Are you ready to play with your life, are you ready to take the risk? you may be ready to give new life but not anyone while to take risk... or may wanted to give life... poor unwanted child.
you make it clear... Abortion is a murder and a choice.
I do not know why you guy's derived from original thread... or you can say abortion is evil.
It does not mater if morality is subjective or objective, I believe there is just moral.
Murder is also a personal choice, and I might not be anything to prevent it at times, but I sure will try to make it clear why it shouldn't … morebe done.
The risk is extremely small, it's not even legitimate to allow all abortion for such a small risk (that is almost nonexistent today due to modern technology, sanitary hospitals and what not).
AWESOMEO why you have to be so smart...
Are you ready to play with your life, are you ready to take the risk? you may be ready to give ne… morew life but not anyone while to take risk... or may wanted to give life... poor unwanted child.
you make it clear... Abortion is a murder and a choice.
I do not know why you guy's derived from original thread... or you can say abortion is evil.
It does not mater if morality is subjective or objective, I believe there is just moral.
morality is what you believe in, good or bad are just definition to your believes...
I believe that is not a straight "good" or "bad", so yeah that mean you have right (short pause) again "no right in determining what is good and what is bad" but so I believe in ORDER AND CHAOS.
Now if you are such smart friend can you answer to my question
I don't know either, just wanted to make it clear about when I stand on this, but I said that this is better if discussed on PM.
If you believe there's just morality, I believe that means it's objective
If morality was nothing but a simple belief, it would be nonexistent.
Man never chooses evil for the point of being evil, evil is merely a false conception of which that is good. No one is born evil, but they can choose the morally wrong things out of good intention.
"it desires to have you, but you must rule over it.”
morality is what you believe in, good or bad are just definition to your believes...
I believe that is not a straight "good" or "bad", so… more yeah that mean you have right (short pause) again "no right in determining what is good and what is bad" but so I believe in ORDER AND CHAOS.
Now if you are such smart friend can you answer to my question
The people are born evil or they are become evil?
If it's a question of morals, trying to define someone as evil doesn't make much sense to me because they wouldn't understand what morals are, if only as a rule-based thing like an ordinance. Also, there's the problem of splitting, as in, saying someone's "all bad" or "all good" doesn't make sense, so the term "evil" seems pretty naïve in my opinion, like a child's understanding of "bad": intuitive, but simplistic.
In other words, I don't think evil people really exist, as things are always more complicated than that.
Further, you have to look at the situation they're in, how they perceive things, what they believe, etc., and then you have to accept that, under certain pressures and seeing things a particular way, even supposedly good people (such as yourself) can do things that others would define as evil. If you can think of yourself as good mostly because of how many bad things you haven't done but had the chance to do, then maybe that'll work for you. There's also the idea of a "bad conscience" where being nice can become competitive and lead to harming others or even a pleasure in self-hatred.
What if he was tortured like Rob to be that way and has since forgotten who he used to be?
(If this question is answered in the books, forgive me, because I haven't read them.)
You should never call someone else evil because it's hypocritical because you also have a bit of evil in yourself.
I'm going to have to disagree with this statement. There are many levels of evil, and why should it be hypocritical to call someone like Hitler evil just because everyone has some evil in them, even if it's very minor? For example, it's not hypocritical to call someone who beats people everyday just because he wants to, because you once wanted to hit someone, as they are completely different levels of evil and different things.
Everybody has at least a little bit of evil in them but nobody is pure evil.
You should never call someone else evil because it's hypocritical because you also have a bit of evil in yourself.
He is right I think the Stranger said it best "some more than others". Do I think there is selfishness and greed in everyone? Yes but there are standards
You should never call someone else evil because it's hypocritical because you also have a bit of evil in yourself.
I'm going to have… more to disagree with this statement. There are many levels of evil, and why should it be hypocritical to call someone like Hitler evil just because everyone has some evil in them, even if it's very minor? For example, it's not hypocritical to call someone who beats people everyday just because he wants to, because you once wanted to hit someone, as they are completely different levels of evil and different things.
