Are good and evil people innately different?

Stan77 said:

Which brings us back to my original question, what is good and what is evil. You cannot "better" something if you are still not clear about what it is you're trying to better.

Click to expand...

I was never asked that question, perhaps you asked someone else; but I will gladly give my take.
Good and evil is about the ability to distinguish the difference between actions that are helpful vs actions that are harmful to me and my neighbor. The actions I determine to be helpful I call good, the actions I determine to be harmful I call bad/evil.

Kfox said:

I was never asked that question, perhaps you asked someone else; but I will gladly give my take.
Good and evil is about the ability to distinguish the difference between actions that are helpful vs actions that are harmful to me and my neighbor. The actions I determine to be helpful I call good, the actions I determine to be harmful I call bad/evil.

Click to expand...

The fact that you've edited your post at # 15 after i have quoted you in my response is a red flag/strike at your integrity (or lack thereof),. But since i don't know you well i will give you the benefit of doubt and attribute it to some kind of mistake.

But come on Foxy. you're not going to make me run in circle with you, will you. I have already indicated, in my response to Nakosis, your kind of two sentenced definition of good/evil, isn't good enough, because your capacity for ascertaining what is good/evil hasn't been established.. So we are again back to my original objection.

Out of curiosity though ( an perhaps giving you a chance to clarify) i may ask, how are you defining "helpful" and "harmful"?

wellwisher said:

The question I have is, do members of all the various groups and opposite sides, notice good and evil people in their chosen clan or side?They may be true to the clan, but this has to do with their approach. Ideas like relative morality could allow the evil to hide in plain sight. But they will typically go a little too far, too eagerly, for the cause. This contrasts with those who will try to stay within the bounds of a their clan philosophy, without getting underhanded. This may be an Atheist with a good moral code.

Click to expand...

Anyone who has studied moral and ethics knows that there are no good or evil people. It's like an axiom in moral philosophy.
Only actions are moral (good) or immoral (evil).

For me, good and evil is not an appropriate spectrum to believe in (if a spectrum is even allowed), but good or bad as regards behaviour, beliefs, and even thinking might be so. Such that we are usually mixtures of these more than any individual being labelled 'evil', although no doubt many will be classed as such (or just extremely bad) because they seem to have no redeeming features as to whatever they do. But this notion of evil is just not that useful, unless one continually wants to fragment society by creating the 'us' and 'them mentality.

And if anything as to such 'evil' results from some defect in their personality, perhaps even being biologically determined, what does that say about the notion of 'evil' - for example psychopathy or the triad even? Why should they be blamed for such?

Stan77 said:

Maybe someone can start by clarifying what is good and what is bad. Should they be defined by societal norms, individual measure, or according to the beacons of wisdom. Are they universals or particulars. So on and so forth.

Click to expand...

Good and bad certainly is open to interpretation.

HonestJoe said:

Yet you're looking to divide people on the basis of the shallow and superficial criteria of being intrinsically "good" or "evil"?

Click to expand...

Good and evil behavior, among its members, can be found in all the shallow criteria groups, from race, sex, ethnicity, politics, religion, etc. Good and evil is more fundamental to human nature, than learning be part of a social clique. Skin color or sex does not prevent one from being successful. It is usually the evil people, who set up roadblocks and gossip conventions. Once we form groups, based on shallow uniforms, most people can point out the extremists of good and evil within their own group. Some will have a solid moral line in the sand, and others have no such line; saints and hitmen for the cause.

If you look at the ten commandments, what do all these have in common? Violation of each of the 10 prohibitions could cause division in the group. If you notice, there are no victimless crimes on the list. Thou shall not drink, smoke or eat is not there, since these do not impact others the same way as direct violations against others. Rather the list is limited to willful and impulsive actions that can impact other people deeply, and cause division within families, neighbors and cultures. Religious wars happen between the flags of competing Gods. It is one thing to have your own belief system; victimless crime, but once you raise the flag to make it social, the division can begin.

