Human Nature

this might be a dumb question; but what if what we're thinking about someone is true, even if it's a bad thought? this might be irrelevant, but if someone does something terrible, and we think terrible things about them as a result... does that still make it bad?

That's probably too difficult a question for me to answer with any confidence, but if I had to guess I'd say it's one of those things that doesn't technically have to be bad, but almost always is. I might think to myself "that person looks terrible," but who among us thinks about things like that as simple emotionless facts, unaccompanied by disgust, spite, or a feeling of superiority? If anyone else can do that, my hat's off, but I think most people tend to have a mix of feelings when they judge someone that one, and not all of them are pure.

Um... I think you're lumping anything even remotely negative in with "evil". I think "evil" is a bit more specific than that. It's not evil to think somebody looks ugly. It's evil rejoice in their suffering at their own ugliness, e.g. "haha, I bet that ugly loser can't even get a date!"

__________________
"Loves them? They need them, like they need the air."

Yeah, the discussion branched off a bit there. Then again, I'd defy anyone to draw a stark line between bad and evil. And I think someone who is bitter and petty their entire lives might qualify, even if they never do one single thing that would seem "evil" on its own. If anything, small, constant transgressions seem to speak more to the core of the person than an isolated incident, however bad that incident may be. It's a lot harder to explain away a million petty thoughts than one horrific mistake.

Regardless, "evil" is a word with a lot of connotations attached to it that certainly vary a great deal from person to person. I tend to dislike the fact that it's reserved only for the worst of things, but that's just me.

I've said this before:

Evil: when the value you hold for the suffering of the other goes beyond the value you hold for your own happiness.

Yes, that makes just revenge evil. I dunno though... we can work on this definition. It does strike me as a bit shaky and/or limiting.

It does to me.

I just don't think any animal's self-awareness is as of yet comparable to that of a humans. I'd imagine dogs and chimps have a pretty high level compared to the freakin' rest of the ginormous animal kingdom, but you just don't get the sense that a dog knows wtf is going on around it, like, 90% of the time.

Also... let's be honest... there're some people like this too, man.

(and I ain't talkin' 'bout bein' physiologically comatose)

Are dolphins an exception?
From some website:

?
Dolphin Heroes
In Greek stories and old sea stories, there are dozens of claims of dolphins helping drowning sailors, rescuing people from sharks, and making themselves useful as guides through treacherous waters. The “treacherous waters” guiding can be ascribed to the dolphin’s needing a similar water depth as many boats.
Dolphins and other cetaceans also help injured members of their family groups and newborn babies to the surface by swimming under them and nudging upward, just as some reports describe them doing with humans. Interestingly, there are some real reports of dolphins helping other cetaceans. In 1983 at Tokerau Beach, North-land, New Zealand, a pod of pilot whales ran aground during ebb-tide. The Zealanders who lived there came out and did their best to keep the whales alive, sponging their skin and calming them, until the tide came back in. But even then the whales were having trouble orienting.
Dolphins came to the rescue. Somehow, a pod of dolphins who were nearby figured out what was happening. They swam into the shallows, putting themselves at risk, and “herded” the pilot whales out to sea, saving 76 of 80 whales. Five years earlier, a similar incident had occurred at Whangarei harbor. If dolphins are smart enough and helpful enough to save other cetaceans in that manner, why not humans.
Real-Life Cases: Dolphins Saving Humans
You’ve seen it in Flipper and other popular culture stories; dolphins rescuing humans from drowning or sharks, keeping them safe from harm. But does it really happen?
The answer is, surprisingly often.
Several years ago, in the Gulf of Akaba, a British tourist was rescued by three dolphins from sharks. Near the Sinai Peninsula, a ship captain had stopped his boat so several passengers could watch dolphins playing. Three of the passengers decided to swim with them, and one stayed a little longer than the others. To his horror, he was bitten by a shark – and more were coming. Suddenly, three dolphins placed themselves between the tourist and the sharks, smacking the water with tails and flippers, and drove the sharks off so the man could be rescued.
In 2004, a group of swimmers were confronted by a ten-foot great white shark off the northern coast of new Zealand. A pod of dolphins “herded” them together, circling them until the great white fled. There are several other examples from the area of Australia of similar incidences.
In another case in the Red Sea, twelve divers who were lost for thirteen and a half hours were surrounded by dolphins for the entire time, repelling the many sharks that live in the area. When a rescue boat showed up, it appeared that the dolphin pod were showing them where the divers were; they leaped up in the air in front of the rescuers, jumping toward the lost people as if to lead the boat onward – as, according to old stories, they often did with endangered ships in treacherous water.
Because we can’t talk to dolphins, we can’t really fathom what their motives are in these situations. It is, however, very possible that they are indeed trying to help and protect fellow mammals in the ocean to safety. If this is true, it means that they are the only animals, besides humans, which show true altruism.

Oh yeah, those guyz. I dunno. I really want to call that sorta thing "wishful thinking". I mean, why would they be so smart? It doesn't make a lot of sense to me on the extremely basic, practical level I am able to relate to animal physiology.

that's what i said like 4 pages back. i still think evil is on a totally different level than bad, or anything discussed here. is that a completely different topic? what's the difference between evil doing and wrong-doing?

