Good or bad ?

**Gottskalk** · January 23, 2006, 06:06 PM

Can we really divide the world in the good people and bad people ? is the phenomenon good and bad just a twisted product of mans culture ? What do you think ? are you good? and who is bad ?
personally i dont really believe in the good guys/bad guys gag. An old way to justify ones existance over another people.

**Spiff** · January 23, 2006, 06:21 PM

Good and bad are highly relative and in the end, not based on anything tangible. The question is, why should someone not act 'bad' if they have no consequences to face? There is no answer really

**Darth Wong** · January 23, 2006, 06:23 PM

There are good and bad actions. After someone has either committed a horrifically bad action or demonstrated a propensity toward consistently taking smaller bad actions, we tend to classify him as a bad person. But a lot of people tend to leap to judgment too quickly, or worse yet, to make this classification based on groups rather than individual behaviour.

**Turbo** · January 23, 2006, 06:52 PM

There is no good or bad. These are subjective things based on man's morality. Morality is based on societal preferences.

There is only evil and God's will. Evil is not doing God's will. Only through religious belief can man truly know the difference.

**Slythis** · January 23, 2006, 10:56 PM

*sigh* I hate always finding myself in the middle ground.

generally speaking good and evil are amatter of human perception. That said there are however people born into the world who have no capacity for evil, true they may commite a bad act here and there but their general temperment keeps them from straying too far from what their native cultures deems to be good. Like wise there are people with an infinite capacity for evil who by their very nature will desicrate the moral pillars of their culture. so there is not definate answer to the question.

**vizi** · January 23, 2006, 11:01 PM

A good person can do a bad thing and a bad person can do a good thing.

Good and Bad (Evil?) exist but like all things its hard to classify them for everyone. People have different views on everything. However it is up to those that view the action to determine whether it was good or bad and whatever is decided will probably change at some point in history as the long term effects begin to show.

I am always a fan of taking what you believe as good and bad (or anything for that matter) and applying it to your morals and ideas. Then decide for yourself. However it is best not to push your thoughts on others since everyone has different beliefs on matters such as this.

**Darth Wong** · January 24, 2006, 02:04 AM

Originally Posted by Turbo

There is no good or bad. These are subjective things based on man's morality. Morality is based on societal preferences.

Core morality is based on societal needs. Superficial morality is based on societal preferences. There's a difference, and superficial morality tends to change with time and cultural shifts, while core morality generally does not.

There is only evil and God's will. Evil is not doing God's will. Only through religious belief can man truly know the difference.

Oh right, so it's impossible for an atheist to know what evil is? Why are you trying to bait people into yet another a "religion vs atheism" argument? Is it your intent to hijack the thread?

**Turbo** · January 24, 2006, 06:19 PM

Originally Posted by Darth Wong

Oh right, so it's impossible for an atheist to know what evil is? Why are you trying to bait people into yet another a "religion vs atheism" argument? Is it your intent to hijack the thread?

My, you are certainly paranoid. I wasn't trying to provoke anything nor was I trying to hijack the thread. I am not going to argue with you but you are not going to control and dominate where I post and what I post. Nor am I going to get angry despite the rude and abrasive manner that you are speaking to me. In the future, you can politely suggest that my post is off-topic instead of going into a meaningless tirade. Better yet, try ignoring my posts. I'll pray for you

.

**Darth Wong** · January 25, 2006, 02:38 AM

Originally Posted by Turbo

My, you are certainly paranoid. I wasn't trying to provoke anything nor was I trying to hijack the thread. I am not going to argue with you but you are not going to control and dominate where I post and what I post. Nor am I going to get angry despite the rude and abrasive manner that you are speaking to me. In the future, you can politely suggest that my post is off-topic instead of going into a meaningless tirade. Better yet, try ignoring my posts. I'll pray for you

.

I love the way you immediately attack me when I point out that you are hijacking the thread by claiming people who lack "religious belief" cannot know the difference between good and evil. Don't like somebody pointing it out when you do something bad?

**Sher Khan** · January 25, 2006, 04:07 AM

He wasn't anywhere close to hijacking anything. In fact, his post, which is completely legitimate as a response to a Good vs. Evil thread, didn't even affect the direction of the topic.

I believe there always existed a sort of understood morality in humankind, a sort of don't cheat, don't kill mentality that came about because it was necessary for small societies to grow and flourish without degenerating with infighting. Then came basic tribal religions that, not only included creation stories to satisfy the growing human intellect, but also included the previously developed moral laws into the belief system.
Soon, this concept developed the world over in every colonial cluster (that survived to prosper anyway).
Alongside this however came the development of society, and its role in morality. While the written law existed in religion, people could still break these rules as they were not bound by physical restraints. The will of society, and social acceptance, indirectly forced those who wouldn't normally adhere to such laws into submission. It was either that, or live a dangerous and lonely life as a hermit.