I always hated this argument, because it claims to be neutral when it really isn't (stop me if I'm putting word in your mouth). Going to 'grey' nonetheless connotes concepts of black and white (ie Good and Evil) but acknowledges that there is no entity which truly embodies one or the other. Nonetheless, as the concepts of black and white are subsequently presupposed in the statement, those qualities can nonetheless be ascertained. In the abstract, good and evil are a matter of philosophy; brain patterns, compulsion, socialization, etc. - those things are practical considerations in evaluating how much those value systems can be enacted, but does not have any bearing on the validity of the value systems themselves.
I suppose it depends on what you perceive as "good". How do you define someone as either good or evil? Surely there's no black and white ans… morewer to that, but a lot of grey. And to what extent should we judge others this way? Surely we have all done something which has had negative consequences, either for ourselves or for others at some point in our lives? And that's another thing - is it somebody's behaviour which defines them as either good or evil, or should their thoughts be penalised too, even if extreme ideas do not influence their behaviour? Is it a question of morals, choice, psychology or neurology?
Okay I'll stop.
I'll just say, there are very few real moral relativists (fortunately); most people have an idea of what is good and bad, and they believe that other people should share that idea of being good and bad - how forcefully they argue for it is the difference. I think what I think, and I think other people should think the way that I think - because I think I'm right, otherwise I wouldn't think that way - the question is how far am I willing to go to enforce that other people behave as I feel 'good,' which is largely reliant on the certainty I have in those beliefs; but to simply toss your hands up and say 'people can believe what they want' is really made out of bad faith.
To actually answer the question - I believe 'evil' or the closest thing to it, is malice; not bad things done out of anger, vengeance, or selfishness, but those harmful deeds which are done solely for the gratification of the actor. "Le mal pour le mal" - that's evil.
Just to add to what I said earlier, (assuming there is a black-and-white definition of good and evil to you) - do you think it is a person's… more personality traits (dispositional factors) or the situation that they are in (positional factors) that makes them act in such a way that could be considered 'evil'? Food for thought - I don't actually know where to begin answering these questions, but here's a documentary of the infamous Zimbardo et al study into role acceptance which is extremely interesting and definitely worth a look if you are not easily disturbed:
Not surprisingly, I confused Robb Stark and Theon Greyjoy for some reason, so what I mean to ask is (without knowing anything about Ramsay Snow's history), would you say Ramsay is evil if he were tortured and manipulated to be how he is now by someone else?
Black and white are the extreme opposites which insinuates that there is a gauge to measure morality like 'on a scale of one to ten' but good and evil can only ever realy be perceptions based on social norms and ect there is no true ten so nobody can be ten . Edid: (just an extra) that means people fall inbetween which would make them grey
I always hated this argument, because it claims to be neutral when it really isn't (stop me if I'm putting word in your mouth). Going to 'gr… moreey' nonetheless connotes concepts of black and white (ie Good and Evil) but acknowledges that there is no entity which truly embodies one or the other. Nonetheless, as the concepts of black and white are subsequently presupposed in the statement, those qualities can nonetheless be ascertained. In the abstract, good and evil are a matter of philosophy; brain patterns, compulsion, socialization, etc. - those things are practical considerations in evaluating how much those value systems can be enacted, but does not have any bearing on the validity of the value systems themselves.
Ideally if you call Hitler hypocritical then he can counter by saying you're evil as well. Yes I know there are different degrees but generally people don't use phrases like, 'so evil', 'very evil' etc. The just use, 'evil' as an absolutist term which it is not. Nobody is pure evil. I wouldn't even say Hitler is pure evil because he did have a wife who he treated well so there did seem to be at least a little good in him.
So basically calling Hitler evil should be hypocritical but calling him very evil should be okay.
You should never call someone else evil because it's hypocritical because you also have a bit of evil in yourself.
I'm going to have… more to disagree with this statement. There are many levels of evil, and why should it be hypocritical to call someone like Hitler evil just because everyone has some evil in them, even if it's very minor? For example, it's not hypocritical to call someone who beats people everyday just because he wants to, because you once wanted to hit someone, as they are completely different levels of evil and different things.
In the final days of the war, during the Battle of Berlin, Hitler married Eva Braun. On 30 April 1945, less than two days later, the two committed suicide.
Well yeah it is hypocritical.