Thou shall not commit adultery. If someone was to do seduce and/or do that to your husband or wife, this would cause deep division that can take years to heal, if ever. The lingering pain and lack of trust, can then impact those around you; children. Members of the extended family may then want revenge for their adult sister or brother. Even if there is eventual forgiveness among the couple, some in the extended family; mother or father in law, may never forgive. Those who believe in relative morality and do not see adultery as their problem; they are the doer, is a person who does not empathize with the extended pain their actions will cause at a very deep instinctive level. The good person would say, what if this happens to me, would I be happy for the perpetrator like he/she is with or for themself? My guess is every shallow criteria group has someone who did this and others who suffered from this. It did not help the group integrate.

Thou shall not steal. In the news, are stories of how some politicians are allowing stealing in their cities; shop lifting. It is more of a taboo to defend oneself from the thieves. As an exercise, does anyone see how these changes can cause division in culture? Does anyone see that those in power who are allowing this, are not going what is good for all? Why does that group allow this to happen in their group, if you see yourself and your group as good? Do you feel powerless to stop it, less the worse of worse turn on you?

The goal of this topic is to help remove such people; bad apples, so what is left can start to reunite with their lost brothers and sisters. First we need to identify this darkness by its actions. Right now it is more qualitative than quantitative.

wellwisher said:

Good and evil behavior, among its members, can be found in all the shallow criteria groups, from race, sex, ethnicity, politics, religion, etc. Good and evil is more fundamental to human nature, than learning be part of a social clique.

Click to expand...

But you just said yourself there, good and evil behaviour. Your OP question as about intrinsically good and evil people. I question the idea that anyone can be fundamentally and entirely "good" or "evil" in the first place, and I'd go as far as to suggest the idea that is possible is a more dangerous tool for division than any of the general physical or social categories you mention. After all, a major factor in creating such divisions is associating those simply identifiers like skin colour or religion with the idea that all of those people are somehow fundamentally "bad" or "evil".

wellwisher said:

If you look at the ten commandments, what do all these have in common? Violation of each of the 10 prohibitions could cause division in the group. If you notice, there are no victimless crimes on the list.

Click to expand...

Apart from the first three (unless you think God could be a victim), keeping the Sabbath (which shouldn't be a social problem as long as you're not being explicitly disruptive) and coveting (which isn't necessarily a good thing but not harmful unless acted on).

Regardless, I don't see what this has to do with people being intrinsically "good" or "evil". After all, if they were, why would we need a set of rules to follow. "Good" people would always do the right things and "evil" people would always do the wrong things. The rules wouldn't make any difference.

wellwisher said:

The goal of this topic is to help remove such people; bad apples, so what is left can start to reunite with their lost brothers and sisters.

Click to expand...

But you still don't think you're being divisive? You want to identify a set of intrinsically "bad" people and "remove" them for the good of society? Have you studied any human history at all?

People are just people. It's the choices we make that define us as good or evil.

But I do see that the effect of our choices is cumulative. The more we choose to engage in evil, the more our behavior becomes who we are. Just as the more we choose to do good, the more that good becomes us. We are re-creating ourselves a little bit each time we choose between doing good or doing evil.

The good news is that we can change the path we're on if we can see that it's wrong. The bad news is that it takes time and persistence to make that change. Especially if we were on the wrong path for a long time.

Hitler, Mussolini, popes etc. believed they were doing good for themselves and thier "kind/neighbors". Joseph Kony, Al Baghdadi, Fred Phelps, Athuraliye Rathana, etc. all believe they are doing good. They were/are functioning from their measure of what's good and evil while the results of their actions are no secret.

I am afraid, unless you're able to articulate/define/examine a goodness which is not tied to your own affiliation, be it religious, ideological, or any other kind, one may say, in a somewhat dramatic way, all conditioned/contrived goodness is inherently evil. So up for consideration is the question, does goodness have to include beauty and truth?

And to add to my post above, no there are no innately good people. If there were/are then we will be calling them an Idiot ( see Dostovesky's The Idiot) , or we will kill them so fast they wouldn't know what hit them. That's right, we who think we are good, will be the first people to throw the rock. In any case.....carry on.