So, morality, or Good and Evil, started out as a human necessity, was cultivated and propogated first by religion, but then was slowly caught up on by social unwritten law, which was much more dynamic than religious institutions of anytime and thus, easier to spread and follow.

**Darth Wong** · January 25, 2006, 04:22 AM

He wasn't anywhere close to hijacking anything.

Oh really? Read the opening post. It asks if there is even such a thing as good people or bad people, not "where do you think morality came from" or "is religion responsible for morality".

**Saint-Germain** · January 25, 2006, 04:25 AM

Originally Posted by Darth Wong

I love the way you immediately attack me when I point out that you are hijacking the thread by claiming people who lack "religious belief" cannot know the difference between good and evil. Don't like somebody pointing it out when you do something bad?

It was completely on topic. Turbo was just saying that his belief influences his perception of 'Good and Evil' which, you may have noticed, is the title of the topic. Religious beliefinfluences a lot of things, two of them being moral values and a person's perception of others who don't share that belief.

If you had let it slide, and accepted that Turbo's view is one that leads naturally from his beliefs, I wouldn't be having to make this post, and God knows I shouls be doing my homework...

:

Edit:

Originally Posted by Darth Wong

Oh really? Read the opening post. It asks if there is even such a thing as good people or bad people, not "where do you think morality came from" or "is religion responsible for morality".

Wow, nice narrow definition of the topic. And don't you think it's natural that a religious person will factor in whether a person believes in God, is Christian etc. before declaring them a 'good' or 'bad' person...?

**Darth Wong** · January 25, 2006, 04:33 AM

It's "narrow" to try and keep this topic from becoming yet another "religion is necessary for morality" discussion? It doesn't even matter where you think your personal sense of morality comes from; the question is whether it's even valid to classify people as good or bad at all.

**Saint-Germain** · January 25, 2006, 04:46 AM

Or you could have just let it slide...

Anyway, I have, since infancy, rooted for the 'bad guys' (as long as they weren't too one-dimensionsal) and felt sorry for poor Commodus in Gladiator etc. etc.

If you knew me you would have thought "WTF?"to the first part of that sentece before realising it was just because my li'l heart was bleeding for them and then rolled your eyes

**the_mango55** · January 25, 2006, 04:46 AM

Originally Posted by Darth Wong

It's "narrow" to try and keep this topic from becoming yet another "religion is necessary for morality" discussion? It doesn't even matter where you think your personal sense of morality comes from; the question is whether it's even valid to classify people as good or bad at all.

Turbo replied to the question asked by the original poster honestly, and did not attack anyone. Would you rather he didn't voice his opinion, since you think that it is wrong, or offends you somehow? He also didn't say that non believers were incapable of doing God's will, he just said they wouldn't know for sure.

I don't know, but it seems to me that wherever I see anything about God posted, within a few posts here comes Wong starting a religious argument again. Not that I have anything against you, I enjoy debate as much as the next guy, and you seem like a nice enough person....

for an atheist

**Darth Wong** · January 25, 2006, 09:45 AM

Originally Posted by the_mango55

Turbo replied to the question asked by the original poster honestly, and did not attack anyone.

No, but since the "where did morality come from, religion or something else" thread is already posted in this forum a half-dozen times, I didn't want to see this thread turn into yet another carbon copy.

I don't know, but it seems to me that wherever I see anything about God posted, within a few posts here comes Wong starting a religious argument again.

So when someone else posts a religious argument and I respond to it, I'm actually the one who's "starting" the argument?

**Last Roman** · January 25, 2006, 10:12 AM

Originally Posted by Darth Wong

There are good and bad actions.

I agree, a person isnt inherintly (sp?) good or evil. It is the actions that we do that define the person.

@Darth Wong, I like that quote, I saw that too last night. funny stuff

**Spiff** · January 25, 2006, 01:39 PM

So anyway...

How about a legal postivist approach? The law is the law and youre bad if you break it. That isnt to say all immoral actions are illegal though - but its probably a good place to start if youre worried that something may be bad..

Or you could look at it as in "good or bad for who?" Yourself, or someone else, or society as a whole?

Or as in how much 'pleasure' or 'pain' an action causes for society, and apply the result as a means of justification..

**Turbo** · January 25, 2006, 03:03 PM

One of the problems with classifying anyone as good or bad is that man's nature changes constantly. Someone that commits bad actions can change completely or partially in a short or long period of time. So, it is difficult to say with any certainty that a person is 'good' or 'bad'. A person can be one, or the other, or both. Even the definition of good and bad changes from culture to culture and from different religions and geographic regions. This I think is the problem with basing a variable like good and bad on another variable such as society, its needs, or culture.

Relgion however is a more constant standard and provides more stability. Like it or not, what we consider to be good and bad actions in our Western Civilization come from the lingering influence of Christianity in the US and Europe.