Ideally if you call Hitler hypocritical then he can counter by saying you're evil as well. Yes I know there… more are different degrees but generally people don't use phrases like, 'so evil', 'very evil' etc. The just use, 'evil' as an absolutist term which it is not. Nobody is pure evil. I wouldn't even say Hitler is pure evil because he did have a wife who he treated well so there did seem to be at least a little good in him.
So basically calling Hitler evil should be hypocritical but calling him very evil should be okay.
In the final days of the war, during the Battle of Berlin, Hitler married Eva Braun. On 30 April 1945, less than two days later, the two committed suicide.
Not surprisingly, I confused Robb Stark and Theon Greyjoy for some reason, so what I mean to ask is (without knowing anything about Ramsay S… morenow's history), would you say Ramsay is evil if he were tortured and manipulated to be how he is now by someone else?
The scene shows a "routine sampan board and search." What happens is that an on edge and frustrated Chef boards the boat to search for any contraband. Once instructed to look near a basket of rice, a young girl lunges at him. This makes a jumpy and tense Mr. Clean shoot and kill everyone on the sampan with the exception of the young girl who is in critical condition. What she was luging at Chef for is because she thought he was going to find her puppy and take it from her, all a miscommunication. The captain instructs everyone to bring the dying girl onto the boat to get her to a medic, captain Willard is angered by this as he told them not to stop for the "board and search." Without hesitation he executes her in front of everyone and says "I told you not to stop, now lets go." This action has alluded me since I've first seen this film four years ago.
My question is if what he did could be seen as an 'evil' action? Certainly not good, but before he had has his authority challenged at every turn by several other soldiers as well as everyone on board the PBR. Through the next scene he narrates his thoughts saying "that's how things worked over here. They cut 'em in half with the machine gun and then give them a Band-Aid. It was a lie, and the more I saw them, the more I hated lies."
Im sorry but someone who constantly talks about how they want to join the army saying abortion is evil doesn't sit well with me. Especially since the army you want to join uses abhorrent practices and illegal weaponry.
If morality was nothing but a simple belief, it would be nonexistent.
Man never chooses evil for the point of being evil, evil is merely … morea false conception of which that is good. No one is born evil, but they can choose the morally wrong things out of good intention.
"it desires to have you, but you must rule over it.”
I think parts of it are objective. For example, we can all agree that killing someone when they pose no threat to you or others is wrong, or… more that stealing when you have enough is wrong.
But then we go into things like abortion. There's logic and facts to back up each side of the argument, so there is no right or wrong there since people have differing opinions. When it comes to morality, there are things that are obviously wrong and unjust, but there are also things that just come down to opinion.
Morality could still be objective though, it's just that people choose to invent their own interpretations to morality from their own line o… moref thought, emotions and their own standards. When I said mortality is probably objective I didn't mean everyone would have the same standards for it, but just that there would be 1 undoubtable set of standards in this world that would determine what is "good" and what is "bad", but of course, people would never agree to follow those standards even if it were presented to them, because some things are too loaded and complex for everyone to understand one view and agree on it... They would continue argue about what is wrong and what is right, and not necessarily be reasonable and understand it all at once
I don't know, that's my opinion.
Theon was brainwashed secondly I'm pretty sure one of Roose's men (The original Reek) had a lot to do with the horrible person Ram had become . It goes deeper into it in the book Reek teaches him things and they do them together
I'd say he's evil, but unwillingly evil. Being tortured and manipulated into doing something isn't the same as doing things of their own acc… moreord.
And Theon Greyjoy didn't really forget who he is. He was tortured and is now but a shadow of his former self, but Theon is still there within Reek.
I'm not going to fight anyone, I'm joining the Intel Corps.
Besides, they force me to join, it's not my choice.
And let's say that I were to join the army out of free will and into the infantry, that still doesn't make what you mean any more true. The army provides self-defence from attackers, they don't murder innocents (I am aware of the Gaza Strip casualties, but they were only victims of circumstances and were not directly attacked by the military).
Im sorry but someone who constantly talks about how they want to join the army saying abortion is evil doesn't sit well with me. Especially since the army you want to join uses abhorrent practices and illegal weaponry.
Theon was tortured. He simply reached a point where his psyche broke. Not exactly a brainwashing.
