Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Absolute standard = God's will
Well I guess the Bible would be an acurate representation of God's will...
In the Christian world, 'evil' is rejecting the will - the plan, the commands, the goals - of God.
Sarah (by the way, I think you should call yourself 'Psycho Psarah', it just has a 'ring' to it) asks to be presented God's absolute standard. It is found in the Bible, and presents as a total understanding, not just one rather odd statement here or there. I cannot present it here and now, as it is both too complicated for definition and too simple to be missed.
The simple version is, meet God on His terms and pay attention to what He says. If one is not willing to do that, one doesn't really care about the absolute standard. I'm not trying to be belligerent about it, but that's the way it works. Sort of like learning to play the piano; one either studies and practices, or one listens to someone else. There is no 'instant' piano ability. (Which I regret, by the way.)
Ana Ist; you are correct in a limited sort of way. Evil derives from 'desire' to please one's self. Good derives from 'desire' to please God.
Variant, that statement is an outright lie. If you are not aware that is a lie, I really feel sorry for you.
In the Christian world, 'evil' is rejecting the will - the plan, the commands, the goals - of God.
Sarah (by the way, I think you should call yourself 'Psycho Psarah', it just has a 'ring' to it) asks to be presented God's absolute standard. It is found in the Bible, and presents as a total understanding, not just one rather odd statement here or there. I cannot present it here and now, as it is both too complicated for definition and too simple to be missed.
The simple version is, meet God on His terms and pay attention to what He says. If one is not willing to do that, one doesn't really care about the absolute standard. I'm not trying to be belligerent about it, but that's the way it works. Sort of like learning to play the piano; one either studies and practices, or one listens to someone else. There is no 'instant' piano ability. (Which I regret, by the way.)
Ana Ist; you are correct in a limited sort of way. Evil derives from 'desire' to please one's self. Good derives from 'desire' to please God.
Variant, that statement is an outright lie. If you are not aware that is a lie, I really feel sorry for you.
And badness is the will to intentional evildoing?As a working definition, evil is the will to intentional badness.
This may be a useful thought for someone who feels that judging an entire person good or evil is a good idea.You can't be an evil person without consciously and intentionally willing something bad upon someone else.
Yes, that´s what your definition says.There is also no such thing as an intrinsically or objectively bad thing or event; something is only evil by intentionality, by subjectivity.
Maybe I am too optimistic or something, but I think people of the first category don´t even exist.Another distinction should be made between an evil person and evil actions: the former is a person whose intentionality has become such that he constantly wills badness on others, whereas anyone can commit evil actions intermittently.
1. Substantiation for the last claim is needed. Either you are preassuming that those "accumulated injustices" that they react to were not "evil", by your definition, and that the reactions are "evil", by your definition (which would be quite an assumption to make); or - in case you allow for the possibility that those "accumulated injustices" had been themselves "evil" actions, and that the reactions aren´t necessarily "evil" - there remains little space for your idea that "evil" is more widely spread in "bad homes and neighborhoods".What causes someone to be evil? We often speak about this like people choose evil just for the heck of it, or are evil because they differ ideologically or culturally than us. But I think what motivates evil is accumulated perceived injustices in a person's life which the person displaces onto others in a decontextualized way. "The world screwed me over, and so I'll screw the world over back," is the motto for evil. One commits evil as a way of punishing others for the unfairness that the self perceives has been done to it, not just from the particular other but also additional instances of injustice done by others as well. Evil often involves overpaying the other person in badness given this displacement, and this is one of the big problems of evil: it repays too much badness on a single person at any given time. Hence, perhaps, the "blindness" involved with evil. Think about the people who grow up in bad homes or neighborhoods. They're much more likely to commit evil actions because they've had more accumulated injustices thrown their way.
Disagree.Another way of saying this is that evil would be impossible without a standard of justice.
Doesn´t follow.If this is true, then all evil has an element of goodness in it, and in a real sense goodness is a main ingredient in motivating evil.
You use "sense of justice" and "justice" here as though they were the same. A "sense of justice" that results in "misapplied justice" isn´t "justice" - if anything, it would be "injustice". I really wouldn´t know what´s good about a "sense of justice" that causes people to commit injustices.This goodness (justice) is twisted or misapplied, but still, without a sense of justice there could be no evil.
The Nazi's were occultists and were not even remotely Christian. Here is the research to demonstrate this for those who care to know the truth."God is with us" is the translation if you don't speak German.
Again you concur with an absolute standard of moral values.I guess holocaust against innocents depends on the context.
Unless you don't think the writer of numbers was sincere in thinking that God wanted it.
Of course you can't which is because you and I are imbued with a sense of absolute right and wrong.I can't think of any justification I would find acceptable for it off the top of my head.
I don't even know what "present in anything approaching an absolute manner" means.PsychoSarah asked for a presentation of an absolute standard and now two people have said the same platitude "Gods Will" which neither person can present in anything approaching an absolute manner.
First, having God's word as dictum is based on His being the Creator. So it is reasonable to treat the word of The Creator of the Universe in special stead.Which is...? And how do you know what god considers good actually is? You only have god, a biased source, on how good god supposedly is. That is me being generous of course and allowing one to hypothetically consider the bible true.
Again you acknowledge to an absolute standard.I've read the Bible.
In terms of a standard for objective morality I don't think it quite fits the bill.
As I posted earlier, I would probably think that there should be a rule against killing small children and other war crimes.
And, it's not even in question that I can cite the last 1000 or so years of history to point out that there is considerable disagreement on what God thinks even if the bible were a given.
First, don't confuse cultural mores and societal laws with good and evil. Evil behavior is often sanctioned in cultural mores and laws. Second, the Bible teaches a set of principles that will result in following God's will if we follow them. So it does cover "every instance" in that sense.Even if it could somehow generalize "right" and "wrong" in some very broad non-specific ways...it can't do that for every situation now can it? That would require infinite (or very near infinite) pages.
What does your name mean?And my name looks funny if you don't put the "the" in it.
First, don't confuse cultural mores and societal laws with good and evil. Evil behavior is often sanctioned in cultural mores and laws. Second, the Bible teaches a set of principles that will result in following God's will if we follow them. So it does cover "every instance" in that sense.
What does your name mean?
Which is...? And how do you know what god considers good actually is? You only have god, a biased source, on how good god supposedly is. That is me being generous of course and allowing one to hypothetically consider the bible true.
I've read the Bible.
In terms of a standard for objective morality I don't think it quite fits the bill.
As I posted earlier, I would probably think that there should be a rule against killing small children and other war crimes.
And, it's not even in question that I can cite the last 1000 or so years of history to point out that there is considerable disagreement on what God thinks even if the bible were a given.
Actually I'm correct in an unlimited way.
At least you got the "correct" part correct though...
"Found in the bible...." even if that were true, the bible is a finite book very much open to interpretation isn't it? Even if it could somehow generalize "right" and "wrong" in some very broad non-specific ways...it can't do that for every situation now can it? That would require infinite (or very near infinite) pages.
And my name looks funny if you don't put the "the" in it.
"First, don't confuse cultural mores and societal laws with good and evil."
I haven't...don't worry about that.
"Second, the Bible teaches a set of principles that will result in following God's will if we follow them."
So you would say that no matter how morally ambiguous the situation...there's always a clear "good" and "evil" that can be ascertained by following God's will?
Please note, that if you say "yes" to the question...I intend to ask you a relatively easy moral question, then little by little change it's details until you reach a moral ambiguity.
I don't even know what "present in anything approaching an absolute manner" means.
Again you acknowledge to an absolute standard.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?