Rumination on the question of evil

Philosophy Forums Philosophy
1

The word ‘‘Evil’’ has had a long history with human beings…
The ‘‘Book of Job’’ is one such example of our investigations
of ‘‘Evil’’… Through no fault of his own, Job is tormented
and tortured… and how many millions have suffered,
again, through no fault of their own, from wars, famines,
plagues, natural disasters, and such ‘‘Evil’’ acts like
the Holocaust…

But there is second side to this question of ‘‘Evil’’…
the question of why people, such as those in Germany,
who engaged in the practice of ‘‘Evil’’… not the leaders
of Nazi Germany, but the many followers who participated in
the Holocaust and other acts of ‘‘Evil’’…

What of the young men and women from the town of Oswiecim
Poland… What was their motivation to work in Auschwitz
as guards, and nurses and office workers?
Does the need for a job outweighs the sense of right and wrong,
that should have kept people away working in a concentration
camp? How is one able to justify such work in the face of
overwhelming ‘‘Evil?’’ How would you justify working in
Auschwitz? and what motivations would you have to
to explain working at Auschwitz?

So, we go through the gamut of justifications that might be
used to explain working at Auschwitz…

One of the particular aspects of this lies in the nature of our
isms and ideologies that we hold to very tightly…
For example, the average German may have these lines
in mind in accepting work at Auschwitz…

‘‘Deutschland, Deutschland uber alles, uber alles in der Welt’’

Which roughly translates as, ‘‘Germany, Germany above all,
above all in the world’’ One such justification to work
with ‘‘Evil’’ may be patriotism… Germany above all…
We in America can relate to this patriotism as we practice it
too… and this patriotism does allow one to practice ‘‘Evil’’
because we can deny the human being and their values,
if they conflict with the object of our patriotism, be it Germany
or be it America… the Vietman War is one long rumination on
this question of ‘‘Evil’’ and why human beings agree to its
practice given the nature of its ‘‘Evil’’…

The long-time war in Iraq and Afghanistan, can also be said
to be ‘‘Evil’’ because it had no clear-cut objectives nor did it
have anything resembling an ‘‘End Game’’…
What would a victory or a loss in Iraq look like? Who knows,
because no one gave that any thought… and why would anyone
consider working in a war that had no clear objectives and no
clear ‘‘End game?’’…

We can see from this example, that isms and ideologies
play a role in the act of being ‘‘Evil’’… by hanging onto
our ism regardless of what that ism leads us to do, even to
the practice of ‘‘Evil’’…

What is missing is an examination of values, an overcoming of
isms that lead us to a reevaluation of our values… in which
we are faced with choices, at what point of our practice
of patriotism lead us to an examination of what we are doing…
So, do we engage in the ism of patriotism even if it
leads us to ‘‘Evil’’ actions? Where exactly do we draw the line
between our wanting to fulfill our obligations to our isms,
and finding ourselves being involved in acts of ‘‘Evil’’…
Which take priority? our isms or our avoidance of engaging
in ‘‘Evil’’…

We see this every day in our workplace… insurance companies
denying lifesaving health care just to make a few bucks…
or our politicians talking about ending Social Security and
Medicare to ‘‘reform’’ the system… and that is basically about
saving ‘‘taxpayers’’ the wealthy, from paying more taxes…
to deny health care to save a few bucks is, to my mind anyway,
the very act of ‘‘Evil’’…to put money before people’s lives,
that is the very essences of ‘‘Evil’’, for it is Nihilism…
to put the ism of patriotism before people lives and their
values is pure Nihilism… and where does this Nihilism,
this patriotism come from? It is just another childhood
indoctrination that we are ‘‘educated’’ into…
the failure to overcome, reevaluate our childhood
ism and ideologies can and quite often leads us into
acts of ‘‘Evil’’…
The people from town that help keep the concentration
camps open, they engaged in ‘‘Evil’’ because of their failure
to examine in their values and beliefs… is being a ‘‘good’’
German worth an engagement with practicing ‘‘Evil’’…
I was just doing my duty… A good Kantian to be sure,
but does that mean they are not ‘‘good’’ human beings?