As for your second point, I can kind of agree that the original Reek had a hand in making Ramsay what he is, but I don't think his impact was big enough.
Theon was brainwashed secondly I'm pretty sure one of Roose's men (The original Reek) had a lot to do with the horrible person Ram had become . It goes deeper into it in the book Reek teaches him things and they do them together
Its clear that you have no idea what your talking about im sure you goverment does a good job keeping its citizens brainwashed.
Isreal have the most advanced weaponry in the world the accuracy of the snipers is second to none targets can be taken out quickly and cleanly without harming innocent bystanders but instead its not uncommon for entire buildings packed with apartments to be raised to the ground to take out one or two targets, killing hundreds of people indiscriminately men woman child or fetus it doesnt realy matter in ethnic cleansing.
Im not going to say anymore you will never convince me and I will never convince you but i hope one day you will open your eyes and see things for what they realy are.
I'm not going to fight anyone, I'm joining the Intel Corps.
Besides, they force me to join, it's not my choice.
And let's say that I w… moreere to join the army out of free will and into the infantry, that still doesn't make what you mean any more true. The army provides self-defence from attackers, they don't murder innocents (I am aware of the Gaza Strip casualties, but they were only victims of circumstances and were not directly attacked by the military).
Its clear that you have no idea what your talking about im sure you goverment does a good job keeping its citizens brainwashed.
Isreal ha… moreve the most advanced weaponry in the world the accuracy of the snipers is second to none targets can be taken out quickly and cleanly without harming innocent bystanders but instead its not uncommon for entire buildings packed with apartments to be raised to the ground to take out one or two targets, killing hundreds of people indiscriminately men woman child or fetus it doesnt realy matter in ethnic cleansing.
Im not going to say anymore you will never convince me and I will never convince you but i hope one day you will open your eyes and see things for what they realy are.
Also even in intel your hands wont be clean
Sorry, but since there are societies where killing isn't always wrong (including our own, think self defense/ the army!) then it's simply impossible to believe that it's objective.
It's like saying 'I don't believe gravity exists'. It ignores all available evidence.
The book described him as a "problem child" and he had a lot of anger inside of him then Reek showed up and he became something way worse. Missing a male adult figure in his life Reek became the closest thing he had to a father and he influenced what Ram is now. I know Ramsay haters will try to deny it but there are reasons among "he's just evil"
Theon was tortured. He simply reached a point where his psyche broke. Not exactly a brainwashing.
As for your second point, I can kind of… more agree that the original Reek had a hand in making Ramsay what he is, but I don't think his impact was big enough.
The book described him as a "problem child" and he had a lot of anger inside of him then Reek showed up and he became something way worse. M… moreissing a male adult figure in his life Reek became the closest thing he had to a father and he influenced what Ram is now. I know Ramsay haters will try to deny it but there are reasons among "he's just evil"
In a nutshell, basically anyone who's willing to hurt others to get what they want, whether that be physically, mentally, or emotionally.
Especially if they do so to a child.
Comments
AWESOMEO why you have to be so smart...
Are you ready to play with your life, are you ready to take the risk? you may be ready to give new life but not anyone while to take risk... or may wanted to give life... poor unwanted child.
you make it clear... Abortion is a murder and a choice.
I do not know why you guy's derived from original thread... or you can say abortion is evil.
It does not mater if morality is subjective or objective, I believe there is just moral.
I don't know either, just wanted to make it clear about when I stand on this, but I said that this is better if discussed on PM.
If you believe there's just morality, I believe that means it's objective
morality is what you believe in, good or bad are just definition to your believes...
I believe that is not a straight "good" or "bad", so yeah that mean you have right (short pause) again "no right in determining what is good and what is bad" but so I believe in ORDER AND CHAOS.
Now if you are such smart friend can you answer to my question
The people are born evil or they are become evil?
If morality was nothing but a simple belief, it would be nonexistent.
Man never chooses evil for the point of being evil, evil is merely a false conception of which that is good. No one is born evil, but they can choose the morally wrong things out of good intention.
"it desires to have you, but you must rule over it.”
If it's a question of morals, trying to define someone as evil doesn't make much sense to me because they wouldn't understand what morals are, if only as a rule-based thing like an ordinance. Also, there's the problem of splitting, as in, saying someone's "all bad" or "all good" doesn't make sense, so the term "evil" seems pretty naïve in my opinion, like a child's understanding of "bad": intuitive, but simplistic.
