One word: Evolution. First we were amoebas, then we were fish, then we were monkeys. During the time that we were evolving from monkeys into humans, we developed some new abilities: language, math skills, manual dexterity, etc. Another one of these tools was morality. Early humans learned that if they did things that made other people mad (like steal their coconuts or whatever) sometimes those people killed us. Therefore people who consistently acted in their own best interest and ignored the interests of others did not reproduce and pass on their genetic material. The people that did pass on their genetic material had an understanding of when to act for oneself and when to act for others. This is the answer to your second question, "where do we get our sense of good and evil."
As for the creation of evil itself: evil is not a real thing existing independently of human beings. It is an invention of human minds. It's a name we give to certain behaviors. That's part of language - we put things in categories and give them names. This is where we get our concept of evil.
As for the creation of the acts which we call evil (this is probably the answer you're looking for): people act in ways determined by their genes and their surroundings. People who got those evil genes we talked about earlier act in evil ways: they rob banks because they want money. It's all just human behavior.
People didn't "wake up one day hating each other." We are complex beings who use our cognition for many things. One of these things we do with our minds is to recognize rivals and enemies so that we can avoid them or prepare for encounters with them. It's the smart thing to do, in an evolutionary sense.
2006-08-29 01:21:22
·
answer #1
·
answered by ? 4
·
1⤊
2⤋
As you said, I don't believe in moral absolutes, but I still believe in good and evil, I just think that these concepts are different for different people. Our morals come chiefly from the society in which we live, "right" and "wrong" stem directly from the legal system. Evil didn't exist until the first law was written. The main problem with moral absolutism is: which path do we take? Should we follow the teachings of Jesus or Muhammed? Or would we be better off making human sacrifices to appease the sun god?
2006-08-29 01:35:22
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
To slightly modify an answer you've had many times, I don't believe in moral absolutes, and I don't believe in good and evil. I believe that in nature there are predators and there are prey, and any given creature is likely to be both at the same time, given the existence of a food chain.
I believe mankind began to identify concepts of good and evil in the days when different societal models were becoming established, and that they were roughly drawn along lines of "good for the tribe" and "bad for the tribe". Killing a fellow tribe member was a bad thing to do, as it lessened the strength and the chances of survival for all, while collectively killing a majority of a nearby tribe might be good, as the survivors would be integrated into the winning tribe and increase its ability to survive and feed itself. Hence the beginnings of the distinction between murder as bad or evil, but the collective act of war as a potential benefit.
The sense of right and wrong, which many believe is some innate "gift of god" or indeed the result of eating the apple in Eden and somehow in that action falling away from God, could well be nothing more than this development of a social code of what is good and bad for the community - those who transgressed the code of the tribe, for example by killing a fellow member, could be punished by exile, servitude or death. Hence we developed this "sense" of right and wrong based on punishments for transgression of social rules. Later of course, when we stopped being quite as concerned with the primitive business of staying alive until tomorrow and had time to wax fanciful and invent gods, the disapproval of these gods became the ultimate idea of punishment, and turned what might loosely be called "crime" - ie acting against the tribe or society - into "Evil" - ie acting against the gods of that society and their rules.
2006-08-29 03:50:38
·
answer #3
·
answered by mdfalco71 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Right and Wrong or Evil and Good are human concepts, they are contentious areas, depending on who you ask you will get different answers.
One could say there is no good or evil that things just 'are' and therefore there is no origin to either.
All we know as human beings is that we feel sensations or feelings that we wish to continue and those we wish to end. On that note i would argue that the origins of right and wrong or good and evil are just extentions or those sensations/ feelings i.e. those (or those things) who cause the feelings we wish to end become evil and vise versa, it is of course more complex and differs but i would say the origins lay there.
2006-08-29 01:33:49
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
there was no origin. Its just the way we are. some people do good things others do bad (evil) things because of the way they are brought up , like racism can start when the kid is small.
morality is differant from person to person and even in christianity not every person believes in the same morality and thinking. good and bad differs from person to person. right and wrong is brought from culture, family, friends, tv, internet and on yourself.
2006-08-29 01:34:36
·
answer #5
·
answered by lalala2512 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Southpaw got it right. It's a matter of nature. To a mouse, a cat is evil. To an insect, a bat is evil. To human beings, people who are different from us are evil. That basic "my blood relatives are good, and strangers are evil" notion is very continuous across the animal species.
2006-08-29 01:26:45
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
"Evil" is just a part of nature. You watch animals and you will be able to see this. Banishment from herds or groups. Killing each other, stealing, greed etc. it can all be seen throughout nature. Humans just take it to another level sense they think differently.
But I suppose you think Satan caused evil in nature too, so therefore what's the point of my arguing with you.
2006-08-29 01:22:28
·
answer #7
·
answered by Southpaw 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
Evil is a judgment call in itself and in the eye of the beholder too. Christianity teaches people to "see" things as evil, thus teaching them to be that way themselves.
2006-08-29 02:15:42
·
answer #8
·
answered by American Spirit 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
I am a christain don't please don't listen to them. I mean like animals eating each other is evil sure... But since the fall of Adam and Eve life has had a food chain. Give your life to Christ. Please don't think the church has enough people. The church is here just to get unbelievers to believe. But I became a believer at six... You can become a believer at any age. But please find a church and go. I am trying to keep people from going to hell. It doesn't sound fun and I don't want to find out if it is.
http://hyndmanministrycenter.org/
This is the church I go too. 450 people on a Sunday. This is the link above.
Glory to the lamb.
2006-08-29 01:36:50
·
answer #9
·
answered by Jesus Freak!!! 1
·
0⤊
1⤋
This 'evil' that you speak of seems to be a natural behaviour of all living species, man is no different. Plants strangle each other, animals kill and steal from each other, so the the term evil is relative...
2006-08-29 03:02:40
·
answer #10
·
answered by Eureka! 4
·
0⤊
0⤋