another problem of evil

[puto]

Evil that which is not good; exists because the Scholastic proved this using rationalism. You are lacking, absence, or privation; to know good and evil (Coogan 15.) A free person is a good thing; you should and could have done otherwise and have a sense of moral responsibility (Freeland 5.)
Saint Aquinas, “...Masters of their own actions…” (Davies 575.) Evil being one of the greatest intellectual problems of history (Cambridge 6); Spinoza wrote having an opinion might establish reasons in your opinions.
A determinist data dumps; but flourishes in quoting facts (Gould 88.) Choose wisely as Qoheleth the philosopher wrote, “...Eat, drink, and be merry…” (KJV.)
So, are we free or determined? Evil has been proven. Should we change the legal system; if determinism is proven true? You have moral responsibility; if free (Davies 575.) The ability to do otherwise without being coerced; freedom in the traditional sense. The choice is yours; past events or the traditional sense of freedom. One is sense;the other is logic.

[popeye1945]

Evil is a human evaluation referring to what threatens or is bad for biological well-being and its continued existence.

[Iwannaplato]

Evil is something that is so afraid of self-knowledge it is willing to kill everything it encounters rather than looking at itself.

It can be a part of any of us, or more or less embodied in a simple whole in one person. I'm not closed to it sort of hovering around like an astral meme in some places and organizations. Like a meme virus with carriers.

[Perspective]

I doubt you'll have a big loss of options: bad person, terrible person, terrible act, unpleasant company, not someone to leave alone with the kids, horrific act....

There are less laden options.

I once had to deal with a narcissist and attendant flying monkeys and did use the word evil sometimes in my horror and exasperation. But I'm not claiming I came in contact with an ontological force. I see language as also expressive.

The term ‘flying monkeys’ is another way of saying ‘abuse by proxy’ or having someone else do the bidding of in this case a narcissist. The term flying monkey was coined after the flying monkeys in the Wizard of Oz that were under the spell of the Wicked Witch of the East, to do her bidding against Dorothy and her friends.

A tangent, but I love that term. I never liked the Wizard of Oz much, but what a nice metaphor.

Lately, I’ve been thinking about the notion of flying monkeys in 3 different contexts…
1) My family of origin & diagnosed BPD parent who gets other siblings to hate on or manipulate other siblings.
2) Mormon cult who has “officially called” missionary-flying monkeys as well as “every member a missionary” &
3) Common Cold lockdowns/PSY OPS paranoia that involved untold harm - while flying monkeys were telling others “wear your mask to eat” or “you better get the experimental shot that caused premature death in all animals.”

Flying monkeys are stupid though. Their only strength is in #’s - herd mentality. By themselves they prove incapable of the most elementary reasoning skills.

Evil (or immorality) is significantly based on lies so simply highlighting truthful facts can at least help you maintain integrity in the face of it. Evil is also based on a refusal to take responsibility and instead continually shifting blame. Once you see this, you realize whoever is engaging in lying or shifting blame is coming not from apparent strength, but deep insecurity.

It’s important to NOT engage in either-or fallacy. Nobody is 100% good nor 100% evil. But people with patterns of acting immorally are like a glass of water with a drop of poison - lots of good but even 1 drop of poison can cause great harm.


Btw, Wizard of Oz symbols (scarecrow, tin man & lion) may be considered aspects of GOoD…
1. Brain - intelligent design
2. Heart - “the kingdom/experience of God is within you,”
3. Courage - active faith

Maybe evil are the opposites?
1. Lies - falsities
2. No empathy - no feeling
3. Fear - masked in violence

[Greatest I am]

The source of all human against human evil are our women.

Women are what we biologically compete for and that makes them the source of evil as they are the prize.

"Sin: The Path to Excellence"
Sin has long been associated with moral failure, but what if we reframe it? I see sin as something essential to human growth—a necessary part of striving for excellence.
At its core, sin simply means “missing the mark.” It’s not about wickedness but about falling short of an ideal. Christianity and even Gnostic traditions acknowledge this idea in different ways. The concept of felix culpa—the “happy fault”—suggests that sin is necessary for God’s plan. Whether or not one believes in the supernatural, the wisdom of this idea is clear: missing the mark is a natural part of aiming for something greater.
To evolve, both as individuals and as a species, we must take risks and inevitably fall short. This process—of setting goals, failing, and trying again—is what drives progress. Every moment of “sin” is evidence that we’re pushing ourselves beyond our comfort zones and striving toward our best possible selves. This is what we do, consciously or unconsciously, at every point in our lives.
Even competition, often seen as divisive, is tied to this idea. Competition highlights our shortcomings, creating a contrast between where we are and where we want to be. It creates leaders, innovators, and excellence by encouraging us to improve. Of course, competition produces losers, and those losses can feel like failures or even evoke the idea of "evil." But in truth, every loss is an opportunity—a moment to learn, adapt, and grow stronger.
This is why I celebrate sin—not as a call to moral failure but as an embrace of imperfection and growth. Without sin, without missing the mark, we would have no benchmarks for greatness. There would be no leaders to inspire us, no innovators to challenge us, and no progress to drive humanity forward.
I don’t believe in the supernatural, but I see wisdom in the way ancient scribes wove this idea into their teachings. Sin, in its truest sense, is not something to avoid but something to engage with thoughtfully. It is the evidence of our striving, our courage to try, and our commitment to evolve.
So, I invite you: aim high. Take your shot. Miss the mark. Become a sinner in the best way possible. In doing so, you’ll not only create a better version of yourself but also contribute to the collective excellence of humanity.

