Evil is an Artform

[Lucifer_Carroll]

Now I feel honored, the devil himself posted...thanks


There is so much great feed back here, thanks to all once again.

Eh, it's nothing. You know the old saying, "set an evil to catch a devil". Or the older saying, "set a naughty to catch a horny devil"

 

[Belegon]

Evil people may perform good acts and good people may perform evil ones. I agree with most here that what I view as "evil" is mostly about selfishness and the belief that it is all put here for me to play with as I will.

So I believe that actions are evil or behaviors are evil. So people are not inherently good or evil?

Uhh, most of the time. There are people I would not hesitate to say, "He or she is evil/good".

I think I could kill character B without feeling I had become an evil person if I had no other choice. Even if it was for the "common good", I would feel I had committed an evil act if I acted without provocation. I kind of feel that my defining it thus is more about "honor" than "good vs. evil".

I do not believe I could make myself kill the child Hitler under any circumstances. I would try many other things to change his future, but I simply can not conceive of myself murdering a child.

 

[psychocatblah]

I do not believe I could make myself kill the child Hitler under any circumstances. I would try many other things to change his future, but I simply can not conceive of myself murdering a child.

Which would beg the question of what about his childhood you'd change? Enter him into art school early? Give him more Jewish friends? Force him to eat meat?

p

 

[amicus]

Evil

spelled backwards is live....which is curious...

Excellent question, excellent responses....

Abstruse...I would offer you the first several chapters of a novel I have posted here, The Chief, Part one...you need not comment or vote....

I posed the same question...what is evil...and since most of my 'rational' attempts to define terms are not accepted as the modern tendency is towards relativism, I thought I might portray 'evil' in a character, describe how it came about and how it was responded to.

The ''evil" character is Ruubaat, a 'Far See-er' Shaman, forerunner of witchdoctors and modern clergy.

The details are vague, but in the past year, I watched a science channel thing about the criminal mind...they tested incarcerated criminals, guilty of many crimes and found both a genetic and a 'brain chemical' similarity on about a 90 percentile average.

It was on the order than some have spoken of, that those 'criminals' remained in an egocentric, childlike state, in which they only took and never gave.

It seems only a limited number can deal with abstractions, such as the concept of 'evil' and 'good' are. As someone suggested, the axiomatic definition of evil is simply that which threatens human life. And that the opposite, 'good' is that which benefits human life.

As I have attempted, in other posts, to point to epistemological and metaphysical comprehension of these subjects, and been rejected for the 'personal' 'subjective' 'relative' viewpoints, I expect no less at this endeavor.

If one truly seeks to comprehend the 'concept' of 'evil' in reality, as an absolute, there are certain precursory acknowledgements one must make.

One cannot depend on an elementary school understanding and vocabulary to deal with these subjects, they are serious and complex if one seeks comprehension.

But..Abstruse and others...if you wish to see how one writer, describes evil inculcated in a character and how it affects society and how it is dealt with and why and the costs involved, then, again, I recommend the first few chapters of The Chief, Part one.

Amicus Veritas

PS..Cloudy...should you happen to read the Chief, perhaps you will realize my intent was to learn and study and try to understand native american culture, not demean it.

http://www.literotica.com/stories/showstory.php?id=117028

 

[psychocatblah]

So in the end, the Peter Pan syndrome is not only annoying to women, but dangerous? I knew it.

 

[Belegon]

Which would beg the question of what about his childhood you'd change? Enter him into art school early? Give him more Jewish friends? Force him to eat meat?

p

Ay, there's the rub. What would be the thing in his enviroment that could change his outlook?

Get him into a home with a decent father figure? Have him serve during WW I in a hospital instead of the trenches? Have his first love be a Jewish Gypsy?

I wish I knew.

 

[psychocatblah]

Yes, identifying the evil is the easy part. How it happened is not so easy. So leaving the child alive with the hope that fate could be changed... unless it was simply what was to happen and unavoidable. Maybe it just would've been more Mussolini and less Hitler. Maybe there's a whole range of people who would need to die. And then... we're back in genocide-ville.

 

[rgraham666]

There's no such thing as evil.

Morality is relative.

We have no free will.

*Sits back and waits for the games to begin.*

I believe I've already dealt with the first two.

The third is utter bollocks, in my opinion. The only being who has no free will is God, assuming She exists.

Since God knows everything she has no free will, but acts exactly as reality dictates.

