The Student Room Group

Surely evil is just subjective?

I honestly don't see how anyone can claim it is completely objective. What you consider evil all depend on your personal opinions and the way you were brought up.

Just look at society. It did many things hundreds of years ago that were completely acceptable/ was the norm but now would be considered evil. There is also potential for some of the things that society find acceptable today to be considered evil in the future.
(edited 7 years ago)

Scroll to see replies

if "evil" is the intention to do harm or inflict personal pain/sadness to others, then surely some acts, given some pretty obvious intentions (like arbitrary torture) will objectively be evil? I mean, sure, you can't technically objectify an intention because it is something intangible, but evidence surrounding actions can lead to very firm conclusions about such intents. ideas like capitalism and socialism might be subject to relativity in terms of morality, but some acts will objectively be evil because there is no good intention behind it, unlike the former two examples.
(edited 7 years ago)
Isn't murder objectively evil, measured by the harm/pain it causes, that it's depriving someone of a life, that their relatives will experience emotional distress, etc?
Evil is subjective in so many different ways. As the saying goes: "A villain on one side, is a hero on the side". Now, IS he a hero/villain or does he SEEM to be a hero/villain? Subjectivity definitely plays a part. Everyone's image is decided by someone else - an image that's always one off the mark. But there needs to be a general consensus and that's the reason there is a bottom line. In fact, you could say that it's in nature, to avoid conflict, that such a bottom line exists - so it's only naturally subjective. Nevertheless, doing what you think is right can only be the right answer. No matter how many wrongs we go, we'll keep looking for the right path. Don't ignore the advice of others', thinking their influence can only be a bad thing and not realising you're being stubborn.

That's what I think... at least.
:angelwings:
Original post by Iridocyclitis
Isn't murder objectively evil, measured by the harm/pain it causes, that it's depriving someone of a life, that their relatives will experience emotional distress, etc?


Many people would argue that the murder of evil people is a good thing.
Original post by sleepysnooze
if "evil" is the intention to do harm or inflict personal pain/sadness to others, then surely some acts, given some pretty obvious intentions (like arbitrary torture) will objectively be evil?


Right, the problem is people in positions of authority have decided that certain actions are evil, e.g. homosexuality, without evidence they actually are objectively harmful, which is I think what has confused the OP as he is, correctly, observing how our conception of evil actions has changed over time. This is true. But our conception of evil as harm-doing itself has remained the same - it simply hasn't been adhered to.

You may enjoy this book, which follows the argument onwards from there to conceive a scientific conception of morality, i.e. that once we can accurately and scientifically measure the harm of an action, we can objectively say if it is right or wrong (whether it adds to well-being or adds to suffering respectively).
Original post by Iridocyclitis
Isn't murder objectively evil, measured by the harm/pain it causes, that it's depriving someone of a life, that their relatives will experience emotional distress, etc?


Suppose murdering that person will save 100 people from torture and death at the hands of the person we have murdered - which action now has the total higher measure of harm/pain?
I read something earlier about a man who imprisoned his daughter for 24 years, did awful things. She had 8 kids 3 of whom were imprisoned for 8 years.

Surely that is not subjective, there is no way that you can defend something like that. Its evil.

I think if the victim is innocent then most evil acts are not subjective.
Reply 8
Avatar for canyou
canyou
OP
3
Original post by sleepysnooze
if "evil" is the intention to do harm or inflict personal pain/sadness to others, then surely some acts, given some pretty obvious intentions (like arbitrary torture) will objectively be evil? I mean, sure, you can't technically objectify an intention because it is something intangible, but evidence surrounding actions can lead to very firm conclusions about such intents. ideas like capitalism and socialism might be subject to relativity in terms of morality, but some acts will objectively be evil because there is no good intention behind it, unlike the former two examples.


It depends what you mean by good intention and what your view on good is. Murdering some people can actually benefit someone if they don't give a **** about the person they murdered.
Reply 9
Avatar for canyou
canyou
OP
3
Original post by SuperHuman98
I read something earlier about a man who imprisoned his daughter for 24 years, did awful things. She had 8 kids 3 of whom were imprisoned for 8 years.

Surely that is not subjective, there is no way that you can defend something like that. Its evil.

I think if the victim is innocent then most evil acts are not subjective.


So you saying it is objectively evil to torture some human beings but not others?
Reply 10
Avatar for canyou
canyou
OP
3
The way I see it is that it is only objectively wrong if it is impossible to do.
Original post by canyou
So you saying it is objectively evil to torture some human beings but not others?


No I am not saying that, that is not my opinion, I was just echoing what another persons view could be. If someone is evil I believe that prison is the right thing for them.
Original post by canyou
The way I see it is that it is only objectively wrong if it is impossible to do.


What do you mean?
I think everyone in the generations to come can find it in them to agree that what Hitler did was evil.
Reply 14
Avatar for canyou
canyou
OP
3
Original post by macromicro
What do you mean?


I mean if it can't be proved by science then it can't be objective.
Reply 15
Avatar for canyou
canyou
OP
3
Original post by TreeFellOnMe
I think everyone in the generations to come can find it in them to agree that what Hitler did was evil.


Every single person?

No I don't think that will ever happen.
Original post by canyou
It depends what you mean by good intention and what your view on good is. Murdering some people can actually benefit someone if they don't give a **** about the person they murdered.


who said murder? I said arbitrary torture
Reply 17
Avatar for hateme
hateme
3
Whether something is evil or not is based on context and perspective
You can't say murder is objectively evil in all cases without any context and vice versa
Reply 18
Avatar for hateme
hateme
3
Original post by sleepysnooze
who said murder? I said arbitrary torture


What if torture lead to saving 1000s of innocent people
Original post by Iridocyclitis
Isn't murder objectively evil, measured by the harm/pain it causes, that it's depriving someone of a life, that their relatives will experience emotional distress, etc?


So it was evil to fight Hitler?

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you