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).
To my mind, evil basically consists of treating people as things.
Quote from: Malthus on March 30, 2016, 10:02:23 AM
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."
Quote from: Malthus on March 30, 2016, 10:02:23 AM
To my mind, evil basically consists of treating people as things.
Or as a collective rather than individuals.
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.
Quote from: Barrister on March 30, 2016, 10:29:48 AM
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...
Quote from: Barrister on March 30, 2016, 10:29:48 AM
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 :P
Quote from: Berkut on March 30, 2016, 10:37:06 AM
Quote from: Barrister on March 30, 2016, 10:29:48 AM
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.
Quote from: Valmy on March 30, 2016, 10:40:01 AM
Quote from: Barrister on March 30, 2016, 10:29:48 AM
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.
QuotePeople 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".
Quote from: Valmy on March 30, 2016, 10:40:01 AM
Quote from: Barrister on March 30, 2016, 10:29:48 AM
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.
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.
Quote from: Berkut on March 30, 2016, 10:54:16 AM
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.
Quote from: Jaron on March 30, 2016, 10:57:41 AM
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.
:lol:
You bastard.
Evil is all that men are capable of unless we're in a state of grace.
Quote from: Malthus on March 30, 2016, 10:02:23 AM
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".
Paraphrasing Asimov might work. Causing harm to a human being or other living creature or, through inaction, allowing a human being or living creature to come to harm.
Quote from: Berkut on March 30, 2016, 10:54:16 AM
Quote from: Valmy on March 30, 2016, 10:40:01 AM
Quote from: Barrister on March 30, 2016, 10:29:48 AM
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.
I always thought that it requires an immense amount of hubris to claim to know not only what God wants for you, but what God wants for other people.
At some level, I have to say, I agree with Beeb's definition but I probably do not understand it in the same way he does.
From that (and mine) perspective, evil would be doing (or forcing something or someone to do) something that is not your/his/her/its "purpose". Now, how you define that purpose is another question whatsoever. Even if you claim God's hand in determining the purpose, it is extremely shortsighted and prideful to claim to know what other people's "purpose" is, though - hence, killing people, enslaving them etc. is evil because that way you impose your idea of their "purpose" on them (here it comes very close to "treating over people as things"). But as long as they are doing what they think is their "purpose" - and they are not preventing others from doing the same - you have no right to stop them (which is probably where I disagree with Beeb, as I assume he believes God's wishes are the same for all, so you have a right to stop someone not doing God's wishes).
For non-human entities (such as animals, plants, environment, inanimate objects) we can more easily determine something's purpose in a more universal way, I think - so evil would be doing stuff to these entities that is contrary to their "purpose" - so fucking or torturing an animal, polluting the environment, destroying things of art just for the sake of it.
Admittedly, this theory is still work in progress, so don't nitpick the inconsistencies. :P
I don't find a definition of evil very useful.
Quote from: Barrister on March 30, 2016, 11:03:03 AM
Quote from: Berkut on March 30, 2016, 10:54:16 AM
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.
You say you do not, but of course you do when you support laws that reflect your interpretation of what God wants, and hence what defines "good" and "evil" in the context of what YOUR god wants.
I don't see you supporting Sharia law, for example. But you do support laws that reflect your particular morality which you just defined as being defined by the will of your God.
So yes, you do in fact demand exactly that.
Quote from: Barrister on March 30, 2016, 10:51:08 AM
Quote from: Berkut on March 30, 2016, 10:37:06 AM
Quote from: Barrister on March 30, 2016, 10:29:48 AM
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.
You just defined *me* as evil, so yeah, I would tend to object to that.
It is this concept of evil that justifies my beliefs as a death sentence in some countries. And what is more, with *your* definition of evil, *their* demand that I be legally killed for my beliefs is "good".
Evil, to me, is sociopacy. Doing what's wrong even when you know it is.
Otherwise, vile and evil actions are mostly a result of letting yourself be an instrument in a long chain of command.
