What is the banality of evil?

Question

I'm writing a paper for 10th grade English and I was wondering if my assumption of the banility of evil is correct:

People trying to do good (i.e. follow orders) can commit evil.

-or-

Good people can do bad things.

Answer 1

here's another one: "The road to Hell is lined with good intentions".

Answer 2

How approximately Blondi? Hitler's puppy. The suggestion of the banality of evil is that the exceptional evil acts in historical past had been dedicated via usual persons who idea that what they had been doing used to be ordinary and right. So Hitler had this puppy that he cherished and knowledgeable and took exceptional care of (identical to a ordinary individual could), and, but, he dedicated probably the most evil acts identified to guy.

Answer 3

The problem with the entire concept is the nature of evil itself. What is 'evil'? It's a relative term, and a value judgement and it varies from culture to culture, century to century, person to person. Since there is no single, valid defintion of evil, or 'bad' or 'good', you cannot speak conclusively about any of these things. Perhaps THAT should be what your paper is about. The fact that evil is an utterly relative concept changing from moment to moment depending on the circumstance and the person making the pronouncement.

Answer 4

I believe that the banality of evil means that evil is not taken seriously and is treated as banal in everyday life - just another constant, instead of the serious and potentially deadly sin that it is.

Answer 5

People are by nature evil. Doing good is just a way to suppress it.