So, what should take priority? an allegiance to our indoctrinations,
which can and often does, lead us into the practice of ‘‘Evil’’ or
do we reject being a ‘‘good’’ citizen for being a ‘‘good’’ human being?
and we reject working in such places as Auschwitz and our modern
day equivalent, insurance companies? Or any company for that matter,
what puts profits before people…

It has been said that we have no choice in our modern day society,
that we must work, ‘‘contribute’’ to our society…
but in doing so, we put profits before people’s lives… that is an
act of ‘‘Evil’’… and here we get more justifications for working
with ‘‘Evil’’… I am a low level player, I simply do what I am told…
I need a job in order to support myself, I am practicing/engaged
in my isms and ideologies before any dubious belief of doing ‘‘Evil’’,
‘‘Evil’’ stands in the eye of the beholder…

One may define human beings in terms of the vast and myriad
justifications for doing ‘’‘Evil’'… being human is simply the
act of justifying one’s actions and beliefs… and one may
say, I am not doing ‘‘Evil’’ I am simply doing my job…
which is to say, I am engaged in an Ants viewpoint…
I don’t look any further than what my job requires or
demands… there may be ‘‘Evil’’ being done here, but
it doesn’t reflect or is present in my current job…
so, the acts of ‘‘Evil’’ can be ignored because
it doesn’t affect me or my job… it is only by
disassociating the job from the other aspects of
the company, can I justify my work, my job…
the company may be doing ‘‘Evil’’ but I am not…
so, I can feel good about myself and my work…
And the office worker at Auschwitz can feel good
about their job because they didn’t personally
torture or kill people in the concentration camps
they worked in…it is only by disassociating one’s
work and place within Auschwitz, can one feel
good about working in such a place…

We can think about this in another way, is my guilt in
working at Auschwitz or an insurance company, an individual
guilt or is it a collective guilt? We can easily justify any and all
actions including working at Auschwitz, by asking ourselves,
if these actions benefit Germany, then it overrides
our own individual guilt… is guilt singular or is it
collective? I may be acting by, any measurable standard,
‘‘Evil’’ but I am ‘‘saved’’ because I am not alone in
this collective act of ‘‘Evil’’…I am one of thousands who work here…
that takes away my individual guilt and frees me from any
sort of collective guilt for my actions…

the modern day question becomes, how do I escape any burden
of guilt in working for an ‘‘Evil’’ company or in working at ''Auschwitz?"
There is no reflection on our choices… we can just as easily decide
not to work at an ‘‘Evil’’ company or at ‘‘Auschwitz’’… thus removing
any possibility of acting within ‘‘Evil’’ in doing my job…
We don’t reflect on the greater good… the acting of ‘‘Evil’’
for profits is not wondered about… it is simply part of the job…
but at what point should we engage in some thought about
what doing this ‘‘Evil’’ does to our soul? where do we draw
the line on engaging with ''Evil?" and why that line and not
another?

Individual guilt vs collective guilt…
where do we draw the line?

Kropotkin

2

America has a long history of engaging in ‘‘Evil’’…
from the genocide of the American Indians, to the
Spanish-American war of 1898, to the massive
interventions in various countries, from Latin America,
to Iran, to Iraq, to Afghanistan, and of course, Vietnam…

Abu Ghraib is one such act of ‘‘Evil’’ and as an American,
how would I be able to justify such ‘‘Evil’’ done in my name,
with my alleged consent…it is equal to the Holocaust,
just on a much smaller scale… but of course, that means
we can better justify it as being on such a smaller scale…
does the guilt of Abu Ghraib, extend to me?

by staying silent, I gave my consent… and thus the guilt,
extends to me, as it was done in my name, done as a
justification for ‘‘protecting’’, engaging in the ‘‘Self-Defense’’
of America… of which, I am part…and by a series of
justifications, I can easily escape any actions/guilt done in my
name at Abu Ghraib… or in Vietnam or at Auschwitz…

So, when the village idiot, IQ45, tries to take a foreign
country like Greenland or Panama, what is my level of guilt?
for there cannot be any justification for such an act…
for if Putin is wrong trying to take over the Ukraine, then
IQ45 will be wrong for trying to attack other countries…
is the coming attack on either/both Greenland and Panama,
to be considered to be ''Evil?"