We on the other hand have very limited perceptions. We can't know everything, so any decision and/or action we make is going to be a choice. Then we are responsible for the results of that decision.

Perhaps that is a good definition of the difference between good and evil.

Good accepts responsibility, evil does not.

 

[CharleyH]

What is evil?

Evil exists in the minds and imaginations of the people who conjure up a vision of evil. It is a cultural construct based on the values and mores of a particular society.

Typically, as seen in the bible, anti-authoritarianism is the worst of all evils, despite the 10 commandments.

Lou raises the point about evil acts. Well, are acts evil, or are they evil because the individual or the culture in which we exist has agreed that they are evil? From an existential point of view nothing is truly evil, but there are right and wrong choices. The burden is not on society to decide, but rather on the individual to decide what is right, or wrong for him or her. In choosing, (as Perdita brings up the word) the individual is saying that he/she has made the correct choice, and the choice itself can never be wrong for the individual, therefore, even if one murders another, it was the right choice for that individual.

Rgraham touches briefly on the fact that evil is a perception, and he is correct. No one here can, without a doubt, define evil, or alternately, define good except where it concerns themselves. Because of one’s own choice, the rest of the world will be judged accordining to his/her view. For example, the whole war against terrorism from every view, all political motivation aside, is simplistically based on conceived notions of good and evil.

Mr. Sublime and Colly take alternate views, and yet people are neither born evil, nor good. Perception is certainly affected by the time anyone reaches the age of seven, but ultimately an individual will choose the decisions in their lives, and the decisions in their lives will always be the ‘best’ decisions for them. Whether good or evil is inconsequential.

None of us can make the wrong choice for ourselves, therefore from this perspective, every choice we make is “good” for us. I have never once heard anyone say, “I have made an evil choice.” This is because it is impossible. It is only by the judegment of others that people are labelled good or evil.

KarenAM continues Colly’s perception by stating that we are born with innate selfishness. Actually, selfishness is a perception as well. We are all born with the need to survive, just as Gauche’s soldiers and lions and bears, oh my.

Again, the word evil, as is the word good are constructs inspiring the imaginations of all people. Psychocat mentions that you cannot take out god/religion, and I am presupposing this in reference to contemporary definitions. But surely you can, since mythology, paganism, far before any uniform world religion also makes judgements upon the nature of good and evil.

As time and space are reference point for far more complex constructs, so too are the words good and evil simple constructs by which we construct our lives, live and enable ourselves to individually make decisions. To summarize, redundantly:

EVIL DOES NOT EXIST, AND NEITHER DOES GOOD

There is, and can only be right choices for the individual, and I will posit that right choices are based on a persons individual perception of the need to survive.

So therefore the answer is yes. Evil, as much as good, is an artform.

Is that good enough Abs?

 

[Colleen Thomas]

An interesting point on Hitler. He studied art, I believe mainly architecture (Colly, my historian friend can possibly provide the correct answer) He was rejected from art school.
I can't help but wonder if his being accepted and going on to design and create would have kept 6 million people alive?

Hitler wished to be an artist. I think not from any innate skill as much as from being lazy and wanting to enjoy the bohemian lifestyle. He submitted work to the Vienna Art Academy and was rejected. They told him his talent proably was in arcitecture. However, him being admitted to become an architecht would have required he returned to school and he wasn't prepared to do that.

I think his acceptance to art school wouldn't have made one whit of difference in what he became. He stayed on in Vienna, earning what little he could selling watercolors he did of the many buildings. The life of an art student and that of a starving artist were not all that dissimilar. It is just as likely he would have spent as much time out in Vienna as a student as he did as a starving artist. He would have been exposed to the rabid anti-semitism he picked up there reguardless of his acceptance.

From his personality and performance in school, it seems likely he would have flunked out at any rate. Adolph Hitler chafed at authority, and the School was famous for the strictness of its standards.

The best chance to keep Hitler from becoming what he did was at Ypres in World War I. A gas attack nearly killed him.

Interestingly, it seems very likely Hitler's father, Alois, was the illigitimate child of wealthy a Jewish family's son. I don't think that says anything about Evil per se, but I do think it says something about hate. Hate is blind.

