Chalnoth
Senior Contributor
Right. My point is that actions don't lie on a line between good and evil. Something can be completely devoid of any good whatsoever, and may be evil or not. Heck, something can even provide quite a bit of good and still be considered extremely evil by many people (e.g. human testing for the development of some advanced medical treatment to save millions, though the testing cripples and kills hundreds...most would consider that quite evil, though it isn't without good).Yes, and ignoring her would be bad - like a very, very, very, light shade of gray. You are taking an act devoid of any good, but not harming anyone in that act.
For many people, one or the other (or both) are already the case.Nope. If no one knew any pain, pleasure would be pain; if no one knew any pleasure, pain would be pleasure.
Right, but typically that which causes pain in others is considered evil, while that which causes pleasure in others is considered good. There are other considerations as well, but that's sort of a general thing that works most of the time.They are comparative terms, and they are different thing than good - evil.
I don't see how you could consider there to be any good in simply ignoring a person.No; ignoring her is not good, but not completely devoid in that your action does not harm her.
Upvote
0