In other words, I don't think evil people really exist, as things are always more complicated than that.
Further, you have to look at the situation they're in, how they perceive things, what they believe, etc., and then you have to accept that, under certain pressures and seeing things a particular way, even supposedly good people (such as yourself) can do things that others would define as evil. If you can think of yourself as good mostly because of how many bad things you haven't done but had the chance to do, then maybe that'll work for you. There's also the idea of a "bad conscience" where being nice can become competitive and lead to harming others or even a pleasure in self-hatred.
So, yeah, it's always more complicated.
What if he was tortured like Rob to be that way and has since forgotten who he used to be?
(If this question is answered in the books, forgive me, because I haven't read them.)
I don't think I understand your question. First of all, who's Rob? Second, what do you mean to ask, exactly?
I'm going to have to disagree with this statement. There are many levels of evil, and why should it be hypocritical to call someone like Hitler evil just because everyone has some evil in them, even if it's very minor? For example, it's not hypocritical to call someone who beats people everyday just because he wants to, because you once wanted to hit someone, as they are completely different levels of evil and different things.
He is right I think the Stranger said it best "some more than others". Do I think there is selfishness and greed in everyone? Yes but there are standards
I always hated this argument, because it claims to be neutral when it really isn't (stop me if I'm putting word in your mouth). Going to 'grey' nonetheless connotes concepts of black and white (ie Good and Evil) but acknowledges that there is no entity which truly embodies one or the other. Nonetheless, as the concepts of black and white are subsequently presupposed in the statement, those qualities can nonetheless be ascertained. In the abstract, good and evil are a matter of philosophy; brain patterns, compulsion, socialization, etc. - those things are practical considerations in evaluating how much those value systems can be enacted, but does not have any bearing on the validity of the value systems themselves.
I'll just say, there are very few real moral relativists (fortunately); most people have an idea of what is good and bad, and they believe that other people should share that idea of being good and bad - how forcefully they argue for it is the difference. I think what I think, and I think other people should think the way that I think - because I think I'm right, otherwise I wouldn't think that way - the question is how far am I willing to go to enforce that other people behave as I feel 'good,' which is largely reliant on the certainty I have in those beliefs; but to simply toss your hands up and say 'people can believe what they want' is really made out of bad faith.
To actually answer the question - I believe 'evil' or the closest thing to it, is malice; not bad things done out of anger, vengeance, or selfishness, but those harmful deeds which are done solely for the gratification of the actor. "Le mal pour le mal" - that's evil.
The lemon acronym speaks for itself.
You hurt me bwain
Stalin and Hitler.
Not surprisingly, I confused Robb Stark and Theon Greyjoy for some reason, so what I mean to ask is (without knowing anything about Ramsay Snow's history), would you say Ramsay is evil if he were tortured and manipulated to be how he is now by someone else?
Black and white are the extreme opposites which insinuates that there is a gauge to measure morality like 'on a scale of one to ten' but good and evil can only ever realy be perceptions based on social norms and ect there is no true ten so nobody can be ten . Edid: (just an extra) that means people fall inbetween which would make them grey
Well yeah it is hypocritical.
Ideally if you call Hitler hypocritical then he can counter by saying you're evil as well. Yes I know there are different degrees but generally people don't use phrases like, 'so evil', 'very evil' etc. The just use, 'evil' as an absolutist term which it is not. Nobody is pure evil. I wouldn't even say Hitler is pure evil because he did have a wife who he treated well so there did seem to be at least a little good in him.
So basically calling Hitler evil should be hypocritical but calling him very evil should be okay.
In the final days of the war, during the Battle of Berlin, Hitler married Eva Braun. On 30 April 1945, less than two days later, the two committed suicide.
Their relationship had been going on for 15 years before their marriage.
Hitler seemed to believe in male superiority but he still treated her well.
I'd say he's evil, but unwillingly evil. Being tortured and manipulated into doing something isn't the same as doing things of their own accord.
And Theon Greyjoy didn't really forget who he is. He was tortured and is now but a shadow of his former self, but Theon is still there within Reek.
