That's the point Jim. In all of the examples you listed it is pretty much understood by the majority that these acts are considered not good. Yes of course such acts do come under normal human behavoiur but only in so much as normal humans have commited such acs. However if we consider what is normal to be what the majority agree's then murder is not as normal as it would seem.
Indeed I must confess that part of my reason for creating this thread is to try to understand the argument against a creator God for the reason of the existance of evil. I'm still nto getting it though. Why is it a bad thing that we seek out the company of each other? Also to do so does not necisarily mean that we are not competent on our own, without others of our species to help. On 30 June, 10:54, retiredjim34 <[email protected]> wrote: > Lee - thanks for considering my proposed definition. You ask: How can > normal human behavior be defined as evil? I suspect that it largely is > a matter of viewpoint. Surely the KKK didn't consider lynching negroes > evil; Nor did Hitler consider the holocaust evil, or the Romans > crucifiction of the Christians, or maybe even a mother's murder of a > molester of her child. I expect you have heard of the theodicy > problem: given an all powerful, all good God, why does evil exist in > this world? Many have proposed their answer to this question. The > answers are summarized in Philosophies for Dummies - 1. All evil is > punishment for sin. 2. All evil results from the misuse of free will. > 3. Evil requires a moral choice which leads to soul building. 4. Some > combination of 1-3. > Instead of these views of evil from afar, I propose a view of evil > from within the moment. It's purpose and function is to bring us > together. In that sense it is an antidote to good, which as I said > tends to let us think that we've got it made and need no one. Aren't > these responses to good and evil the normal human responses.? I think > so. How's that for strange? > > On Jun 29, 2:49 am, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > That's a strange way of seeing it Jim. > > > I would think that as our speices is undeniably social then > > incorperated in the norm is the need for human contact, as such how > > can what can only be considered normal behavour stand up to being > > defined as evil? > > > On 27 June, 22:01, retiredjim34 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > How about this as an answer? Evil is whatever brings us together, > > > makes us desparate for the comfort of one another, while good is all > > > that makes us think we are independent, don't need anyone, have things > > > nailed, are the very best and can do anything we want. Or is that too > > > simple an answer? > > > > On Jun 24, 1:51 am, Lee <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > A simple question, or is it?- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
