True or false: good & evil doesn't exist

True

True as good does not equal perfect and evil is not the opposite of perfection.

Pilasy:La Voix d'un homme

It's subjective.

false. donating is good, killing is evil. of course theres good and bad i think youre looking to challenge WHAT people consider good&evil

True.. INB4 people start making the thread unnecessarily complicated and/or about religious/non-religious beliefs.

True

@dbvse7: how can you even say good and evil dont exist?

Kind of. Some things are subjective and some people don't have the capacity to be anything other than they are.

@rpgesus: I meant False.

Miss me with that matter of opinion stuff, raping someone is evil, murdering innocent people is evil, kidnapping someone and torturing them because you find pleasure in seeing people in pain, is evil.

That's just my opinion tho

@rpgesus: lol very smart viner we got here

@russellmania77: lol very edgy viner "nothing is good or evil its only a matter of opinion" lmao nonsense

unless i misinterpreted it and you're actually saying you agree with me, then my bad

Good and Evil does exist. Look at the planet we live on.

Subjective.

@dbvse7: ok cool we're on the same page then lol the OP is a little confusing

@rpgesus: um. Agree

@russellmania77: oh i thought you were saying i was "smart" in a condescending way because i thought that. idk lol after a while i guess you just assume everyones attacking on forums. sorry my bad

False.

Hmmm interesting question

Good and evil do exist.

If Hitler wasn't evil then no.

So killing some innocent person for the heck of it is no different than helping a innocent person. You have to admit that when you do something good there's a peaceful reassurance inside your soul or a warm feeling you could call it, well for me anyways. So when people say its true what do they exactly mean...

If we say they exist, they exist for all practical purposes. Humanity is effectively a god when it comes to whether good and evil are real because we create the laws of morality. In the same way that if the universe did not create the laws of science then there would be no laws of science, if we don't create the laws of morality then there are no laws of morality.

I have a feeling none of that makes sense...

@g-dude: what about people who feel good about being bad?

@thedandyman: well i would still say in nature killing when you dont need too(food,protection, territory, mating) is evil and helping your herd,pride,etc is good for that individual animal and for the group as whole. so good and evil still exist in natural law and it helps determine animal instinct

Good and evil are concepts.

Concepts exist, even the subjective ones that have no clear "correct" definition.

@rpgesus: So when a cat kills a mouse and brings it home because that's what cats do (I don't know much about cats so I'm not sure why they do it), is that evil as the mouse is not being eaten? One might also say that in a heard it would simply be easier to leave the elderly and sick to die as they're using up food and water while not providing anything themselves.

I definitely get what you mean though. I've been changing my mind between what I said in my first post about us being "god" when it comes to good and evil and the view you've just given.

@thedandyman: damn i dont have a response for the cat thing because it does seem like they just play with them now that i think about it lol but i dont know much about cats either. and i think the truth is somewhere in the middle. there are some things that are only "good or evil" because humans choose to categorize them but i also think theres a sense of good and evil within nature as well

While we're discussing good and evil, let's see what people think of this argument that a certain someone (*cough* William Lane Craig *cough) loves to use:

1. If God does not exist, objective moral values and duties do not exist
2. Objective moral values and duties do exist
3. Therefore, God exists

I don't think a higher power is needed to determine "objective moral values", we can either do it ourselves or nature can do it for us.

False, how is doing harm to someone for no reason is subjective and not evil?

@rpgesus: Yeah, I guess we can use a mix of nature and our own intelligence to come to the conclusion on whether or not something is good or evil.

@thedandyman: people wrote the holy books and the moral codes within them (which are only good if you ignore the prevalence of rape, slavery and murder). where do you think they got there morals from, why are morals different from culture to culture, if god is the reason for these morals why doesnt everyone have them and i reject the whole premise that without god we dont have morals

@the_kidd: because the guy might have killed that other person for no reason but unbeknownst to him the man he killed was actually a killer himself ?

@rpgesus:

@russellmania77: Then he has reasons, retaliation for a perceived wrong committed against him.

Saying good and evil doesn't exist is like not knowing the difference between giving a baby candy and intentionally rubbing your balls with that candy and then giving it to the baby.

Yes this is an analogy, and no I have not done it on purpose.

Anyway, although we have slightly different moral compasses most humans should understand the concept of what is right and wrong or ( since it has to do with this thread) good and evil.

Either that or you are possibly sadistic, and insane and need to be taught to not rub your balls intentionally on candy and then give it to a baby.

I love the argument of murder being justified if it's another murderer. Just cause you so bad sh*t, doesn't mean it's okay. If I raped Hitler, I'm still a rapist.

If we consider killing the ultimate act of evil that means whether you kill for pleasure, mercy, defense or food your evil simply because you took a life the reason does not justify taking a life to some people (always depends on the person). Killing an animal of any kind is evil simply because there are people who feel it's wrong to do so, so if you have even stepped on an ant you're evil.

It's all opinion and depends on the person.

It's like that question of would you go back time to kill Hitler knowing what he would become and do. The second you kill him you're a murderer and in someones eyes you're evil.

Like many things it depends on your definitions. Quite a lot of peoples definition of evil (and good) and even truth can vary in nuance ways. Such things can also be contingent on how people process and categorize actions and behavior. I often find people who believe evil is an actual thing as people who think generally in binary terms, where as people who don't think in relative terms. Which overlaps a bit but not entirely with ideas about absolutes and application of, and the authority or consensus behind such claims.

The way I look at it is that evil is a oversimplified banner term that can be used to describe actions and behavior that are unideal in some way. Actions and behavior can be true and evil depending on a criteria, but people can't be. Consider the cycle of violence and how many victims of evil actions and behavior , left untreated, can go on to be guilty of similar actions and behavior. So where as some people may like to accuse Person A of being evil, a murderer or rapist, so on, others may just consider Person A guilty of actions or behavior that could be considered evil (or rather harmful to others, and also the person themselves and therefore actions or behavior not considered preferable or ideal) now as far as objectivity/subjectivity, well that depends on the criteria established and some peoples criteria or understanding of what makes for an objective criteria isn't necessary as good as others. Also that criteria can be subjective.

Good and evil exists...........as a relative concept.

@_cain_: I wouldn't be mad if you did tho

If good and evil don't exist then

@russellmania77 : That's would be mental illness

@g-dude: but are they evil or good?

Moral relativist here, I think good and evil are subjective. There isn't a single thing or action that is purse "good" or "evil"...except kittens, they are purely good...however, cats are purely evil.

What is his basis for the existence of objective moral values?

Yes and no. The things that we label either good or evil may be subjective. It differs depending on many factors, such as the individual or the prevailing social norms. But the basis from which the very notion of good and evil arises from may be objective. That is to say, there are certain things that can be applied universally. And in this instance, one can argue, that the all-encompassing factor is emotion. The sentimentality of people and how they react to particular events or stimuli eventually lead to the conception of the duality, which is good and evil. Does that make good and evil completely objective by design? No, not in my opinion. But at the same time, I don't believe it's entirely subjective either. (Subjectivism, by its very principles, is skeptical of any objective truth; and thus it cannot exist as a paradigm. Instead, it exists to critique existing paradigms, challenging their rules and notions.)

So what does this actually mean? For me, I believe that good and evil exist in their most basic forms. But those forms can be altered and changed to the point where good and evil cannot be applied so easily.