Quote from: Berkut on March 30, 2016, 12:42:32 PM
Quote from: Barrister on March 30, 2016, 10:51:08 AM
Quote from: Berkut on March 30, 2016, 10:37:06 AM
Quote from: Barrister on March 30, 2016, 10:29:48 AM
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.
You just defined *me* as evil, so yeah, I would tend to object to that.
It is this concept of evil that justifies my beliefs as a death sentence in some countries. And what is more, with *your* definition of evil, *their* demand that I be legally killed for my beliefs is "good".
Hey, he could worship you as a god. Then, there'd be no problem. :D
Praise be to the holy Berkut!
:berkut:
I define it as being purely selfish. By that I mean that someone is so selfish that no one and no thing can or will supersede their desires, wants, and/or needs.
Quote from: merithyn on March 30, 2016, 12:59:40 PM
I define it as being purely selfish. By that I mean that someone is so selfish that no one and no thing can or will supersede their desires, wants, and/or needs.
So, being like God?
Quote from: Berkut on March 30, 2016, 12:42:32 PM
Quote from: Barrister on March 30, 2016, 10:51:08 AM
Quote from: Berkut on March 30, 2016, 10:37:06 AM
Quote from: Barrister on March 30, 2016, 10:29:48 AM
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.
You just defined *me* as evil, so yeah, I would tend to object to that.
It is this concept of evil that justifies my beliefs as a death sentence in some countries. And what is more, with *your* definition of evil, *their* demand that I be legally killed for my beliefs is "good".
You really like putting words in my mouth Berkie.
I did not define you as evil. You seem like a very decent guy. You work hard, provide for your family, love your wife and children, are active in your local community... all of that seems entirely in accordance with God's nature as far as I can tell. You may not believe in Him, but whether you know it or not you seem to be living a pretty Christian life. :hug:
And I have no hestitation in saying that those who would put you to death because of your religion (or lack thereof) are pretty clearly evil. Jesus was pretty clear on the "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone" bit. We're supposed to leave the judging up to God.
Quote from: Martinus on March 30, 2016, 01:01:03 PM
Quote from: merithyn on March 30, 2016, 12:59:40 PM
I define it as being purely selfish. By that I mean that someone is so selfish that no one and no thing can or will supersede their desires, wants, and/or needs.
So, being like God?
God, Ayn Rand, they're quite similar.
Quote from: Martinus on March 30, 2016, 01:01:03 PM
Quote from: merithyn on March 30, 2016, 12:59:40 PM
I define it as being purely selfish. By that I mean that someone is so selfish that no one and no thing can or will supersede their desires, wants, and/or needs.
So, being like God?
Those who claim godlike status are typically evil, yes.
Quote from: Martinus on March 30, 2016, 01:01:03 PM
So, being like God?
Nonsense. God loves you Marty. You are perfect and beloved in God's eyes. Berkut, though, not sure about him. And he might be the true God.
Quote from: Berkut on March 30, 2016, 10:37:06 AM
Quote from: Barrister on March 30, 2016, 10:29:48 AM
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...
Tribal response: triggered. :lol:
Quote from: merithyn on March 30, 2016, 01:04:09 PM
Those who claim godlike status are typically evil, yes.
Huh. Not sure I agree with that. That is a surprisingly large number of people in history after all.
Quote from: Barrister on March 30, 2016, 01:01:46 PM
Quote from: Berkut on March 30, 2016, 12:42:32 PM
Quote from: Barrister on March 30, 2016, 10:51:08 AM
Quote from: Berkut on March 30, 2016, 10:37:06 AM
Quote from: Barrister on March 30, 2016, 10:29:48 AM
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.
You just defined *me* as evil, so yeah, I would tend to object to that.
It is this concept of evil that justifies my beliefs as a death sentence in some countries. And what is more, with *your* definition of evil, *their* demand that I be legally killed for my beliefs is "good".
You really like putting words in my mouth Berkie.
I did not define you as evil. You seem like a very decent guy. You work hard, provide for your family, love your wife and children, are active in your local community... all of that seems entirely in accordance with God's nature as far as I can tell. You may not believe in Him, but whether you know it or not you seem to be living a pretty Christian life. :hug:
And I have no hestitation in saying that those who would put you to death because of your religion (or lack thereof) are pretty clearly evil. Jesus was pretty clear on the "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone" bit. We're supposed to leave the judging up to God.
