What is your (prefered) definition of evil?

[Martinus]

If you were to define evil in the simplest and at the same time more accurate way, how would you do it (you do not have to be original - it could be someone else's definition).

[Malthus]

To my mind, evil basically consists of treating people as things.

[Brazen]

To my mind, evil basically consists of treating people as things.

That's almost exactly how Terry Pratchett defined it: "Evil begins when you begin to treat people as things."

[Valmy]

To my mind, evil basically consists of treating people as things.

Or as a collective rather than individuals.

[Barrister]

I dunno, I reserve the right to formulate it in a better way, but pretty much I would define evil as being contrary to God's wishes and nature.

[Berkut]

I dunno, I reserve the right to formulate it in a better way, but pretty much I would define evil as being contrary to God's wishes and nature.

That is almost stunning in how terrifying it is...

[Valmy]

I dunno, I reserve the right to formulate it in a better way, but pretty much I would define evil as being contrary to God's wishes and nature.

Yes...but who speaks for God? People are made in God's image yes? His spiritual image. So treating them as less than divine beings would be counter to his will yes?

Edit: So I think Malthus' definition still works. That was my point if it was not clear 

[Barrister]

I dunno, I reserve the right to formulate it in a better way, but pretty much I would define evil as being contrary to God's wishes and nature.

That is almost stunning in how terrifying it is...

I knew you'd love it. 

[Barrister]

I dunno, I reserve the right to formulate it in a better way, but pretty much I would define evil as being contrary to God's wishes and nature.

Yes...but who speaks for God?

God speaks for God.  We have the Bible, which are God's words, and we have prayer.  Personally I am very skeptical of any person who claims to unerringly speak for God.

People are made in God's image yes? His spiritual image. So treating them as less than divine beings would be counter to his will yes?

I don't know that I would have put it exactly like that, but yes.  After all "That which you do for the least of my brothers and sisters, you do for me".

[Berkut]

I dunno, I reserve the right to formulate it in a better way, but pretty much I would define evil as being contrary to God's wishes and nature.

Yes...but who speaks for God?

In reality?

Whoever says they speak for God, of course. And has the motivation to act on those beliefs in some fashion.

BarristerBoy himself demands that we accept his word for what God wants, and is happy to support laws that reflect his understanding of that word, even when they trample on the liberty of those who do not agree with his interpretation. Indeed, according to his definition, it would be evil to do otherwise.

That is why this idea is to fucking terrifying to me. So many people buy into this, and while someone like Beebs buying into is (mostly) pretty benevolent, it is this *exact same belief* that justifies the suicide bombing of children, or lining up men along a ditch and machine gunning them for apostasy, or whatever other atrocities are routinely being committed today in the name of following "God's wishes and nature".

We don't even need to get that extreme though - it is this exact same definition of evil that gets school boards to insist on putting creationism in science classes, or fuels climate change denial.

Of course Beeb believes that those people are wrong, but they believe, apparently with even greater fervor than he does, that HE is wrong.

Note: I am NOT arguing that religious extremism is the ONLY possible motivation for atrocity. There are others as well, of course, as Stalin was so happy to illustrate. But it is pretty hard to beat the "Because god wants it that way" as justification for actions that are in fact evil from any objective standpoint.

Ironically, it is the definition of evil given by BB that, in my opinion, actually leads to actual evil actions. And this goes back into Malthus's definition, although I would put it a little differently.

Evil is the defining away the humanity of others, the casting of other humans into the class of "things" that can be destroyed, enslaved, exploited or denied equality based on them being in some "other" group that does not deserve inclusion into the full equality of the "right" group.

[Jaron]

Fortunately, I don't have to define evil. The benevolent prophet and the 12 can do that for me. I need do naught but listen.

[Barrister]

BarristerBoy himself demands that we accept his word for what God wants

I demand no such thing.  God gave you the gift of reason and intellect - you figure out for yourself what God wants you to do.  There are some pretty wise people over the centuries who have had some opinions on that, and listening to them may give you some guidance, but only you can decide for yourself.

[Valmy]

Fortunately, I don't have to define evil. The benevolent prophet and the 12 can do that for me. I need do naught but listen.

You bastard.

[Eddie Teach]

Evil is all that men are capable of unless we're in a state of grace.

[Martinus]

To my mind, evil basically consists of treating people as things.

This is one of my two favourite definitions, yes - and as Brazen points out, it is Terry Pratchett's definition. The problem with that definition is that it does not account for evil done to non-people.

The other one I like as well, although it is more exoteric - "evil is any force that is out of balance".