Is there such a thing as pure evil, and if not how do you explain people like Hitler?

Answer 1

Ok, so get this. Most modern day theologins will argue that not only is there not such a thing as pure evil but (and here is where it gets interesting) Evil does not even exist as it's own entity. Evil is simply the absence of good but can not stand on it's own.

To answer the Hitler thing: At the time he really believed that he was doing the good and right thing. Yes, now we can look back and we know that he was a mass murdering psychopath but at the time he really believed that he was the good guy. To be an act of "pure" evil the act would need to be so bad that no one could ever deny the fact that it was evil.

Answer 2

This is an interesting question.

Firstly, Hitler might be a recent example of evil but there are worse, believe it or not.

I can give many examples, but I'll chose just two.

Ghandi and Mother Teresa are on the top of most peoples good list but Ghandi slept with female children and it is also said that Mother Teresa never provided care for the people in the hospices she created, but it was a place she went to revel in their suffering. It is said that she believed that their suffering was more godly than caring for them.

I think that good and evil are in everyone so no one is just one or the other.

I read other peoples answers and wanted to add that Hitler killed 2 million Jews, the other 3 million were from Poland, Russia, etc.

Answer 3

I do not believe in the philosophy of Absolutism - so I do not believe that the character value of "pure evil" exists as a material thing itself. "Pure evil' is used as a description of something specifically observed and witnessed; but "pure evil" does not exists as a material thing.

About Hitler - what he did was evil action, and it was wrong.
I think Hitler knew it was wrong, too. He preyed on men's insecurity and selfishness. Hitler had the mentality of a "reptile brain" - he was selfish, and violent, and destructive, and power hungry.

However, as mankind becomes more civilized, humankind is able to control the reptile thinking, and rise above it to use his brain so that he uses the intellectual and spiritual part of a civilized human being.

Answer 4

This is my opinion of the topic at, of course this is a Islamic approach to the issue since I myself am a Muslim. This is adapted from Hassanian Rajabali's debate, he is a world renowned speaker. even though you may think that this is bias, but it make logical sense just read on.

There's no such thing as absolute evil. Absolute evil does not exist--it is relative--and it changes its position depending on which side you take, and which angle of perspective you take. That which is good for one side can be bad for another simultaneously as is the case in a relative frame of reference.
I can say that I can be extremely larger with relations to an atom, and at the same time, I am extremely small with the relations to the universe. It depends on my frame of reference, when things change positions. Thus when we talk about relativity, when we talk about good and evil, they take positions inside but nothing in the universe is absolutely evil. There is no such thing.

Let me give another example, lies versus truth. You will find that to lie is evil and to speak the truth is good. You will see that lies cannot exist without the truth, but on the other hand, truth can exist without lie. For example, if I say, I always lie. Does it make sense? No. Because there is no essence of truth in my statement, thus it becomes nonsensical. Therefore, truth is a necessary constituent to lies. But I can certainly say that, "I always speak the truth", or "I sometimes speak the truth", it makes perfect sense, because there is an element of truth in my statement, and thus my statement makes sense.
Thus when it comes to the relative perspective within the Islamic position, that is what it means. When Allah says, min sharri ma qalaq--by the evil or by that rejection. What does 'Evil' mean from the Islamic perspective? It means that which lacks good. It's just like 'darkness'. It cannot exist. You cannot measure darkness. It is lack of light that you can measure. You cannot measure coldness. It is lack of heat, because it is only heat that our senses measure, not coldness.

So from the Islamic perspective, it is a relativistic position, and evil is a trial. When evil comes into play would we say that when a teacher gives exam, and each question has 5 multiple choices, and only one is right, and four are wrong. From that perspective you say that one of them is a good answer. If you select the right one you get rewarded, and if you select any of the other four, it is evil, because you get punished by getting a zero for that question. Now, would you say that the teacher is inherent to evil for having put four wrong answers to one right answer? Or would you say that the exam is so preposterous that evil absolutely outweighs the good. Would you say that the teacher should remove all evil, and make all answers correct? In fact, you will say that you are fooling me--you are now shaking my own foundation--that you are actually insulting me. Either give me the exam and allow me to select my own ways, and to see the difference between the good and the bad, the right and the wrong, or else, don't try me.