One final note. A little trivia. Before his grandmother changed her name and some records were altered, his father's last name was Schiklegruber. Heil Schicklegruber! Dosen't have quite the same ring does it? Perhaps he would have over come that, but it's one of the multitude of what if's in the life of Hitler. (i know I spelt that wrong, but you get the idea)

-Colly

 

[ABSTRUSE]

Wow, lots of stuff here to go over, thank you all once again for giving me much to go on.
Charley, you rock babe.
Amicus, I think I've watched the same programs you have, esp the one on teenage thrill killers, scary stuff.
Colly, as always, hugs.
Karen, I always love to see you jump on a thread.
RG, there must be something in Canada's water, makes you think clear.
damn, I know I'm missing folks, but my attention span is limited.
I am however grateful for the assistance.

~A~

 

[KarenAM]

I've been looking for the biography I read about Hitler but haven't been able to find it, so this is from memory.

I think Hitler was highly creative but had only technical skill as an artist, not that intangible thing called talent. The reason he was rejected from art school was on the latter grounds. I agree with Colly that he would have flunked out, though, because the only time he dealt well with authority was when he was a leader.

Ultimately, a lot of Hitler's behavior can be seen as reflecting his disconnect with the real world. Quite literally, he lived in a fantasy that was part messianic and part Wagnerian opera. This can be seen in a lot of ways: his love of mysticism and drama, for example.

The trouble was that he couldn't express this artistically, and I think this frustrated him. He was unable to focus until after his service in WW I, unable to hold a job, and came very close to dying as a homeless madman on the streets of Vienna as a young man.

Hitler, like Stalin, worshipped his mother, and was overcome with grief when she died. He thanked her physician, who was Jewish, profusely for having tried to save her life. Hitler's father seems to have been distant, as fathers were in that time and culture, but not abusive; his upbringing was remarkable for its normalcy. Stalin's father was an abusive drunk who beat him regularly.

Hitler had several siblings, most of whom died young; his sister Paula survived the war and lived in obscurity her whole life (I think she died in the early 1960's, without progeny). His half brother had a on-again and off-again relation with Hitler, and this man's two kids lived in the USA, where after the war they swore a pact between them not to have any children, so Hitler would have no blood descendants, even from his half-brother.

One note: Hitler had one younger brother who lived long enough for Hitler to bond with him. Appearantly this little boy's death had a profound effect on Hitler, who was never the same again.

Hitler loved animals and could not stand to see them suffer. People he thought less of. He could not be negotiated with, and used mad furies to intimidate the leaders of several countries which he then destroyed.

People have been trying to understand Hitler since WW II, so as to prevent another. I worry that we are failing on both counts.

 

[CharleyH]

you rock babe

Ya - well just make sure you catch me in the morning when I am semi-intelligent.

*bump . . . and grind*

 

[Guest]

I did a quick search of the OED online. Here are some interesting quotes. - Perdita

The face of "evil" is always the face of total need. —Burroughs, William S.

Whatever good visits thee, it is of God; whatever evil visits thee is of thyself. —The Koran

There is no evil in the atom; only in men's souls. —Adlai Stevenson

Individually you agreed to evil. —Almiro Rodrigues (sentencing the Bosnian Serb General Radislav Krstic for his part in the massacre of Bosnian Muslims at Srebenica in July 1995)

As soon as men decide that all means are permitted to fight an evil, then their good becomes indistinguishable from the evil that they set out to destroy. —Christopher Dawson (Cultural historian and educational theorist. Born in Wales at the end of the 19th c.; first Chauncey Stillman Professor of Roman Catholic Studies at Harvard; died 1970.

evil. Buddhism has no concept of evil as a cosmic force or objective reality. The nearest it comes to this is the mythological figure of Mara, the Buddhist ‘devil’. However, it has much to say about evil in the sense of human suffering (duhkha), and these teachings are set out in the First Noble Truth. Buddhism recognized that human experience inevitably contains much that is painful, such as sickness and death, and that human beings are exposed to many natural evils such as floods, fires, earthquakes, and the like. Alongside these there is also the category of moral evil, which is analysed into various vices known as defilements (klesa). The most fundamental of these are the three roots of evil (akusala-mula), namely greed (raga), hatred (dvesa), and delusion (moha). The so-called ‘problem of evil’ which afflicts theistic religions is not so acute in Buddhism since many (but not all) of life's misfortunes can be explained by the doctrine of karma. —A Dictionary of Buddhism. Ed. Damien Keown. Oxford University Press, 2003

 

[ABSTRUSE]

Thanks P. These are wonderful.

 

[psychocatblah]

Re: What is evil?