Ok so we agree more than I thought.
What you call "Christian life" is (at the meta level) what Hindu call "yama". I.e. living a good life (not good in the sense of comfortable, but one that is not evil). The rules of "yama" differ from a religion to a religion and from a culture to a culture but ultimately it is avoiding unnecessary "excitement" (such as killing, or stealing, or inviting bad karma), so that you put yourself in a state that helps achieve transcendence.
Which brings us back to my original definition of evil being a "force out of balance". If your life is out of balance (Koyaanisqatsi, as the Hopi would call it), this is the root of evil.
Quote from: merithyn on March 30, 2016, 01:04:09 PM
Those who claim godlike status are typically evil, yes.
I Am not. <_<
Quote from: Barrister on March 30, 2016, 01:01:46 PM
Quote from: Berkut on March 30, 2016, 12:42:32 PM
Quote from: Barrister on March 30, 2016, 10:51:08 AM
Quote from: Berkut on March 30, 2016, 10:37:06 AM
Quote from: Barrister on March 30, 2016, 10:29:48 AM
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.
You just defined *me* as evil, so yeah, I would tend to object to that.
It is this concept of evil that justifies my beliefs as a death sentence in some countries. And what is more, with *your* definition of evil, *their* demand that I be legally killed for my beliefs is "good".
You really like putting words in my mouth Berkie.
I did not define you as evil. You seem like a very decent guy. You work hard, provide for your family, love your wife and children, are active in your local community... all of that seems entirely in accordance with God's nature as far as I can tell. You may not believe in Him, but whether you know it or not you seem to be living a pretty Christian life. :hug:
But your Christian god wants me to believe and worship him above all those other things - hence by the definition of evil you have provided (acting outside his wishes and desires), I am in fact evil. Acting in a Christian manner is something that happens because you are good, not because acting in such a manner is good. As far as *my* understanding of Christianity is concerned, if you define evil in strictly terms of "acting outside the desires/nature of God", then in fact I am evil, because I refuse to accept the central tenet of that faith - that acceptance of Christ is the only path to salvation. Being a decent person is great, but doesn't save me.
Quote
And I have no hestitation in saying that those who would put you to death because of your religion (or lack thereof) are pretty clearly evil. Jesus was pretty clear on the "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone" bit. We're supposed to leave the judging up to God.
And that is why I feel pretty safe visiting your lovely family. The details of what God you worship do matter when it comes to actual behavior.
But your *definition* could be as easily used by someone who worships a different god to justify taking me down to the local square and stoning me to death. And has been used for just such a purpose many, many times.
Quote from: Berkut on March 30, 2016, 02:34:36 PM
But your *definition* could be as easily used by someone who worships a different god to justify taking me down to the local square and stoning me to death. And has been used for just such a purpose many, many times.
You've been stoned to death many, many times and risen each time? Maybe Valmy is onto something.
Must have been painful for you, though. I understand that being stoned to death is one of the worst ways to go, unless you get lucky and take a blow to the head that puts you off right off the bat.
Is FB around btw?
Quote
"Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion. "
Berkut is evil by his own definition. Since he is human and must have done some bad things (tell lies, ignore Raz) in his life and wasn't inspired by religion to do them, he must, in fact, be an evil person rather than just a good person who has done bad things.
Quote from: Berkut on March 30, 2016, 02:34:36 PM
Quote from: Barrister on March 30, 2016, 01:01:46 PM
And I have no hestitation in saying that those who would put you to death because of your religion (or lack thereof) are pretty clearly evil. Jesus was pretty clear on the "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone" bit. We're supposed to leave the judging up to God.
And that is why I feel pretty safe visiting your lovely family. The details of what God you worship do matter when it comes to actual behavior.
On a more serious note, of course you are right about that. But that's why BB's definition works for him--from his POV, anyone who follows a god that demands you be stoned to death follows a false god, and therefore is acting contrary to God's wishes, i.e., is evil.
