I mean, idrk how you got that. I thought I was consistently relating it to how good and evil aren’t objective. I was just able to rely on one point the whole time since it kind of shuts down the entire argument.
God, I love being able to edit things
1 Like
Correct me if I’m wrong, but seems to me like you’re saying:
Yes, we can find out if anything is true if we know that the assumptions under which we came to that conclusion are true, but for us humans that is simply not possible?
If that’s the case I think we can agree on this:
Thing could be true, but for all our human intents and purposes that doesn’t matter because we could never know if it actually is. And so, since we can’t prove these thing neither true nor false, it could only be true subjectively.
Tl;dr : The concept of good and evil is subjective as there is no clear basis on how to define it without abiding by a human definition.
Wait this thread is still going? I thought this thread would have gotten an answer already. The fundamentals of the concept of good and evil have never existed up until humans developed a plethora of religions which started to introduce some sort of law you had to abide with.
Good and evil is a concept that we currently abide by its rudimentary description of doing a good thing or doing a bad thing. Good and evil are the mere concepts that humans have put into place as they started to develop religions.
Take the concept of maybe the ancient Egyptian god Ma’at, who was believed to have set the basic principles every person had to follow up until their death where their heart is weighed against Ma’ats feather.
Now since when was the concept of good and evil ever an aspect of nature? It is something that we humans have defined over the course of our history and good and evil is a concept defined by humans. This this is an subjective belief due to each and every one of us having a different notion to good and evil.
1 Like
Let’s define subjectivity: an object that has a meaning that can change depending on the viewers perspective.
Objectivity, then, is an object with a meaning that does not change no matter who is viewing it.
Thus, by this definition, my statement that good and evil are objective is true because I have shown that it is possible to find that objective meaning so long as one is omniscient.
I see you haven’t read any statement I have made.
If we give everything in the world a value, simply for existing, then we can find the true meaning of good and evil by the simple principle of utilitarianism. Good is doing something that benefits the total happiness and existence of the majority, evil is attempting to harm the total happiness and existence of the majority.
Thus, good and evil are true aspects of existence that can be objectively analyzed, given total knowledge of everything in existence.
viewers perspective
that’s how good and evil works. you view good and evil based on your belief.
can easily apply to a single person, it doesn’t necessarily need to apply to everyone. If doing good is literally throwing a nuclear bomb on Japan that stops us from fighting without regarding the fact that radiation is gonna be thrown around and killing a bunch of people i dunno whatchu on about
If dropping the nukes is beneficial to the majority, it’s good.
that’s a messed up way to think
See the thing is I don’t feel like it’s good at all.
But it is.
And those are two fundamentally different things.
If you sat me down at a table and showed me, exactly, precisely, how and why the nukes show a greater total benefit than a loss… I would probably agree with it happening.
But without that, I don’t like it.
It’s an old argument with the nukes. Some state that the entire Japanese nation was willing to shatter itself to pieces fighting the Americans, causing far more casualties than the nukes did. Others argue that this is false.
I don’t know, really no one can predict what would’ve happened had the nukes not been dropped, but if I did?
My views on them would be different.
exactly
it’s subjective
;-;
No it isn’t.
It’s objective. Total gain > total loss, then that’s good. Total loss > total gain, it’s bad.
Bad and evil are two different things though
…I’m using them as synonyms.
bruh you missin’ the point
what’s good to some people is bad to other people
1 Like
Yes of course it is.
But the point is that there is objective good and objective evil.
What people think about it has nothing to do with that.
bruh then what’s the point of good and evil, it’s literally all just fighting
I’m extremely confused by that statement but ok.
Honestly if you’re gonna ask what the point of anything is I’m just gonna say at this point it’s getting religious.
eh sure
whatever you believe
Good and evil don’t truly exist, they’re just terms used to describe a point of view. If you think someone is evil, in their point of view, they’re good (Unless they’re purposely doing bad things for fun.) Same with bad and good. Just a perspective.
I will humbly ask you to read the entire thread starting from the first message or otherwise please leave and let it die my brain is exploding.
Alright