "unnecessary", which is rather vague. But I'm not ready to condemn as evil someone who makes a necessary choice. The people in the wolf-pursued sleigh who are about to nominate one of their group to invite the company to dinner, for instance. One can debate that one about right and wrong, but the group isn't being evil.

I tend to think that exercising forcible control over others for not good enough a reason is evil, too, but that is a rather vague prescription . . .

Maybe its like p0rn - I'll know it when I see it. Heavens, do you suppose that means p0rn really is evil??

g,d, & r

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

How about "knowing, unnecessary selfishness that injures others"?

That works, though I'd include 'carelessness' as well as 'selfishness'.

The people in the wolf-pursued sleigh who are about to nominate one of their group to invite the company to dinner, for instance. One can debate that one about right and wrong, but the group isn't being evil.

No, because the choice is being made that causes less suffering.

Maybe its like p0rn - I'll know it when I see it.

"Nothing is either good or bad but that thinking makes it so." (Am I mangling Shakespeare? Too sleepy to remember properly.)

Heavens, do you suppose that means p0rn really is evil??

Absolutely not! Porn lessens suffering - therefore it's good. Porn causes happiness - mental, emotional, and physical. We like porn.

[countrycousin.livejournal.com]

Porn lessens suffering - therefore it's good.

hmmm. Can recall instances when I was young and foolish where the suffering was not lessened. But I suppose that should be chalked up to the "young and foolish".

Porn causes happiness - mental, emotional, and physical. We like porn.

Well, true. There's that.

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

Can recall instances when I was young and foolish where the suffering was not lessened.

Sounds to me more like a mistake than deliberate evil.

[countrycousin.livejournal.com]

Foolishness (on my part). My argument (porn=evil) was never intended to be serious, nor was any of the follow-up. Just playing with words. :-}

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

Yup, and the way people use (or misuse) them differently. And draw the lines in different places.

[xinef.livejournal.com]

So, two similar definitions going here:
That which causes suffering, especially if caused deliberately
and
Knowing, unnecessary selfishness or carelessness that injures others

Question is how to combine them. The second doesn't easily include evil like Hitler. That wasn't selfishness or carelessness. [Aside, I don't think that mentioning Hitler should invoke Godwin's Rule here. Hitler is a valid example of evil.]

So, how about something like
Deliberate actions, deliberate and unnecessary selfishness or carelessness that causes suffering.
Where "suffering" is defined as any kind of pain, mental, emotional or physical.

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

Aside, I don't think that mentioning Hitler should invoke Godwin's Rule here. Hitler is a valid example of evil.

No. We're using him as a direct historical example of exactly what we are talking about.

I'd take out the 'unnnecessary', I think, but otherwise I like it. "Unnecessary" begs the issue just a little too much. An act can be 'necessary' and still evil.

[xinef.livejournal.com]

Ok by me. Leaving "unnecessary" in also begs the question of how to define "necessary".

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

Good point!

[trixtah.livejournal.com]

I pretty much agree with your definition, except I'd leave out the "especially". Because something without agency that causes suffering is just "bad". Diseases are bad; Hitler was evil (since he most certainly did what he did deliberately).

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

Because something without agency that causes suffering is just "bad". Diseases are bad; Hitler was evil (since he most certainly did what he did deliberately).

Yes... I'd agree with that differentiation. But I was trying to allow for evil that is evil because it is neglectful or unaware. For instance, it was evil of Hitler to exterminate people in concentration camps. It was also evil for people to fail to save those he was sending to the camps, or to support him in his war and his Nazi programme, even if they did it out of fear or ignorance or misguided belief. This is how evil builds. There are degrees of cupability.

[duncanmac.livejournal.com]

I had my own definition, which I posted here (http://duncanmac.livejournal.com/25568.html).