Could anyone help me come up with some points for a presentation about man vs evil?

and utopias

I see you haven’t had any replies. Perhaps you could give more information on the task in hand? People would be more willing and able to help you then.

Anyone out there???? Really urgent

hello. Apologies for the late reply.

It’s good that you are looking around on the internet finding ideas. I think what you need to do with them is write them all down, and try to group them together, so that your presentation can be organised.

Am i right in thinking the title of your presentation is simply ‘man vs. Evil’? Off the top of my head, you may find it worth considering the following:

The definition of evil - in general, it denotes profound immorality. The religious perspective goes a little further, regarding evil as a supernatural force causing human suffering, and is the opposite of ‘good’. It may be useful to compare these slightly nuanced interpretations of what evil really is, as different points of view may offer different solutions.

Does evil really exist? Is it just a figment of the collective human imagination? If humanity were to be wiped out now, would the concept of evil perish with us? Or is it something that also manifests in the lives of other animals, and are they able to conceptualise it in the same way, or perhaps they perceive events detrimental to themselves as a condition of nature?

The subjectivity of evil: Different societies, political ideologies and religions will have different ideas of what constitutes immorality, and therefore of what constitutes evil.

The benefit of the species vs the benefit of the individual: For instance, the immense suffering caused to millions of russians under the yoke of the soviet union was justified as a means to an end - the socialist utopia. They therefore would argue that the individual suffering was necessary for the greater good of mankind, and is therefore not at all evil.

Consider the nihilistic perspective: Nihilists believe that there is no objective purpose or value of life, and that ideas of morality are a human invention - that is, there is nothing inherent or natural about the idea of morality. If the same applies to immorality, then there is no inherent evil, i.e. It does not truly exist.

Consider the different solutions that abrahamic religions offer to the problem of evil: Although they are monotheistic, they are also dualist, meaning they believe in two opposing supernatural forces - good and evil. In order to overcome the latter, the individual must choose the former in accordance with the ways of his/her respective religion. My knowledge on abrahamic faiths is quite superficial, so i’ll say no more on this, but you might want to research them individually in order the compare their respective approaches to evil - perhaps to evaluate how they are similar or different from one another.

Consider the buddhist approach: Again, my knowledge is superficial, but i understand that in order to overcome suffering and evil, instead of changing the actual circumstances surrounding it, or praying to a god, buddhists believe that we must change our mindset, so that it can no longer cause us pain. Achieving this mental state is called ‘enlightenment’. Perhaps you could link this to the nihilistic approach, as it appears to tacitly admit that the concept of evil is a disease of the mind? As a side note, buddhism isn’t truly atheist, because it doesn’t deny the existence of gods. It just argues that gods are subject to the same natural laws that humans are, and so through transcending them through enlightenment, we can escape gods’ power to cause us suffering. Conversely, it implies that gods are also unable to take suffering away.

The role of different political structures / social hierarchies: The exponents of these structures tend to profess that they are the the most beneficial to humanity as a whole. Eg capitalism, nazism, fascism, liberalism, socialism, communism. In their own way, they profess to be the best / most moral method for ordering society, but all have their own shortcomings.

If i think of anything else, i’ll let you know.

Hope this helps.

The role of different political structures / social hierarchies: the exponents of these structures tend to profess that they are the the most beneficial to humanity as a whole. Eg Capitalism, Nazism, Fascism, Liberalism, socialism, communism. In their own way, they profess to be the best / most moral method for ordering society, but all have their own shortcomings.

All of this in order to achieve their perfect world. In order to have good you need bad

You could think of evil in relative terms such as that. But this is a very good example for considering the subjectivity of evil - how different political ideologies view different things as being ‘evil’, and contributing to human suffering. For example, communists think that the inequality that pervades a capitalist society is evil, whereas capitalists think the same of the lack of freedom in a communist society.

Honestly you are one of the most helpful people I've met. Now I can group everything together and just focus on remembering everything

The definition of evil - in general, it denotes profound immorality. The religious perspective goes a little further, regarding evil as a supernatural force causing human suffering, and is the opposite of ‘good’. It may be useful to compare these slightly nuanced interpretations of what evil really is, as different points of view may offer different solutions.