As I cannot see any possible justification for such an attack,
I say either act would be the poster child of ‘‘Evil’’…
But many will say, why worry about something that hasn’t
happened… that is the viewpoint of the Ant… don’t worry
about something until it happens… and even if it does
happen, it won’t affect me…but it will be done in your name…
Part of the reason that ‘‘Evil’’ achieves its goal, is because
people won’t think about it ahead of time… thus remaining
‘‘ant’’ like in our thinking…

and one must, at some point, wonder, am I an ant, or
am I a human being? Your viewpoint, dictates that answer…
and once again, calling for a reevaluation of values…
which values should be our viewpoint, and which values/beliefs
should not be our viewpoint?

Kropotkin

3

Define ‘evil’ old fart.
Don’t throw those biblical terms around, whilst pretending to be a commie atheist.

1 Like
4

Satyr :Lorikeet
Define ‘evil’ old fart.
Don’t throw those biblical terms around, whilst pretending to be a commie atheist.

K: and in this one post, we see the failures of our modern times…
Sammy complete failure to be able to imagine what
‘‘Evil’’ may mean… He has no sense of what is ‘‘Evil’’ and can’t
even define it… depending on someone else to define it for him…
Modern philosophy in a nutshell… even to his laughable attempt to
insult me…

What is ''Evil"… he has no idea whatsoever… and he couldn’t spot
what is ‘‘Evil’’ is, if it bit him on the ass… a modern man to be sure…
lazy to the point of demanding a definition of something that he
should have already grappled with… what is ''Evil?"
part of what makes a philosopher, a philosopher,
is that they work on definitions of such words as ‘‘Evil’’
‘‘meaning’’ ‘‘goal’’ ‘‘purpose’’ ‘‘overcoming’’ to name just a few,
without asking for someone’s else definition…
He hasn’t done the work on working out what exactly is ‘‘Evil’’
and what is not… a piss-poor philosopher if you ask me…

Kropotkin

5

Still no definition.

So, everything you wrote is nonsense.
You have no clue what you are talking about, old fart.
You just ramble on, incoherently, repeating platitudes and mythologies, as if you actually were a ‘philosopher.’

Do you imagine anyone even reads your posts?
you can’t even define the concepts you use…why would anyone bother?

I didn’t use ‘evil,’ you did, moron.
I don’t believe in fairy tales
I still know what you meant… but you cannot justify your use when you pretend to be an atheist Marxist… because it’ll expose how base and commonplace your thinking is.

Goes to show how related Marxism and Abrahamism really are.

6

Let’s say that all value judgements refer to an objective…

What does your use of good/evil refer to?
What is your objective, old fart?
In relation to what objective are ideas and actions considered to be ‘evil’ or ‘good’?

No good/evil in nature.

7

"Satyr? Lorikeet:
No good/evil in nature.

K: so, the Holocaust wasn’t ‘‘evil’’ or that Abu Ghraib wasn’t ‘‘evil’’?
or that within capitalism, making profits is vastly more important
than people? I won’t give you a definition of ‘‘Evil’’ basically
because then you no longer have to think about what ‘‘Evil’’ means…
it has been defined… no longer any reason to think about it…
and you walk into the sunset with a clear conscious…

Philosophy done right, should make you unhappy, uncomfortable,
dissatisfied… and with a definition, you no longer have to worry
about what ‘‘Evil’’ is… You get a readymade answer for what
‘‘Evil’’ is… instead of actually engaging in philosophy…
it is an easy way out… and I have no reason to offer you
an easy way out by defining what ‘‘Evil’’ is…

Was an office worker in Auschwitz or Abu Ghraib, were they
''EVIL?" and is an average American, in whose name
Abu Ghraib was done, are they also ''Evil?"