Could not have said it better - bravo.

__________________

“The gladdest moment in human life, methinks, is a departure into unknown lands.” – Sir Richard Burton

so with that in mind, does that really mean that humans are inherently evil at the core? really?

Hell no, just some of 'em darling.

One thing that get me about dogs is they are extremely loyal, want to be by your side as much as possible, but as soon as the gate is open off they go down the street and never look back.

dogs make the best of their situation, but i don't think that makes them evil. they aren't able to make decisions based on the long-term effects.

but how many? that's the question. my head is spinning again!

Dogs know we are going to come after their arses - smart buggers.

Well... when someone does you wrong, don't you want revenge?

Even if it is just (fair), it is still, by my definition, evil.

Plus, wanting revenge is different than carrying it out. Most of us would want revenge if someone pulled a Kill Bill on us. Totally fair and justified to want revenge, but you are no longer living for the purpose of increasing the existence of happiness. You are, at that moment of desiring revenge, contributing to the possibility of suffering in the world/universe.

Thinking somebody is ugly clearly does not accomplish this.

I'd also like to point out how the suffering is limited to that of The Other, i.e. not yourself. A human being's own suffering, while possibly extending from something self-inflicted, is or SHOULD be in the realm of his own free choice. We should be allowed to suffer if we want. But only we can make that decision for ourselves.

p.s. All of this can/should only apply to non-pathological cases. As soon as we embrace reality fully, we factor in the insane and all notions of good/evil becoming meaningless. I hope that most of you have some concept of self-conscious rationality, even if it does only come in brief spurts of clarity. What if Hitler had voices in his head telling him to take over Europe and initiate the Holocaust? No matter what it is, we cannot call him evil for it is not "him". I think this is an important parameter in this discussion for that reason.

The point I'm trying to make is that in the act of doing good, especially for others at some risk and no reward to yourself, that's all that matters at that moment. Doesn't matter if he kicked his dog that morning or slapped his wife 2 nights ago or cheated on his income tax last April. At the moment of the good act he has chosen good over evil and is on the road to goodness. He may backslide later but at that moment of doing good, he has transformed himself. I don't think it necessarily "makes up" for any bad he did in the past, but I think even one choice of doing good is worth something.

I get the feeling I'm saying one thing and you're hearing another. To the best of my memory, I didn't say babies are morally good, just that they were not morally evil, either--if anything they are a blank slate and at a point where they can go either way. They can be taught hate but they are not born hating. They can be taught love, but are not born loving. They frequently learn that first, however, because they are not able to take care of their selves. If they are hungry, thirsty, wet, tired, lying in poop, scared or lonely, all they can do is cry in hope of drawing their caretakers. If a caretaker comes and relieve their problems and talk to them and hug and kiss them, they learn love. If they are ignored or mistreated, they learn a very different lesson. I'm a great believer in our evironment determining whether we are good or evil, which is why I have no trouble with the concept of teaching right from wrong. The evil thing would be to teach wrong over right, but most parents are good enough not to do that with kids.

Well, you confuse me here--seems we're talking about two different things. And I've got to ask, does "genuine selfishness" really exist or is that just some concept? Not knowing what you mean by that, I don't know if I've experienced it or not.


Believe me, Yoda, if I "subtly changed" to the core for at the core or vice-versa, it wasn't part of some clever manipulation on my part, because to the core and at the core have essentially the same meaning to me--and that is that you're talking about evil that cannot be changed. What I think is at the core of people is freedom of choice--you can choose to do anything you can conceive. And whatever you do, however you end up is a result of the choices you make. Knowing the concept of evil, being tempted to do evil, thinking evil thoughts is not the same as being evil. It's only when one chooses to do evil instead of good that one becomes evil. It's a matter of making a choice and then taking action as a result of that choice.[/quote]


Yes, this is our fundamental difference--you can think every day about how you could embezzle money from your job. But if you never do so, what evil have you committed. What's the difference between evil thoughts and day-dreaming? If your boss could know what you're thinking, it likely would bother him, but as far as the authorities are concerned, you've done nothing wrong. I think that also applies on any spiritual or religious basis.

I don't think the fact we are tempted at times makes us bad: if anything, facing temptation and not yielding to it I think makes us stronger. If we're never tempted to step over the line, then being good doesn't have much meaning. It's our free will and the choices we make that determines if we do bad or do good.

I don't think the law and legality and societal pressures to conform fully explain why most of us are generally good on the surface. Suppose for a moment if our whole society had broken down to the point where there are no police, no courts, no prison, no social restraints to prevent you from taking whatever you want, killing whoever you want, raping anyone you want, and just running amuck for the fun of it. Would you do so? I doubt it. I think your behavor wouldn't change much at all because you're basicly good, whether as a result of what you've learned from your environment or a result of your "core." As far as I'm concerned, what we think "is not worth the paper it's written on." It's what we do. I can tell you from experience that in rasing kids, it's not what you tell or teach them that most influences their character, it's what they see and hear you do. For instance, you can tell your kids not to smoke but if they see you smoking 3 packs a day, they're more likely to try it by sneaking your own cigarettes.

I think it's impossible to answer that question.People become good or bad due to their environment and people they meet.

__________________
"Anything less than immortality is a complete waste of time."