Answer 5

Read Dorothy Sayers Mind of the Maker. She explains that evil is the absence of good. There cannot be evil without good. Pleasure is good but many times it is corrupted. God made pleasure for man. Everything man does is to bring him pleasure/happiness. Hitler got pleasure from the terrible things he did. He was getting a corrupted pleasure from what he did. It was a distorted form of good for himself. There may have been so slight of good in it that it seems pure evil, but pleasure was coming from it. Hitler is NOT good, and his interntions were NOT good, but his evil could not be without good because evil cannot survive on it's own. God created all things and nothing can be without him. Sadly God's good can be made into evil.

Answer 6

This fairly isn't what you have been finding for, yet "Evil" is an imaginary, guy-made concept that does no longer exist interior the actual international. Hitler is to blame for the deaths of 6 million Jews, Stalin for the deaths of 30 million Russians ... yet once you have been to ask each and every of them in the event that they have been evil they might say "of course no longer, i'm basically doing what i think of is nice, or what's going to convey me greater skill/happiness/etc, etc" Now don't get me incorrect, that doesn't advise that they are precise, or that their movements at the instant are not poor, all i'm asserting is they at the instant are not absolute evil or the different form of evil, basically human beings. they could be sociopaths, they could be deranged, they could be many stuff that each and every person consequence interior the main terrible movements, yet evil remains a concept for fairy memories and horror movies. Now as far as determining on the worst of the two: a million. Adolph Hitler & Josef Stalin - Being a Russian Jew that had many family killed by the Nazi's I could circulate with Hitler, in spite of the undeniable fact that Stalin easily became into to blame for greater deaths, he did no longer come on the area of committing Genocide. 2. James Earl Ray & Lee Harvey Oswald - comparable (uncertain) 3. George Patton & Erwin Rommel - don't be attentive to 4. Saddam Hussein & Osama Bin encumbered - Sadam Hussein is to blame for many greater deaths. 5. The attack on Pearl Harbor & The firebombing of Dresden - the fire bombing of Dresden dessamated the completed city killing incredibly some greater human beings.

Answer 7

I believe, not in "pure evil," or in "pure good," but that people of good faith (whether that faith is religious or not) must name evil as we see it. Most evil is mixed in with all sorts of other stuff-- Hannah Arendt's book "The Banality of Evil" shows that evil flourishes best when there is no one with the sense or courage to speak against it and name it for what it is. It get's mushed in with everything else and happens so quietly that everyone wonders how they missed it. Evil is not a *big* event; it is an accumulation of smaller wrongs that no one bothers to deal with.

Answer 8

"Explaining Hitler" takes a less-than-simpleton answer, relating to his biography, cultural epoch, and dare I say -- genius?

He wasn't simply subjecting a population to his tyranny. He was voted into office.

Whole sectors of humanity have wildy different tastes. The Germans, Italians and Japanese had the conquering spirit to make the world for themselves, to glorify their nation and unite with historical perfection in the political body.

It's such a charlatan display to call the enemy "evil".
That's what a good general often does to incite his troops.
But that description doesn't make it so.

Had Einstein und Oppenheimer stayed in the Rhineland, your "evil" would be vastly different my glossy-eyed friend.

Answer 9

Yes, there is a Satan and he is pure evil. Humans also have the capacity for great evil apart from Satan because of our sinful natures. There is a biblical doctrine called Common Grace, which states that God exerts restraint on believers and non believers alike. He does this in varying degrees. The idea here is we are all capable of being a Hitler apart from God's grace. Some people, like Hitler, reject God so completely, that God completely removes His restraint.

Answer 10

"Evil" is relative. Don't believe that? Ask around, nobody will agree (and keep in mind you are, for the most part, only asking members of ONE culture)
I think Hitler was one evil dude, but thats not a universal attribute