That necessarily makes BB's definition rather subjective. I'm not sure that an entirely objective definition is possible. I think my definition would be that to be evil is to know right from wrong and chose to do wrong anyway, especially if to do so causes harm to innocents. But that still leaves the question of what is right and what is wrong.
Quote from: Berkut on March 30, 2016, 02:34:36 PM
And that is why I feel pretty safe visiting your lovely family. The details of what God you worship do matter when it comes to actual behavior.
But your *definition* could be as easily used by someone who worships a different god to justify taking me down to the local square and stoning me to death. And has been used for just such a purpose many, many times.
This is perhaps the source of our dispute.
When I say 'morality comes from God', you take that to mean that morality is entirely subjective. It depends on which God, which set of beliefs you choose to believe in. If you choose to believe in violent jihadi islam, that makes throwing gays off of rooftops moral.
But when I say 'morality comes from God' I mean it that morality is entirely objective. It comes from God, not from man. It doesn't matter whether someone believes their actions are moral or not - the only thing that matters is whether God finds they are moral.
And (getting further afield here) I think you are wrong to equate being "good" and being "saved" in Christian thought. Well, I should make clear I'm talking about the more liberal evangelical Christianity of my church, as I understand it. The general notion is that "goodness" is separate from being saved - largely because none of us are good enough. Not one human being alive is good enough, is deserving enough, for everlasting life. We are all sinners. Thus it is only through the grace of God that we can be saved.
So not believing in Christ does not make you Evil - at least no more so than any of the rest of us.
Quote from: Barrister on March 30, 2016, 03:25:16 PM
But when I say 'morality comes from God' I mean it that morality is entirely objective. It comes from God, not from man. It doesn't matter whether someone believes their actions are moral or not - the only thing that matters is whether God finds they are moral.
But how do we know what is objectively moral?
Quote from: garbon on March 30, 2016, 03:33:50 PM
Quote from: Barrister on March 30, 2016, 03:25:16 PM
But when I say 'morality comes from God' I mean it that morality is entirely objective. It comes from God, not from man. It doesn't matter whether someone believes their actions are moral or not - the only thing that matters is whether God finds they are moral.
But how do we know what is objectively moral?
Ah, now there's the trick, isn't it? ;)
We study, we pray, we do our best to figure it out.
Quote from: Barrister on March 30, 2016, 03:39:48 PM
Quote from: garbon on March 30, 2016, 03:33:50 PM
Quote from: Barrister on March 30, 2016, 03:25:16 PM
But when I say 'morality comes from God' I mean it that morality is entirely objective. It comes from God, not from man. It doesn't matter whether someone believes their actions are moral or not - the only thing that matters is whether God finds they are moral.
But how do we know what is objectively moral?
Ah, now there's the trick, isn't it? ;)
We study, we pray, we do our best to figure it out.
Sure but the problem is that different people will reach different conclusions on what is moral by those methods - much of which could not be objectively moral but they think it is.
Quote from: Barrister on March 30, 2016, 03:39:48 PM
Quote from: garbon on March 30, 2016, 03:33:50 PM
Quote from: Barrister on March 30, 2016, 03:25:16 PM
But when I say 'morality comes from God' I mean it that morality is entirely objective. It comes from God, not from man. It doesn't matter whether someone believes their actions are moral or not - the only thing that matters is whether God finds they are moral.
But how do we know what is objectively moral?
Ah, now there's the trick, isn't it? ;)
We study, we pray, we do our best to figure it out.
But then you could also be nuts.
Quote from: Valmy on March 30, 2016, 10:25:39 AM
Quote from: Malthus on March 30, 2016, 10:02:23 AM
To my mind, evil basically consists of treating people as things.
Or as a collective rather than individuals.
Or a demographic.
Slaves. Blacks, Jews, "The Masses", Gays, Hispanics. Basically anything other than individuals.
Evil is live backwards.
Quote from: PDH on March 30, 2016, 04:16:17 PM
Evil is live backwards.
