Bay 12 Games Forum

I'm going to disagree with that statement. I personally agree with the belief that good and evil do not exist, but the statement above, that definitions of good and evil are either constant or subjective, is incorrect.

Take, for example, the average age of people in a country. That is not subjective, but it changes. You can define ages as 'old' or 'very old' depending on how they compare with the average. Even if the average age changes later on, the original definition that someone was old was correct when applied to that time.

You have certainly taken the core, fundamental premise of the discussion to examine, which is always a good place to start. However: Good and Evil are not comparative statements, as "old" is. They are universal, blanket categories for every action in the human dynamic. Thus they either have a specific definition or none at all. What you have stated is that they are, rather, comparative or in flux, which is to take the side of the argument that no actual definition exists --and thus to state that Good and Evil as such do not exist. It is merely a point of view.

Those are the two possible views: Either it has a specific meaning and standard (which may be unknown, and which we do not need to philosophically agree on), or it is merely a matter of point of view, and Good and Evil do not exist.

Well, I was mentioning the US's general bad political scene (as evidenced in the document just presented, which I referenced). It's deteriorating at a very fast rate, and even the political parties have shown signs of fracturing. And the corruption and idiocy you are so fond of pointing out are a result of the individuals whom the government represents.

My point being that if you want better action from the government, good politics won't fix our problems. The individuals themselves have to be changed. Thus, the need for a major catalyst. Historically speaking, revolutions in thought of that magnitude at the "grassroots" level have only come about as a result of religious or fanatical events. The French, Russian, and Chinese Revolutions, the Great Awakening, the Reformation.

I'm just stating that my analysis is that we can expect continued general deterioration and corruption because it reflects the state of the average individual in our country, which is one of apathy.
I have a lot of respect for you, Aqizzar, and I expect you to be able to connect the dots without so much explanation

Bump

Without an absolute standard, good and evil don't exist.

That's simple logical conclusion, factual and easily established. Either there is an absolute (read "non-debatable", "unchanging") standard, or there is no possible distinction between good and evil. All that is left is "good for me/you/us/them" and "bad for me/you/us/them". At that point, it's purely a matter of viewpoint: time, place, circumstances, and opinion.

Simple example
Absolute viewpoint: Lying is always evil (read as "wrong", "bad").
It may have some good results and truth may have some bad results, but truth is right and falsehood is wrong.

Humanist/modern/non-religious viewpoint: Lying is good sometimes, and bad others. Specific examples are "good" for some people, "bad" for others involved in the same lie. Everything is judged by the motivation and visible results.

We all speak in terms of "good" and "evil", "bad", "wrong", "right". These terms reflect a viewpoint that is no longer prevalent among human beings, and thus lose their meaning in such conversations. To me, it is always wrong to lie, even to tell my girlfriend her jeans look good when they're too tight. It may make her feel good about herself, but it's a lie to tell her something I don't really think.

You are tapping into a huge and fascinating philosophical debate that has raged throughout all of recorded history. Is there Good and Evil, or only what's good for me/you/us/them right now? Was the murderous sneak attack on Pearl Harbor "good" because it pushed the US into a war where they fought "evil" in the form of tyranny, murder, and oppression? Do you judge something by its intent, results, or some kind of universal natural rule that is supposed to be recognized by all mankind?

Another good example is the "family unit" in the USSR. The family was first purged and disbanded by law as a form of private ownership; marriages were called private prostitution and not desired nor acknowledged by the official government. They were "evil", a remnant of humanity's past ignorance and a violation of Communist doctrine. Then, when it was found that there was a natural order to the human family, and that mankind lived and functioned better that way, it was immediately relabeled as "good", desirable, ideal. There was no standard, only "what is good for the motherland right now in our eyes".

Fascinating, isn't it? I've got a very solid and grounded opinion on it, but that is enough of a derail I think

Necroworthy.

It died on July 4th. Now THAT is irony. Surely it can't be left that way?

Imhotep has been quiet in these councils a long time.

Now he speaks:
Let the blood spurt where it may! Such is the way of dwarves and of Armok himself.

And then judge by the aftermath whether Armok might reset time again to match the desires of his absolute will.

That's definitely the boring and undwarfy way to deal with it.

Unless you have Spirits of Fire, in which case it is the SUPREMELY DWARFY way to deal with it, because it won't work and Archibold gets to fight!

Oh, my...

Shade-o set the tone well, and I laughed my way through all 3 pages afterward!
Very nice use of text effects by some people, and just some of these posts are flat out funny.

Maleficence, Armok's all-consuming attribute!