Being Evil

[Alyxx Thorne]

Being evil is fun. Fact. But being nice can also be rewarding.

[Kirkreng]

Keyword: can

[Doom Shepherd]

But usually isn't. Very often, it's punished instead.

[Alyxx Thorne]

Morality is a greyzone. There's no black and white in the world, really.

[Pinkie Pie]

Morality is a greyzone. There's no black and white in the world, really.

So murdering children is up for debate morality-wise?

[Doom Shepherd]

Depends on how you define "murdering" and "children," doesn't it?

[Kirkreng]

Morality is a greyzone. There's no black and white in the world, really.

So murdering children is up for debate morality-wise?

Yes.

[Husker]

While it IS up for debate, you can assume it'll be a short one

[Estophelen]

People don't really mind being "evil". Humanity was evil for thousands of years. We like violence, we like wars, we like greed and selfishness. Nowadays we just shun it because from the society's point if view it's bad. Though give a random man an uniform and make him think he's not responsible of is actions, he won't really mind pillaging a town.

 

Good and Evil are just words anyway. In the old Crusades it was good to kill an "unbelieving dog" even if he was a civilian. Or what about a lynch mobs? "Let's murder that nigger because it's a good thing to do". History is filled with auch things. Basicly... it's a thing we're best at.

[Pinkie Pie]

That's insulting and depressing. But I can't really deny it. :/

[Ross Scott]

We like violence, we like wars, we like greed and selfishness.

I think you'll like my movie then.

[Axeldeath]

People don't really mind being "evil". Humanity was evil for thousands of years. We like violence, we like wars, we like greed and selfishness. Nowadays we just shun it because from the society's point if view it's bad. Though give a random man an uniform and make him think he's not responsible of is actions, he won't really mind pillaging a town.

 

Good and Evil are just words anyway. In the old Crusades it was good to kill an "unbelieving dog" even if he was a civilian. Or what about a lynch mobs? "Let's murder that nigger because it's a good thing to do". History is filled with auch things. Basicly... it's a thing we're best at

 

The thing is, these people didn't go out with the express desire to be "evil", they thought what they were doing was right, just even. Moral "rights" and "wrongs" are just what society decides they are. There's no such thing as a universal morality.

[Estophelen]

We like violence, we like wars, we like greed and selfishness.

I think you'll like my movie then.

 

Filled with the worst the humanity has to offer? Yes please.

 

 

People don't really mind being "evil". Humanity was evil for thousands of years. We like violence, we like wars, we like greed and selfishness. Nowadays we just shun it because from the society's point if view it's bad. Though give a random man an uniform and make him think he's not responsible of is actions, he won't really mind pillaging a town.

 

Good and Evil are just words anyway. In the old Crusades it was good to kill an "unbelieving dog" even if he was a civilian. Or what about a lynch mobs? "Let's murder that nigger because it's a good thing to do". History is filled with auch things. Basicly... it's a thing we're best at

 

The thing is, these people didn't go out with the express desire to be "evil", they thought what they were doing was right, just even. Moral "rights" and "wrongs" are just what society decides they are. There's no such thing as a universal morality.

 

Ah, but isn't there? I don't know, though I don't really believe in Universal Morality. All I see are people doing what they want as long they get away with it and society leaves them alone. Even selfless acts fall into this category. When you donate to charity for example, it's still doing what you want, it's just more socially acceptable than beating a dog in public. But implied morality has its merits. You are less likely to be killed than in Medieval (it also depends on the country you live in of course).

[Vapymid]

There's no such thing as a universal morality.

 

This I disagree with. Even higher apes and cetaceans show signs of morality in their social interaction.

 

When you donate to charity for example, it's still doing what you want.

 

Doing what you want is not sign of immorality. If universal morality exists then it would make you want to do moral things and if it doesn't there is at least 50/50 chance that what you want to do would be moral.

 

Regards

[Estophelen]

I'm not saying that doing what you want is immoral. I'm saying that I don't believe in Universal Morality.

[Axeldeath]

This I disagree with. Even higher apes and cetaceans show signs of morality in their social interaction.

 

Except that morality is defined by how the apes socially interact, intelligent social beings require some sort of "morality" to allow their society to grow and prosper. Lone animals lack any sort of morality and human morals have changed very significantly throughout the last couple thousand years. This "morality" is just another survival instinct, and it will always be in constant flux as to what those morals might be depending on how the society is structured.

[Vapymid]

I'm not saying that doing what you want is immoral. I'm saying that I don't believe in Universal Morality.

 

Sorry, I must have misunderstood your post.

 

As far as I am concerned I think some basic "morality" must be as objective as other natural laws. In fact, I would say that "morality" is our subjective interpretation of the objective laws defining the evolution of life in general and social interaction between individuals in a society in particular. Just like we sense gravity as "up" and "down" we also sense the events affecting our lives as "moral" or "immoral".

 

Regards

[Vapymid]

This "morality" is just another survival instinct, and it will always be in constant flux as to what those morals might be depending on how the society is structured.

 

Well, yes, but underneath the flux and fluff there would be the base of "core" morality which is necessary to survive. For example, the notions of fairness and cheating. No matter what the extraneous "values" are at any given moment, these appear to be fundamental to any social group.

 

Regards

[Axeldeath]

This "morality" is just another survival instinct, and it will always be in constant flux as to what those morals might be depending on how the society is structured.

 

Well, yes, but underneath the flux and fluff there would be the base of "core" morality which is necessary to survive. For example, the notions of fairness and cheating. No matter what the extraneous "values" are at any given moment, these appear to be fundamental to any social group.

 

Regards

 

But I believe this falls down when it comes to people's beliefs. For example, I believe that forcefully taxing the rich to give to the poor is morally wrong, yet another might be of the opposite mindset, they might think that not doing so is unfair to the less well off.

[Vapymid]

Yes, the farther is goes from the basics, the fuzzier it becomes...

 

Regards