Can you define both good and evil in a universally accepted way WITHOUT using an example (like the Nazis or Mother Theresa).
Is it possible to know good without knowing evil and vice versa?
2007-05-26 04:47:00 · 11 answers · asked by Last Ent Wife (RCIA) 7 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
RedQueen - It is refreshing to find a non-Christian who is willing to define evil and good. Your answer is excellent.
It's too bad that most other people have chosen to fall into the gray mist of relativism and claim that neither good nor evil truly exists.
2007-05-26 04:59:26 · update #1
You nailed it Hannah, good job, my point exactly.
2007-05-26 05:16:07 · update #2
Yes, it is possible to define good ane evil without using a comparison. One may compare the Nazis with Mother Teresa. People obviously feel that Nazis were evil (and I am not gainsaying that). People also feel Mother Teresa was good (and I am not gainsaying that). But what is the standard for definition?
In order to define without comparison, one must have an authoritative and dependable standard. A touchstone, if you will.
And yes, it is possible to know good without knowing evil. Adam and Eve, for instance, knew good long before evil was introduced into their home.
The bottom line is opinions are like noses - everybody's got one. Our own personal, often selfish, and subjective opinions are not a reliable barometer by which to measure good and evil. We must have a standard and that standard must have as its source someone who is capable, responsible, righteous and powerful enough to set the standard and enforce it.
That source is Almighty God. It is He who defines what is acceptable (good) and what is not (evil). He teaches us how to avoid the bad and pursue the good.
It is as Christ himself described in Matthew 7:21-23. Many people will be calling him lord and doing most wonderful and wondrous things; yet he himself will tell them: "I NEVER knew you. Get away from me." He then calls their wondrous works "lawlessness." Imagine that. All the time they thought they were good, and probably other people thought they were good as well. Yet Christ bluntly called them something else. And why is that? Because they tried to decided for themselves what people ought to be doing; they tried to make up their OWN definition of good and then they compared themselves with themselves.
This is why we need a standard.
Hannah J Paul
2007-05-26 05:02:03 · answer #1 · answered by Hannah J Paul 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Evil is any act committed that leads to the destruction of another, without necessarily leading to their death. An abusive husband who breaks his wife's spirit, or an abusive parent who destroys any chance of a child leading a normal life is every bit as evil as a mass murderer.
Goodness is a quality possessed by someone who strives to do no harm to another, and who will go out of their way to be helpful. Good people bring out the best in you, and put your welfare ahead of their own. They practice unconditional love, or at least try to. They are accepting of others.
I believe that we ultimately end up knowing both, there's no way around it. But someone who has known only evil will think that this evil is good. Now that's a frightening thought.
Thank you.
2007-05-26 04:54:14 · answer #2 · answered by iamnoone 7 · 4⤊ 0⤋
I just thought of a good way to define ood and evil. Good is when you put the needs of wants and others above your own.
Of course one cant do this all the time. But it is hard to be evil when you are being selfless
2007-05-26 05:00:05 · answer #3 · answered by Don't Fear the Reaper 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
sturdy might want to be defined with out evil, yet evil won't be able to be defined with out sturdy. Huh? Evil is the absence of sturdy, as darkness is truly in basic terms the absence of sunshine. sturdy signifies that some thing is useful to all in touch. Doing sturdy potential you're doing issues that earnings all those tormented with the help of what you do. i do not might want to understand what evil is to outline sturdy.
2016-11-27 20:36:48 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The chair I am sitting in exists as an object. Good and evil are concepts imagined.
2007-05-26 04:54:52 · answer #5 · answered by RT 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Yes. Even if there were only "good" in the world, there would be varying levels of "good".
The "least good" in that world would be evil.
Just find the greatest lower bound on "goodness" in whatever world you're in and you can define "evil".
2007-05-26 04:53:29 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Yes: Good is if it is beneficial for people, if you help others, respect others, care for them, and if you generally try to improve things.
Evil is if you cause serious harm to others (unless it is done in defence).
2007-05-26 04:54:51 · answer #7 · answered by Elly 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The powerful or the masters, look about, and that which they like is called "good" and that which they despise is called "bad".
The weak or the slaves, look to their master, and that which their master calls "good", they call "evil". That which their master calls "bad", they call "good".
And that is the relative difference between good and bad, and good and evil.
2007-05-26 04:52:26 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Of course it is. Certain things are always going to be evil, like murder, stealing, cheating, adultery.
2007-05-26 04:52:12 · answer #9 · answered by sherry312 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Try not to define, and you will be in bliss.
Duality needs to be transcended.
All duality is futile.
Seek the absolute.
2007-05-26 04:51:19 · answer #10 · answered by V 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