On Wednesday, January 2, 2013 3:58:45 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote:
>
>  On 1/2/2013 12:46 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: 
>
>
>
> On Wednesday, January 2, 2013 3:05:10 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote: 
>>
>>  On 1/2/2013 11:13 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote: 
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wednesday, January 2, 2013 12:57:34 PM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: 
>>>
>>>
>>>  On 02 Jan 2013, at 02:01, Craig Weinberg wrote:
>>>
>>> Chemotherapy Good or Evil?
>>>
>>>
>>>  Better than nothing for most people having some disease.
>>> Worst than THC injection, plausibly for the same group of people.
>>>
>>>  Here the Evil is only in the fact that minorities hides information 
>>> from the majority, and this for the minority's interests.
>>> This leads to harmful consequences for the majority.
>>>
>>>  Bruno
>>>  
>>
>> I was thinking more of how chemotherapy is ambiguous as far as it being 
>> something which can enhance life by inevitably diminishing it, but sure, 
>> the politics of it is an issue also.
>>
>> If I had to get into a definition of good and evil I would go more toward 
>> a political direction - senseless inequality of power tends to lead to 
>> corruption and crime. Crime and corruption tends to lead to scapegoating or 
>> a misuse of sense. The combination of corrupt actions and distortion of 
>> truth to cover them up is probably as close to evil as I can think of.
>>  
>>
>> Anything that causes great net suffering of people can be considered 
>> evil: cancer, small pox, AIDS, tsunamis,...  I see no reason to limit it to 
>> social/political causes.
>>  
>  
> Do you think that viruses and tsunamis are well served by the label 'Evil'?
>  
>
> ?? I'm not interested in serving them.
>

Obviously. I meant 'Do you think that it serves us to label natural 
phenomena outside of our control as Evil'?
 

>   Values are human values and each person has his own - although there is 
> a lot of consistency.  I think society and individuals are well served by 
> labeling some viruses and tsunamis as 'evil' because that means we should 
> cooperate to mitigate them.  And in fact we have: We eliminated small pox.  
> We created a tsunami warning system.  Actions I count as good.
>

The action of mitigating damage is good, just as the intentional neglect of 
such actions are evil, but the non-human cause of the damage is neither 
good nor evil. If you get an electric shock, it does not mean that voltage 
is evil.

Craig


> Brent
> Unfortunately it is the prerogative of evil that to seem so is to
> be so.
>       --- Bertrand Russell
>
>
>  

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/-/SzjN6yHj9NsJ.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Reply via email to