Good/bad people or good/bad deeds... - Page 4

heart · 03-14-2008, 02:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 6sticks

I'm no moral relativist, I just find it ironic how you can label someone whose job was essentially to seek out "evil" as evil. Not that I disagree. But what makes you right and him wrong? It's all a matter of opinion. Which is why I consider these discussions to be pointless.

Truth is what makes the difference. It is not all a matter of opinion. I have no problem with irony. Life is full of irony. Being unable to see through irony makes this statement so true:

"We would rather forgive the evil proliferating all around us than the rebellion against it, which we mistake for the true evil" - Arno Gruen (Betrayal of the Self)

Evil most often clothes itself in light and hides there, taking over that which was good to begin with.

The problem in this world is when people give up because seeking truth is hard. It is easier to just shrug and let evil proliferate while we continue playing.

Wandering · 03-14-2008, 02:49 AM

I don't believe people are born equally aware of Good and Evil.

I don't believe people are raised to be equally aware of Good and Evil.

I don't believe people agree on what Good and Evil are.

I don't believe people agree on the respective value and usefulness of Good and Evil.

In short: I can't find a single common position to judge people from. So I can't vote

6sticks · 03-14-2008, 04:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by heart

Truth is what makes the difference.

So it's true that Torquemada was evil? How do you know that?

heart · 03-14-2008, 04:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 6sticks

So it's true that Torquemada was evil? How do you know that?

I didn't say he was evil.

We can only really judge acts.

Ezra · 03-14-2008, 11:58 AM

I'm an NT and I voted for the first choice. However, I find the idea of good and evil in any context quite dubious. As I've said before, I'm amoral. I also always find a rational argument for why people like Hitler are not evil. So, when I voted, it was in context. I think that from a pragmatic, worldly standpoint, people are fundamentally 'good' or they 'mean well', but often do bad things. I also think individuals are easily changeable in this respect; I think they can become more self-serving, and while they'll still maintain a certain empathy with humans, wildlife, the environment etc., this will be buried deep down, and often won't affect their actions. They'll unsuccessfully attempt to justify everything they do in good terms, and will continue to do it anyway. To illustrate, take an industrial tycoon. The more money and power they gain, the more self-serving and greedy they become. Where there might once have been principles there is now nothing. A second kind of business magnate might be one who starts off with no principles, and makes their way up through deceit and manipulation. Daniel Plainview in There Will Be Blood is a good example of this in my opinion.

View Poll Results: What is your outlook on mankind?
I'm an NT and believe that people are basically good, but do bad things.	5	25.00%
I'm an NT and believe that people are basically bad, but do good things.	3	15.00%
I'm an NF and believe that people are basically good, but do bad things.	6	30.00%
I'm an NF and believe that people are basically bad, but do good things.	2	10.00%
I'm an SJ and believe that people are basically good, but do bad things.	1	5.00%
I'm an SJ and believe that people are basically bad, but do good things.	2	10.00%
I'm an SP and believe that people are basically good, but do bad things.	0	0%
I'm an SP and believe that people are basically bad, but do good things.	1	5.00%
Voters: 20. You may not vote on this poll

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
What's Good?	CoosCoos	Welcomes and Introductions	10	03-09-2008 04:50 PM
Who is good at math?	Uberfuhrer	MBTI (tm) and other personality matrices	43	03-07-2008 01:50 AM
Good and bad should be exclusive.	Magic Poriferan	Philosophy and Spirituality	27	01-28-2008 05:28 AM

03-14-2008, 02:49 AM	#32 (permalink)
Wandering Highly Hollow Join Date: Dec 2007 Type: INFJ Location: Slovenia (but I'm French) Posts: 867	I don't believe people are born equally aware of Good and Evil. I don't believe people are raised to be equally aware of Good and Evil. I don't believe people agree on what Good and Evil are. I don't believe people agree on the respective value and usefulness of Good and Evil. In short: I can't find a single common position to judge people from. So I can't vote

03-14-2008, 11:58 AM	#35 (permalink)
Ezra Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Type: ENTJ Location: UK Posts: 492	I'm an NT and I voted for the first choice. However, I find the idea of good and evil in any context quite dubious. As I've said before, I'm amoral. I also always find a rational argument for why people like Hitler are not evil. So, when I voted, it was in context. I think that from a pragmatic, worldly standpoint, people are fundamentally 'good' or they 'mean well', but often do bad things. I also think individuals are easily changeable in this respect; I think they can become more self-serving, and while they'll still maintain a certain empathy with humans, wildlife, the environment etc., this will be buried deep down, and often won't affect their actions. They'll unsuccessfully attempt to justify everything they do in good terms, and will continue to do it anyway. To illustrate, take an industrial tycoon. The more money and power they gain, the more self-serving and greedy they become. Where there might once have been principles there is now nothing. A second kind of business magnate might be one who starts off with no principles, and makes their way up through deceit and manipulation. Daniel Plainview in There Will Be Blood is a good example of this in my opinion.