Again, the word evil, as is the word good are constructs inspiring the imaginations of all people. Psychocat mentions that you cannot take out god/religion, and I am presupposing this in reference to contemporary definitions. But surely you can, since mythology, paganism, far before any uniform world religion also makes judgements upon the nature of good and evil.

As time and space are reference point for far more complex constructs, so too are the words good and evil simple constructs by which we construct our lives, live and enable ourselves to individually make decisions. To summarize, redundantly:

EVIL DOES NOT EXIST, AND NEITHER DOES GOOD

Is that good enough Abs?

I would submit that mythology and paganism are also religions. And we still don't have a uniform world religion. And hopefully we never will.

And now, to quote a famous philosopher:

"There is no good or evil, only power." - Lord Voldemort.

*smirks*

 

[gauchecritic]

Wow, this is silly. I'm going to assume that this was written tongue-in-cheek.

Not at all. You just couldn't see the words that I didn't include. (Always make assumptions)

Hitler's maternal grandmother was from the family of schickelgruber. Germany wasn't (isn't) a fully fledged matriarchy, maiden names die with maidenhood.

Hitler (however evil he was) was first and foremost a politician, a (seeker) holder of power. No one has paid any attention whatsoever to power that shapes (corrupts) weak minds. (And strong wills too)

Someone can probably identify the quote that goes something along the lines of "Cometh the hour, cometh the man" This applies equally to Hitler et al.

Just suppose for a second that Europe now was a German dominated collection of countries (I won't belabour the obvious similarity) Let's say that the 'unification' came about by the 1950s. That's three generations of a united Europe. Let's for a moment now ignore the means of that union (but never forget). Would America be a 'super power' and world policeman? Would Japan be the leading industrialist nation? Or would Europe be the only 'super power' with moon bases, hydroelectric or wind farms producing clean energy, the most fuel efficient vehicles ever and the largest number of 'wealthy' people in the whole world? There's a utopian vision. Who then would be evil? Churchill? Rosevelt?

Another quote (possibly Shakfberd) "There is neither good nor bad except that others think it so."

By the way: Genetics is bunkum when attempting to apply it to moral values and/or talent.

Every child born (assuming 'proper' growth and varied parentage) has the potential to become Hitler or Ghandi, Ted Bundy or Al Bundy, Buddy Rich or Ringo Starr.

Anyone still here?

So which is the greater (or lesser) evil, the killer of one or the killer of many? I think the question should be asked, (not The question but) is it prevention or punishment?

The answer to this is a question. A moral and choice destroying question. In the scheme of things does it matter? The answer to that question, every time, is no. But people are not concerned with 'the scheme of things' only themselves.

My family, my friends, my tribe, my town, my country and my culture are all, ultimately, extensions of myself. Any choice I make (assuming I have free will and am not M'uad Dib or Leto Atredies) will always and forever concern myself and will consequently be tainted with mortality.

Gauche

 

[Guest]

Gauche, you've given much to think on. Your quote was Shakey's:

... for there is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so - Hamlet, II.ii

Perdita

 

[CharleyH]

Re: Re: What is evil?

I would submit that mythology and paganism are also religions. And we still don't have a uniform world religion. And hopefully we never will.

And now, to quote a famous philosopher:

"There is no good or evil, only power." - Lord Voldemort.

*smirks*

Well, from a contemporary viewpoint you can submit all you want

And uh, uniform world religion. Hm, have you been duped into believing there isn't? Each god based on the same principles, each law based on the principles of god. I know there's a god damn thread around here somewhere.

The uniform of world religion, if you piece all the disparate parts together, looks like a flaming spectacle in Vegas: insanely colourful, exhuberantly vibrant and damn right bitchy!

*smirks louder* and quotes Mel Brooks, "Philosopher? Isn't that another word for bullshitter?"

 

[ABSTRUSE]

The answer to this is a question. A moral and choice destroying question. In the scheme of things does it matter? The answer to that question, every time, is no. But people are not concerned with 'the scheme of things' only themselves.

My family, my friends, my tribe, my town, my country and my culture are all, ultimately, extensions of myself. Any choice I make (assuming I have free will and am not M'uad Dib or Leto Atredies) will always and forever concern myself and will consequently be tainted with mortality.

Gauche

thanks Guache.

 

[psychocatblah]

Re: Re: Re: What is evil?