That's the tag line for the Benjamin Button horror reboot I'm writing. :)
Quote from: Martinus on March 30, 2016, 09:57:24 AM
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).
People just arguing for arguments' sake on the internet.
Quote from: mongers on March 30, 2016, 05:45:00 PM
People just arguing for arguments' sake on the internet.
Before the internet, it must have been a challenge for people with overactive brains to find each other so they could argue about things they had no control over.
Excuse me; I know there was a spell where I didn't stop in very often, but when exactly did BB come back from Jesus Camp?
He's always been like that.
No, there's always been an inordinate amount of Dudley Do-Rightism combined with an unhealthy dose of that most ugly of all Canadian traits, and then there's this guy.
Quote from: Berkut on March 30, 2016, 10:37:06 AM
Quote from: Barrister on March 30, 2016, 10:29:48 AM
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...
Why religion is a stain on mankind.
"Some beliefs are so dangerous that it may be ethical to kill people for believing them"
Is this evil?
Quote from: CountDeMoney on March 30, 2016, 06:50:09 PM
No, there's always been an inordinate amount of Dudley Do-Rightism combined with an unhealthy dose of that most ugly of all Canadian traits, and then there's this guy.
He's reacting to Berkut who has gone full Viking on us.
Quote from: Razgovory on March 30, 2016, 07:03:15 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on March 30, 2016, 06:50:09 PM
No, there's always been an inordinate amount of Dudley Do-Rightism combined with an unhealthy dose of that most ugly of all Canadian traits, and then there's this guy.
He's reacting to Berkut who has gone full Viking on us.
:lol: I don't see Berkut going full Viking anywhere near as much, as BB's cheese has slipped off his cracker.
As you're a quieter version of Viking, you're not exactly the person to judge. :P
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on March 30, 2016, 07:18:14 PM
As you're a quieter version of Viking, you're not exactly the person to judge. :P
BB,
face mask 15 yards
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedinagazette.northcoastnow.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2015%2F11%2FAPTOPIX-Browns-Steele_Guer.jpg&hash=985659f2d8415c3c0a8a82cb3a098b2df89231e8)
Quote from: 11B4V on March 30, 2016, 07:21:21 PM
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on March 30, 2016, 07:18:14 PM
As you're a quieter version of Viking, you're not exactly the person to judge. :P
BB,
face mask 15 yards
Meowtf?
Means you punt on 2nd down or something.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on March 30, 2016, 07:18:14 PM
As you're a quieter version of Viking, you're not exactly the person to judge. :P
Well he's a more pleasant version of Viking.
Quote from: Martinus on March 30, 2016, 09:57:24 AM
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).
Anyways back to the OP's question.
Ill use a quote.
Quote
The malice of a true Christian attempting to destroy an opponent is something unique in the world. No other religion ever considered it necessary to destroy others because they did not share the same beliefs. At worst, another man's belief might inspire amusement or contempt—the Egyptians and their animal gods, for instance. Yet those who worshipped the Bull did not try to murder those who worshipped the Snake, or to convert them by force from Snake to Bull. No evil ever entered the world quite so vividly or on such a vast scale as Christianity did.
Quote from: Razgovory on March 30, 2016, 07:50:56 PM
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on March 30, 2016, 07:18:14 PM
As you're a quieter version of Viking, you're not exactly the person to judge. :P
Well he's a more pleasant version of Viking.
That was nice. Thank you.
Viking was a nice enough fellow. He just had a few issues where he obsessed a bit too much.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on March 30, 2016, 06:50:09 PM
No, there's always been an inordinate amount of Dudley Do-Rightism combined with an unhealthy dose of that most ugly of all Canadian traits, and then there's this guy.
I started going back to church again a year ago. :)
Quote from: Barrister on March 30, 2016, 09:02:51 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on March 30, 2016, 06:50:09 PM
No, there's always been an inordinate amount of Dudley Do-Rightism combined with an unhealthy dose of that most ugly of all Canadian traits, and then there's this guy.
I started going back to church again a year ago. :)
Yes, the grace and humility of Pope Francis is quite an inspiration.