Kropotkin

8

Classic…whenever ‘evil’ is mentored Hitler and the holocaust always come up.
The Jews have brainwashed you fuckers real good.

So, no objective definition of evil… other than the crap they put in your head.

Mass murder of humans…evil…very convenient.
Your conceptions are aligned with those of a commoner…
Not even all killing or torturing of living organisms, in general…but specifically the mass murder of humans.
Because humans are conducting multiple holocausts daily…
I bet you love a chicken breast or ten…

Your thinking is very self-serving, ain’t it, old fart?
If we can call it “thinking”…it’s more like repeating…echoing…regurgitating…

Humanism, then is good…
Whatever bothers you is ‘evil’…whatever benefits you is ‘good.’
Pleasure/Pain principle.

If apes could speak and we asked them this question, they would give us the same answer as the one you gave.
Philosopher apes.

9

This fucker hasn’t even gone as far as Beyond Good and Evil…
His thinking ends at the Holocaust… there’s only one holocaust worth mentioning.

His solution…Marxism.
Holodomor, anyone?
Hitler…bad…Stalin and Trotsky …good.

Killing animals, en mass, meh…whatever…killnig humans, bad.
He’s like a concave mirror, reflecting our American empire’s propaganda myths.
A post-war Hollywood reel.

10

Your posts are simply some sort of reaction to what’s
going in your head… for at no point, have I mentioned,
(in no particular order) Marxism, Stalin, humanism,
abrahamism, pleasure or pain… Trosky…
my point involved the nature of ‘‘Evil’’ and
and what are the limits of ‘‘Evil’’… was the office worker
in Auschwitz ''Evil" or was the office worker in Abu Ghraib,
a place that conducted torture and the denigration of human
beings, which is Nihilism, was that office worker also, ''Evil"

What is the nature of evil? and how do we know what is ‘‘Evil’’
and how do we understand that ‘‘Evil’’…by removing definitions,
we remove the easy way out and we are forced to examine
‘‘Evil’’ as it presents itself to us…or is ‘‘Evil’’ really
within us, and present to us, every single day?
the question of how ‘‘Evil’’ is possible, is an interesting
question… is it inside of us or outside of us?

Can a man alone, a Robinson Crusoe, be guilty of ''Evil"
or do other human beings need to be involved?

Perhaps the best way to think of this is, what is the epistemology
of ‘‘Evil’’… what is evil, its nature, its limits and how far does
‘‘evil’’ extend? is ‘‘Evil’’ manmade or can it exist within nature?
by what right do we call forest fires or earthquakes as ‘‘Evil’’
when we don’t even properly understand the question of ''Evil"

''What does it mean to be Evil?"

Kropotkin

11

There is no evil in nature… only in your head, old man.
An empty head filled with Abrahamic crap.

All value judgements require an objective.
What is your objective, old fart?
World peace?
Equality?
World love?
Global Marxism?

Show me that common brain of yours.

12

Yeah, this dude is the typical ilp nutbag neolib cuckslave. Nothing much to see here, unless you want a laugh.

13

Eastern philosophies generally do not conceptualize evil in the same dualistic way as many Western traditions, such as Christianity, which often depict it as an external, opposing force to good. Instead, Eastern philosophies typically frame “evil” in terms of imbalance, ignorance, or disharmony. Here’s a brief overview of how some Eastern traditions approach the concept:

  1. Hinduism

Dharma and Adharma: Hinduism emphasizes the concept of dharma (righteousness or cosmic order) and adharma (unrighteousness or disorder). What is considered “evil” often stems from actions that disrupt the cosmic balance.

Ignorance (Avidya): In Hindu thought, ignorance or misunderstanding of the true nature of reality is a root cause of suffering and perceived “evil.”

Karma: Actions that cause harm or suffering generate negative karma, which perpetuates the cycle of rebirth (samsara). This focus shifts the blame from an external force to personal responsibility.