A bit off topic. But here's a particularly morally complex scene in Apocalypse Now.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=Nf8RY88NGkE
The scene shows a "routine sampan board and search." What happens is that an on edge and frustrated Chef boards the boat to search for any contraband. Once instructed to look near a basket of rice, a young girl lunges at him. This makes a jumpy and tense Mr. Clean shoot and kill everyone on the sampan with the exception of the young girl who is in critical condition. What she was luging at Chef for is because she thought he was going to find her puppy and take it from her, all a miscommunication. The captain instructs everyone to bring the dying girl onto the boat to get her to a medic, captain Willard is angered by this as he told them not to stop for the "board and search." Without hesitation he executes her in front of everyone and says "I told you not to stop, now lets go." This action has alluded me since I've first seen this film four years ago.
My question is if what he did could be seen as an 'evil' action? Certainly not good, but before he had has his authority challenged at every turn by several other soldiers as well as everyone on board the PBR. Through the next scene he narrates his thoughts saying "that's how things worked over here. They cut 'em in half with the machine gun and then give them a Band-Aid. It was a lie, and the more I saw them, the more I hated lies."
Just a random thought.
Im sorry but someone who constantly talks about how they want to join the army saying abortion is evil doesn't sit well with me. Especially since the army you want to join uses abhorrent practices and illegal weaponry.
Not every society believes that killing someone when they pose no threat to you or others is wrong, so it isn't objective.
If it's possible to have interpretations of morality then it's a subjective concept.
Objective is 'atoms exist' not 'theft is wrong'.
That depends if you believe there's someone to determine that fact, as in if God determined it, but that's something I won't get into.
Theon was brainwashed secondly I'm pretty sure one of Roose's men (The original Reek) had a lot to do with the horrible person Ram had become . It goes deeper into it in the book Reek teaches him things and they do them together
I'm not going to fight anyone, I'm joining the Intel Corps.
Besides, they force me to join, it's not my choice.
And let's say that I were to join the army out of free will and into the infantry, that still doesn't make what you mean any more true. The army provides self-defence from attackers, they don't murder innocents (I am aware of the Gaza Strip casualties, but they were only victims of circumstances and were not directly attacked by the military).
Again, this depends if there's an absolute truth about the statement "killing is wrong", I believe that there is, that's why I believe it's objective.
Theon was tortured. He simply reached a point where his psyche broke. Not exactly a brainwashing.
As for your second point, I can kind of agree that the original Reek had a hand in making Ramsay what he is, but I don't think his impact was big enough.
Its clear that you have no idea what your talking about im sure you goverment does a good job keeping its citizens brainwashed.
Isreal have the most advanced weaponry in the world the accuracy of the snipers is second to none targets can be taken out quickly and cleanly without harming innocent bystanders but instead its not uncommon for entire buildings packed with apartments to be raised to the ground to take out one or two targets, killing hundreds of people indiscriminately men woman child or fetus it doesnt realy matter in ethnic cleansing.
Im not going to say anymore you will never convince me and I will never convince you but i hope one day you will open your eyes and see things for what they realy are.
Also even in intel your hands wont be clean
I see how it is.
I won't waste any time talking to you about this, I've dealt with enough people like you.
I agree wholeheartedly. If SpongeBob taught me anything, it's never trust a lemon.
If life gives you lemons, take them and throw them in a bin and set fire to it.
I mean look at what that piece of shit lemon did to poor Patrick.
Sorry, but since there are societies where killing isn't always wrong (including our own, think self defense/ the army!) then it's simply impossible to believe that it's objective.
It's like saying 'I don't believe gravity exists'. It ignores all available evidence.
By that logic nothing is objective, so nothing is subjective.
The book described him as a "problem child" and he had a lot of anger inside of him then Reek showed up and he became something way worse. Missing a male adult figure in his life Reek became the closest thing he had to a father and he influenced what Ram is now. I know Ramsay haters will try to deny it but there are reasons among "he's just evil"
Whatever you say. I'm gonna stand by my points, nevertheless.
Ignorance is bliss
Self-irony does you credit.
In a nutshell, basically anyone who's willing to hurt others to get what they want, whether that be physically, mentally, or emotionally.
Especially if they do so to a child.
EA