Quote from: 11B4V on March 30, 2016, 07:52:50 PM
Quote from: Martinus on March 30, 2016, 09:57:24 AM
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).
Anyways back to the OP's question.
Ill use a quote.
Quote
The malice of a true Christian attempting to destroy an opponent is something unique in the world. No other religion ever considered it necessary to destroy others because they did not share the same beliefs. At worst, another man's belief might inspire amusement or contempt—the Egyptians and their animal gods, for instance. Yet those who worshipped the Bull did not try to murder those who worshipped the Snake, or to convert them by force from Snake to Bull. No evil ever entered the world quite so vividly or on such a vast scale as Christianity did.
Who ever said that was deeply ignorant.
Quote from: Razgovory on March 30, 2016, 09:50:46 PM
Quote from: 11B4V on March 30, 2016, 07:52:50 PM
Quote from: Martinus on March 30, 2016, 09:57:24 AM
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).
Anyways back to the OP's question.
Ill use a quote.
Quote
The malice of a true Christian attempting to destroy an opponent is something unique in the world. No other religion ever considered it necessary to destroy others because they did not share the same beliefs. At worst, another man's belief might inspire amusement or contempt—the Egyptians and their animal gods, for instance. Yet those who worshipped the Bull did not try to murder those who worshipped the Snake, or to convert them by force from Snake to Bull. No evil ever entered the world quite so vividly or on such a vast scale as Christianity did.
Who ever said that was deeply ignorant.
I figured you would know who it was.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on March 30, 2016, 09:07:38 PM
Quote from: Barrister on March 30, 2016, 09:02:51 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on March 30, 2016, 06:50:09 PM
No, there's always been an inordinate amount of Dudley Do-Rightism combined with an unhealthy dose of that most ugly of all Canadian traits, and then there's this guy.
I started going back to church again a year ago. :)
Yes, the grace and humility of Pope Francis is quite an inspiration.
I respect my Catholic friends and brothers, but two years of a Jesuit education showed me why I can not be a catholic. -_-
Quote from: Barrister on March 30, 2016, 10:32:05 PM
I respect my Catholic friends and brothers, but two years of a Jesuit education showed me why I can not be a catholic. -_-
Disappointing.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on March 30, 2016, 10:35:08 PM
Quote from: Barrister on March 30, 2016, 10:32:05 PM
I respect my Catholic friends and brothers, but two years of a Jesuit education showed me why I can not be a catholic. -_-
Disappointing.
Quit being militant.
Quote from: 11B4V on March 30, 2016, 09:52:44 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on March 30, 2016, 09:50:46 PM
Quote from: 11B4V on March 30, 2016, 07:52:50 PM
Quote from: Martinus on March 30, 2016, 09:57:24 AM
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).
Anyways back to the OP's question.
Ill use a quote.
Quote
The malice of a true Christian attempting to destroy an opponent is something unique in the world. No other religion ever considered it necessary to destroy others because they did not share the same beliefs. At worst, another man's belief might inspire amusement or contempt—the Egyptians and their animal gods, for instance. Yet those who worshipped the Bull did not try to murder those who worshipped the Snake, or to convert them by force from Snake to Bull. No evil ever entered the world quite so vividly or on such a vast scale as Christianity did.
Who ever said that was deeply ignorant.
I figured you would know who it was.
I've never read any of Gore Vidal's stuff.
Have you tried any of his hair products?
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on March 30, 2016, 11:40:22 PM
Have you tried any of his hair products?
I did see Gattaca.
Rats live on no evil star.
Quote from: Richard Hakluyt on March 31, 2016, 05:46:33 AM
Rats live on no evil star.
:D
I'm beginning to rue the absence of a "like" button on this board.
Quote from: 11B4V on March 30, 2016, 07:52:50 PM
Quote from: Martinus on March 30, 2016, 09:57:24 AM
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).
Anyways back to the OP's question.
Ill use a quote.