  1. Buddhism

The Three Poisons: In Buddhism, “evil” is not an external force but arises from within, primarily from the “Three Poisons”—ignorance (avidya), desire/attachment (raga), and hatred/aversion (dvesha). These mental states lead to unskillful actions that cause suffering.

Suffering (Dukkha): The concept of evil is often tied to actions that increase suffering for oneself and others, deviating from the Eightfold Path, which promotes ethical living and mindfulness.

Dependent Origination: Everything arises due to causes and conditions, so actions perceived as evil are part of this interconnected process.

  1. Taoism

Harmony and Disharmony: Taoism avoids labeling actions or phenomena as inherently good or evil. Instead, actions that go against the Tao (the natural order) cause imbalance and disharmony, which might be perceived as “evil.”

Wu Wei: Taoist teachings emphasize living in accordance with nature and avoiding forceful or harmful actions, which could create unnecessary conflict or suffering.

  1. Confucianism

Ethics and Morality: Confucianism focuses on maintaining social harmony through proper conduct, virtue, and adherence to roles and relationships. “Evil” arises from failing to act virtuously or uphold social responsibilities.

Human Nature: Mencius, a Confucian philosopher, believed humans are inherently good but can be corrupted by poor environment or education. Xunzi, another Confucian thinker, argued that humans are inherently selfish but can cultivate goodness through discipline.

  1. Shinto

Purity and Impurity: In Shinto, there is no strong concept of good versus evil. Instead, focus is placed on kegare (impurity) and harai (ritual purification). Actions that disrupt harmony with the kami (spiritual beings) or nature are seen as impure.

Summary

In Eastern philosophies, the concept of evil is often tied to imbalance, ignorance, or actions that disrupt harmony rather than being an independent, opposing force to good. There’s a greater emphasis on personal responsibility and the interconnectedness of all actions and their consequences. This approach fosters a focus on self-cultivation and living in harmony with the world, rather than battling an external force.

14

I thank Bob for his excellent discussion of Eastern philosophy…
it brings new light into this discussion… and I will wait until
later to discuss his points… but for now, I have other fish to
fry…

Under the impact of Needleman book, "The Heart of Philosophy’’
I am rethinking some parts of my philosophy…
As is known, or not, I am not a fan of language theories…
I don’t think they are very productive… and fails to get to
the point or ‘‘heart’’ of what it means to be human…
Which is what my philosophy is about, what it means to
be human… but in this instance, I shall do something I
rarely ever do… which is work on the language we use…

In his book, Needleman says that western man seeks out
‘‘wisdom’’ ‘‘Knowledge’’ which for a human born and breed in
the west, is the same thing…to be wise is to have knowledge…
they are one and the same…but the eastern human being,
as Bob points out, is engaged in avoiding suffering or at least
to limit it…The heart of Buddhist philosophy is this question
of suffering… existence is suffering… that is the down and dirty
of eastern philosophy…the east seeks how to avoid suffering
and the west seeks knowledge… (is this statement exact?
Well, its close enough for government work)

Where the problem seems to exists and the epiphany I
got this morning, is that we use big bracketing words
like suffering and wisdom and knowledge and eros…
but the big words don’t actually mean much because
we think about those words individually… take suffering
for example… bring that word down to us humans,
what is the exact impact of suffering on our own individual lives…
I suffer, but what exactly does that mean, in my own individual
case? and is my own individual suffering the same as your
suffering? Suffering, as a word, is a very broad base word,
but it doesn’t and can’t discuss my own case or even your
case of individual suffering… How do we apply the overall
word, Suffering, to our own individual cases?