And uh, uniform world religion. Hm, have you been duped into believing there isn't? Each god based on the same principles, each law based on the principles of god. I know there's a god damn thread around here somewhere.

The uniform of world religion, if you piece all the disparate parts together, looks like a flaming spectacle in Vegas: insanely colourful, exhuberantly vibrant and damn right bitchy!

*smirks louder* and quotes Mel Brooks, "Philosopher? Isn't that another word for bullshitter?"

Ahh. Excellent. We all believe the same thing. So we can stop all of the fighting? Oh sure, boiled down to its basic parts there is little new in the world and few original thoughts.

But I wouldn't be so quick to dump them all into the same container. First of all, it's not productive and second of all, it's offensive: at least to the believers of the different religions.

In a microcosm sort of example, bring Catholics and Protestants into the same room and talk about Religion. And we all *know* that's the same god.

On paper I'm inclined to agree that most religions are the same dress, new day. But the reality of it is that even if they were, it would make the world a boring, sad place and we'd just have to start arguing about even sillier things to make up for it.

And that is what they call... my two cents.

 

[CharleyH]

Re: Re: Re: Re: What is evil?

And that is what they call... my two cents.

Who's they? Originality vs. . . hmm, intriguing.

Jesus christ, where is my god damn lighter!!! How can I answer without a fag? Hm, why are these not called dykes?

Hu . . hm.

Ok Psycho,

To argue about god or religion is a futility best left to absurdists, and I rarely argue it.

I discussed individuality, not originality. Just as life was born of a single cell, so too can everything, eventually be simplified, but our brains are too narrow in this moment we call time.

While I certainly try to respect the individual values of others, they are not my own, and since I am an individual, my choice to offend purposefully or not is one that I live with, very comfortably. Perhaps this is good, perhaps it is evil, to me it is right.

The world is a sad place, but never boring, but one needs to look to see.

And it’s much more fun to argue about who put the caramel in the caramilk bar because we are all more likely to eat it and be happy than swallow it and vomit.

Such is my Canadian dollar = 3 cents.

 

[rgraham666]

I did a quick search of the OED online. Here are some interesting quotes. - Perdita

As soon as men decide that all means are permitted to fight an evil, then their good becomes indistinguishable from the evil that they set out to destroy. —Christopher Dawson (Cultural historian and educational theorist. Born in Wales at the end of the 19th c.; first Chauncey Stillman Professor of Roman Catholic Studies at Harvard; died 1970.

That brings to my mind a Taoist saying I read many years ago and have kept in my heart ever since.

What you resist, you become.

 

[ABSTRUSE]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: What is evil?

The world is a sad place, but never boring, but one needs to look to see.

And it’s much more fun to argue about who put the caramel in the caramilk bar because we are all more likely to eat it and be happy than swallow it and vomit.

Such is my Canadian dollar = 3 cents.

That was was profound, and yet compelling beautiful...In a Charley sort of way.

Lit is never boring if you look to see.

My Monopoly dollar=paper.

 

[psychocatblah]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: What is evil?

Who's they? Originality vs. . . hmm, intriguing.

Jesus christ, where is my god damn lighter!!! How can I answer without a fag? Hm, why are these not called dykes?

Hu . . hm.

Ok Psycho,

To argue about god or religion is a futility best left to absurdists, and I rarely argue it.

I discussed individuality, not originality. Just as life was born of a single cell, so too can everything, even!tually be simplified, but our brains are too narrow in this moment we call time.

While I certainly try to respect the individual values of others, they are not my own, and since I am an individual, my choice to offend purposefully or not is one that I live with, very comfortably. Perhaps this is good, perhaps it is evil, to me it is right.

The world is a sad place, but never boring, but one needs to look to see.

And it?s much more fun to argue about who put the caramel in the caramilk bar because we are all more likely to eat it and be happy than swallow it and vomit.

Such is my Canadian dollar = 3 cents.

They. You know... them. They that say things but never want credit. The un-trademarked. The... oh nevermind. I'm just silly now.

But the decision to offend or not offend would be a selfish one... and if selfishness is evil... are you evil? Am I evil for prattling on? (probably, but I'm ok with that too) Are we evil in just the small things or does it have to be a really big thing? Is it just evil to take a life or is it just as evil to steal a person's livelihood?

Alright. Enough. I'm completely talking out of my arse at this point. Posting to avoid doing anything practical like vacuuming or doing the dishes. And I must stop the madness!