[Martin Peter Clarke]

That's approaching the border of surreal humour.

[Belinda]

Evil that which is not good; exists because the Scholastic proved this using rationalism. You are lacking, absence, or privation; to know good and evil (Coogan 15.) A free person is a good thing; you should and could have done otherwise and have a sense of moral responsibility (Freeland 5.)
Saint Aquinas, “...Masters of their own actions…” (Davies 575.) Evil being one of the greatest intellectual problems of history (Cambridge 6); Spinoza wrote having an opinion might establish reasons in your opinions.
A determinist data dumps; but flourishes in quoting facts (Gould 88.) Choose wisely as Qoheleth the philosopher wrote, “...Eat, drink, and be merry…” (KJV.)
So, are we free or determined? Evil has been proven. Should we change the legal system; if determinism is proven true? You have moral responsibility; if free (Davies 575.) The ability to do otherwise without being coerced; freedom in the traditional sense. The choice is yours; past events or the traditional sense of freedom. One is sense;the other is logic.

Some individuals are more free/have more choices than others.

[Pistolero]

All value judgements require an objective, which is often idealized.

Moral value-judgments refer to the welfare of a collective.
So, good/evil often refer to whatever benefits or is detrimental to the welfare of a collective - often represented by God.

God becomes the gatekeeper of ethical amendments that preserve and advantage a collective.
These require such a reward/threat authority because ethics are amendments to moral behaviors, that have evolved through natural selection, so they often go against human impulses, such as the ethical rules preserving monogamy.
Such ethical rules are necessary to maintain internal peace, preventing male competitiveness from becoming violent, and in order to incorporate as many individuals, primarily males, into a system - making them investors in its welfare.

[puto]

Belinda,

Libertarian freedom is the ability 'to do otherwise'. Evils do exist, such as a moral evil is wicked. What morals, you choose to follow is your choice that is freedom. All I know is choice because I am in, "The land of the free and home of the brave." I am not a prisoner in chains. You are 'free', so think about it.

[Belinda]

Belinda,

Libertarian freedom is the ability 'to do otherwise'. Evils do exist, such as a moral evil is wicked. What morals, you choose to follow is your choice that is freedom. All I know is choice because I am in, "The land of the free and home of the brave." I am not a prisoner in chains. You are 'free', so think about it.

I know I'm more free than most other people in the world. Freedom of thought, speech, and assembly must be defended or they get taken away. There is no point in philosophising unless at least I want to be aware of what is going on in the world.

There is a widespread belief that The Home of the Brave is now also the home of a regime that is taking away freedom of thought and freedom of speech. It is a bad sign when universities are at risk from dictators , and the ancient custom of hospitality to strangers is done away with.

[Martin Peter Clarke]

We all use the word, "evil", but I have no idea what we mean by it.

In this context anything that shouldn't have been allowed to happen if kindness reigned.

In general, however, yeah, the definition seems to vary. From like very bad people or actions or attitudes - with bad being another vague cultural term - to an actually distinct ontological force or even creature or alliance that goes against The Good or God, perversely and knowingly not merely out of ignorance.

It's entirely natural. Genetic. Pre-wired for experience. Economic growth, pluralism and legal institutions are the only possible ameliorators. I.e. north western European civilization.

[Belinda]

We all use the word, "evil", but I have no idea what we mean by it.

In this context anything that shouldn't have been allowed to happen if kindness reigned.

In general, however, yeah, the definition seems to vary. From like very bad people or actions or attitudes - with bad being another vague cultural term - to an actually distinct ontological force or even creature or alliance that goes against The Good or God, perversely and knowingly not merely out of ignorance.

It's entirely natural. Genetic. Pre-wired for experience. Economic growth, pluralism and legal institutions are the only possible ameliorators. I.e. north western European civilization.

In every context, evil is absence of good.
If we have a believable and feasible definition of 'good' then particular evil events are themselves labelled.

[Belinda]

In this context anything that shouldn't have been allowed to happen if kindness reigned.

In general, however, yeah, the definition seems to vary. From like very bad people or actions or attitudes - with bad being another vague cultural term - to an actually distinct ontological force or even creature or alliance that goes against The Good or God, perversely and knowingly not merely out of ignorance.

It's entirely natural. Genetic. Pre-wired for experience. Economic growth, pluralism and legal institutions are the only possible ameliorators. I.e. north western European civilization.

In every context, evil is absence of good.
If we have a believable and feasible definition of 'good' then particular evil events are themselves labelled.
Martin Peter Clarke, am I to understand your reply is sardonic?

[Martin Peter Clarke]

It's entirely natural. Genetic. Pre-wired for experience. Economic growth, pluralism and legal institutions are the only possible ameliorators. I.e. north western European civilization.

In every context, evil is absence of good.
If we have a believable and feasible definition of 'good' then particular evil events are themselves labelled.
Martin Peter Clarke, am I to understand your reply is sardonic?

Not in the slightest Belinda. Good is measurable primarily by life expectancy; actuarial tables.

[Belinda]

In every context, evil is absence of good.
If we have a believable and feasible definition of 'good' then particular evil events are themselves labelled.
Martin Peter Clarke, am I to understand your reply is sardonic?

Not in the slightest Belinda. Good is measurable primarily by life expectancy; actuarial tables.

So you continue in the same vein. I note you use the passive voice. Instead of the passive voice please tell exactly what is the political party of those persons who measure good by life expectancy.