Let us apply one particular case of ‘‘suffering’’ to analysis…
it is said that one of the ways we suffer, is by growing old…
along with disease and death, to name the biggies of suffering…
and yet, old age, and I am old, is simple acceptance of the fact
I am growing old… I cannot ever grow young again or I can’t
fight growing old…it is a battle I cannot win…Whether or not
I want it, I will grow ever older… the aches and pains of growing old,
and believe me when I say, my bones ache every single day, and that
is part of growing old… the best, the best I can do, is put stuff
on it to lessen the pain, the pain itself, never really goes away…
(thank god for edibles) I am growing old, but is it really suffering if
I have no other options? I can’t control it, nor can I stop it, so,
is that really suffering? In other words, how do we apply the big
words like suffering and eros, into our own individual lives?
I don’t really see a connection between those big words like
suffering and eros and our lives in the moment…
We can individually interpret words like suffering and eros,
but that is separate from the use of big words… how do we connect
a big word like suffering into our own individual lives?

Old age, disease, death… those are claimed to be suffering,
but frankly it’s the cost of doing business of being alive…
only by death can we escape ‘‘suffering’’…

Most people when they attempt or actually commit suicide,
are not trying to kill themselves as much as they are trying to
end the pain they are in… suicide is a means of escaping pain,
not to kill oneself… If my pain is great enough, death seems like
a small price to pay to end that pain… it is pain we are escaping,
not life… but the way to understand pain, and I have experience
great pain, both emotional and physical, is to understand
that pain is part of the ticket of existence… to be alive
is to know pain… so, instead of trying to escape the pain,
we can, as I have done so, we find a means of coping with the
pain, booze, drugs, sex, escaping the pointless pursuit
of the trinkets of existence… seeking out money, fame,
material goods, power and titles…
but masking the pain, that just delays the pain, it doesn’t end it…

The other day, I was trying to remember a name of a long ago
friend… we were very close at one time and as it often happens,
we drifted apart… and to save my life, I couldn’t remember his name…
and the big truth is that in time, we can forget our pain, our suffering…
time does heal all wounds…and those who kill themselves to
escape their great pain, they just didn’t give it enough time…
and that is just one aspect of suffering… the question is,
how do we escape pain and suffering? The simple passing of time,
will do that for us…

To bring the big words like suffering or eros down to our
own individual needs and self… to be frank, the word
suffering is too abstract for us to make any use of it…
as is the word eros or pain…it is only by bringing that word
down to our individual level, does the word suffering make
any sense…

and therein lies the problem with the usage of the word suffering,
by Buddhists, it is too abstract to make any use of it…
bring it down to our own individual self, and now, now the
word suffering actually means something… the universal term,
suffering, really doesn’t mean anything unless we can bring down
to our own individual level… to make a universal word into a local,
individual word…

I hear the word ‘‘dog’’ and that is a universal word,
but I must bring that word back to earth… and I do so by
remembering a dog we had as a kid… Troubles…
a particular dog… not as a universal dog, but as an
individual dog… that is how I make sense of the universal
word, dog… I turn that universal word into a particular,
individual word, Troubles… the greatest dog ever…

So, a universal word like suffering or eros, needs to make
sense for us in an individual way, ‘‘I suffer with/because’’
of some individual means… not as a universal means,

Now given what I have just said, let us revisit the word,
‘‘Evil’’… ‘‘Evil’’ as a word, is fairly abstract…
what exactly does a universal ‘‘Evil’’ look like?
it is only by bringing this word back to earth and
making it individual, can we make any sense of it…

Is suffering, ‘‘Evil’’ not that I can tell because what is
definition of ‘‘evil’’…

Evil: Morally wrong or bad; immoral; wicked: evil deeds,
an ‘‘evil’’ life. Synonyms: nefarious, vile, base, corrupt,
vicious, depraved, iniquitous, sinful…

As a universal concept, the word ‘‘Evil’’ has no meaning…
because what is considered to be universally ''Evil?"
and every single universal definition of ‘‘Evil’’ has been
defended by somebody… AS a historical fact, there cannot
be any dispute that the Holocaust happened, as it has been
depicted… yet, even here, At ILP, we have a couple, at least,
Holocaust denyiers…but taken as a universal, the word, ‘‘Evil’’
is too abstract… but take it down to an individual level,
and we can state, without any doubt, that the Holocaust
was ‘‘Evil’’… what was the ‘‘crime’’ that was punished by
the Holocaust and specifically such places as Auschwitz?
Not for anything they did, but what they were, Jewish,
communists, homosexuals, gypsies… were all punished
in concentration camps… and their specific crime?
for being Jewish, communist, homosexual, gypsies,
they were put to death…and they were considered to
be ‘‘subhuman’’ for being something other than some specific
universal… they were punished for being an unwanted universal
type, not as an individual type… remember their specific
crime is being, not doing… and being is universal,
as Heidegger pointed out…