Quote
The malice of a true Christian attempting to destroy an opponent is something unique in the world. No other religion ever considered it necessary to destroy others because they did not share the same beliefs. At worst, another man's belief might inspire amusement or contempt—the Egyptians and their animal gods, for instance. Yet those who worshipped the Bull did not try to murder those who worshipped the Snake, or to convert them by force from Snake to Bull. No evil ever entered the world quite so vividly or on such a vast scale as Christianity did.
That's a bunch of horsepucky anti-Christian bullshit. Lots of religions believe in destroying non-believers, and plenty of Christian states did not ever try to destroy non-Christians.
Quote from: Agelastus on March 31, 2016, 08:03:07 AM
Quote from: Richard Hakluyt on March 31, 2016, 05:46:33 AM
Rats live on no evil star.
:D
I'm beginning to rue the absence of a "like" button on this board.
I've missed that for some time.
There are posts that are pure genius here at times.
Quote from: Richard Hakluyt on March 31, 2016, 05:46:33 AM
Rats live on no evil star.
Fritz Leiber uses this one in one of his Fafhrd and the Gray Mouser stories, I believe. ;)
Quote from: Martinus on March 30, 2016, 09:57:24 AM
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).
Islam
Quote from: Malthus on March 31, 2016, 11:07:13 AM
Quote from: Richard Hakluyt on March 31, 2016, 05:46:33 AM
Rats live on no evil star.
Fritz Leiber uses this one in one of his Fafhrd and the Gray Mouser stories, I believe. ;)
I think he may well have done, it has been hanging about in the recesses of my mind for some decades, unsure who first thought of it.
Quote from: Siege on March 31, 2016, 02:44:39 PM
Quote from: Martinus on March 30, 2016, 09:57:24 AM
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).
Islam
So there was no evil before that?
Marius. Cinna.
Quote from: Razgovory on March 31, 2016, 04:56:26 PM
So there was no evil before that?
Well no before them it was the Romans
And before them the Greeks
And before them the Babylonians
And before them the Assyrians
Quote from: Malthus on March 30, 2016, 10:02:23 AM
To my mind, evil basically consists of treating people as things.
but a lot of good can (and I'm sure has) come out of treating people as things/objects. evil exists more when people are treated as things in a bad context (which is subjective)
Quote from: LaCroix on April 01, 2016, 12:06:25 AM
Quote from: Malthus on March 30, 2016, 10:02:23 AM
To my mind, evil basically consists of treating people as things.
but a lot of good can (and I'm sure has) come out of treating people as things/objects. evil exists more when people are treated as things in a bad context (which is subjective)
Not really.
Quote from: Martinus on April 01, 2016, 12:34:16 AM
Quote from: LaCroix on April 01, 2016, 12:06:25 AM
Quote from: Malthus on March 30, 2016, 10:02:23 AM
To my mind, evil basically consists of treating people as things.
but a lot of good can (and I'm sure has) come out of treating people as things/objects. evil exists more when people are treated as things in a bad context (which is subjective)
Not really.
What about when you treat one of your boyfriends as a garden hose with baseball?
Quote from: LaCroix on April 01, 2016, 12:06:25 AM
but a lot of good can (and I'm sure has) come out of treating people as things/objects. evil exists more when people are treated as things in a bad context (which is subjective)
Ok. Give an example.
Oh and evil is subjective? Well thanks for that :P
Quote from: Richard Hakluyt on March 31, 2016, 04:30:55 PM
Quote from: Malthus on March 31, 2016, 11:07:13 AM
Quote from: Richard Hakluyt on March 31, 2016, 05:46:33 AM
Rats live on no evil star.
Fritz Leiber uses this one in one of his Fafhrd and the Gray Mouser stories, I believe. ;)
I think he may well have done, it has been hanging about in the recesses of my mind for some decades, unsure who first thought of it.
Yup, the palindrome has been referenced in various places a long time, and no doubt long predates his use - I just thought it was cool he used it. ;)
Democrats are evil and dna live era starcomed.
Quote from: Siege on April 03, 2016, 12:31:34 AM
Democrats are evil and dna live era starcomed.
Star come down? NWO, Democrats.
One of my mates defined evil as mixing a twentyone year old single malt whisky with Fanta Orange.
At least it's not Orangina.