But human beings don’t exist within the universal, we exist
within the individual, the specific…I am a human being,
but I exist within a specific, individual self…we are
individual, specific selves… that is how we live…not as
universal human beings, but as specific human beings…
I am Kropotkin, I am a specific individual, and I live my life
that way…not as a universal example of a human being…

and what of universal terms such as morality or ethics?
They too are just abstract words until put them into our own individual case
or actions…and what of words, universal words like justice, gravity,
time, space, freedom? Again, just abstract words until we give
them some form by our individual usage of the term…

We have large umbrella words such as morals and gravity and
justice, but they are just an abstraction until we put some meat
on their bones…and we do that by turning an abstraction into
a particular, individual form… and so if we take the holocaust as
an universal, it doesn’t make much sense to describe it as ‘‘Evil’’
but if we take the Holocaust as an individual event,
for example, we take the individual, Dietrich Bonhoeffer,
he died in the camps on April 9, 1945… and why?
he was anti-nazi… and how does a state, a regime
like Nazi Germany, hold itself to be ‘‘good’’, not ‘‘Evil’’
when it executes people like Bonhoeffer for dissent?

In his ‘‘trial’’’ there were no witnesses, no evidence,
and no records of the proceedings or any sort of defense…
and the German regime held itself as being ‘‘good’’
or engaged in the act of ‘‘Justice’’ but words like
justice need to be brought down to earth and
treated individually, not universally… for it is clear,
that Bonhoeffer wasn’t ‘‘justly’’ tried… but the Nazi’s
would have stated, under oath, that they were a ‘‘just’’
state… but given how they treated Bonhoeffer,
their defense of being ‘‘just’’ or ‘‘good’’
falls apart at the individual level, not at the universal,
abstract level…
and given their Nazi’s response, we can state that
the Holocaust was ‘‘Evil’’, once it is brought down
the individual level…

So, are you good or evil? are you engaged in suffering?

We can only tell given our individual response, not
our universal response…

Kropotkin

15

.
Peter has said some very nasty things to others over the years., does that make him evil?

.
Peter?

16

by the usage above, is the ism ‘‘Capitalism’’ evil?
and it depends on whether you used that word,
individually or universally?

so, what do you think?

Kropotkin

17

“The only good is the truth, the only evil is ignorance.”

I mean, kinda.

18

Nature knows no evil…no good no bad.
Nature only knows, superior/inferior, advantage/disadvantage…power/weakness.
All value judgements require an objective…intent.
Only life has intent.
Only life can believe in good vs bad.

The intent…the objective, determines the value judgement.

Kraponit’s objective is global collectivism - Humanism.
Equality…justice…peace on earth…love for everyone…
All anti-life sentimentalities.
He’s no philosopher…
His brain thoroughly indoctrinated by the Jews, after decades of Hollywood and Media propaganda…he can only be triggered by certain terms…Holocaust, Hitler…Nazis, Fascists…Capitalists…exploitation…
Isn’t Marxism a Jew invention?
Does he not exploit the work of other organism’s every time he takes a bite?
Does he not take advantage of their work in appropriating and breaking nutrients down to a condensed form: flesh, organic matter?
Is he not exploiting other life forms to stay alive?

Has her not being privileged by America’s dominance, all these years?
Has his lifestyle not been determined by the US’s exploitation of other peoples, other nations?
Has he not voted for the governments he complains about, or has he not remained indifferent to what they do, in his name?

Nature knows no good or evil, naive old man.
These are lefty sentiments…victim psychology.
Straight from the Bible.

19

I think… that you are not a very nice man.