View Full Version : Good and Bad
NeoTheOne
09-17-2006, 07:57 PM
What is Good, And What Is Bad?
Is there really a definite definition, or is it based on precipitin.
One might say that Good is what is Lawful and Bad is what is Unlawful. But again there are some laws which people refuse to follow. For example i dont know if this is still in effect but i rember when wearing religious head ware was banned in France. Well then if you were to wear it will be considered unlawful and thus be Bad?. But its not bad.
So What is Good and what is Bad?
JPaul
09-17-2006, 08:23 PM
There is more than one way to define the difference between good and bad, depending on one's precipitin.
The following are a few examples of what may be considered good / bad, this list is far from exhaustive.
1. The law, to break laws may be considered bad.
2. Religious dogma, for example breaking a commandment.
3. One's conscience, doing something one has decided for themselves is wrong.
4. Circumstances, something may be intrinsically bad, however if it is the lesser of two bad things then would it be wrong to carry out the act. It may be required to knock out a drowning child, in order to save their life. Would hitting the child be bad.
Like I said this is far from being exhaustive, one must consider many factors. However in my view matters of conscience and belief outweigh matters of law, when it comes to deciding on what is good and what is bad.
A child is completly unaware of the fact that pulling that object could kill him.
We tell the child that it is bad to pull that object.
BrolyBoo
09-18-2006, 09:08 PM
What is Good, And What Is Bad?
Is there really a definite definition, or is it based on precipitin.
One might say that Good is what is Lawful and Bad is what is Unlawful. But again there are some laws which people refuse to follow. For example i dont know if this is still in effect but i rember when wearing religious head ware was banned in France. Well then if you were to wear it will be considered unlawful and thus be Bad?. But its not bad.
So What is Good and what is Bad?
really, i dont think there is a good and a bad
good could be anything in anyone's mind
so could bad
Barbarossa
09-19-2006, 08:23 AM
Bad is that which hurts people.
Good is that which benefits people.
At the end of the day, good and bad is often just a matter of interpretation.
limesqueezer
09-21-2006, 03:10 AM
If you don't know what is good than you are..well.humm..really not inteligent.
I don't need laws to tell me that killing is bad, i wouldn't do if there was a law that you have to kill. When in religion there are no bad people, you can do whatever you like in the name of your god or just because you like it, all you have to do is to confess to your sins, well only if you think you done bad. At end everybody goes to heaven, good and evil.
If you don't know what is good than you are..well.humm..really not inteligent.
unnecessary comment and rude
I don't need laws to tell me that killing is bad,
you make it sound like killing is inherently bad was this your intention and if so could you explain why. Personally i agree with BrolyBoo, nothing is inherently good or bad it is all about perspective i.e. in the eye of the beholder. Imo religion and law don't really need to be specifically mentioned, because even though they are important in shaping our beliefs of good and bad, they are just a couple of the social forces which affect our perspective, whereas i think the important thing is that it is your perspective that guides the decision on whether something is good or bad.
bashnu
09-22-2006, 10:18 PM
If only things could be good all the time.
then we couldn't laugh about the bad times.
I am going through a serious bad stretch right now, in all the senses. It hurts.
Seedler
09-23-2006, 03:09 AM
not good is bad, and not bad is good.
Comprendre?
Agrajag
09-23-2006, 02:44 PM
unnecessary comment and rude
I don't need laws to tell me that killing is bad,
you make it sound like killing is inherently bad was this your intention and if so could you explain why. Personally i agree with BrolyBoo, nothing is inherently good or bad it is all about perspective i.e. in the eye of the beholder. Imo religion and law don't really need to be specifically mentioned, because even though they are important in shaping our beliefs of good and bad, they are just a couple of the social forces which affect our perspective, whereas i think the important thing is that it is your perspective that guides the decision on whether something is good or bad.
Where, pray tell do you think you get this percpective from.
peat moss
09-23-2006, 03:12 PM
I like Zed's comment it explains in a nutshell .
Where, pray tell, do you think you get this perspective from.
the place babies come from :unsure: either there or belgium
bornwithnoname
10-01-2006, 12:40 AM
If good and evil are in the eye of the beholder then from Hilter's perspective he wasn't wrong?
If good and evil are in the eye of the beholder then from Hilter's perspective he wasn't wrong?
Hitler was a psychopath.
I think it's pretty safe to say that from his perspective anything that he was ok with was right.
EDit: as far as he was concerned, I mean.
bornwithnoname
10-01-2006, 04:06 PM
If good and evil are in the eye of the beholder then from Hilter's perspective he wasn't wrong?
Hitler was a psychopath.
I think it's pretty safe to say that from his perspective anything that he was ok with was right.
EDit: as far as he was concerned, I mean.
The fact that he was a nut job is irrelavent to the question.
Do you even understand the question you put forth?
As far as he was concerned he wasn't wrong, and that had much to do with what he was.
JPaul
10-02-2006, 04:29 PM
Hitler was a psychopath.
I think it's pretty safe to say that from his perspective anything that he was ok with was right.
EDit: as far as he was concerned, I mean.
The fact that he was a nut job is irrelavent to the question.
No it isn't.
In fact it is fundamental to the question, part of the question must be whether good and bad are subjective or objective.
Not terribly clever, but it sort of treats the subject. (http://www.update.uu.se/~fbendz/philo/objective_morality.html)
JPaul
10-02-2006, 05:33 PM
Not terribly clever, but it sort of treats the subject. (http://www.update.uu.se/~fbendz/philo/objective_morality.html)
Got as far as
"Different people who advocate the idea that there is some kind of objective morality do not seam to have the same meaning of the term."
then lost the will to ... oh never mind.
Not terribly clever, but it sort of treats the subject. (http://www.update.uu.se/~fbendz/philo/objective_morality.html)
Got as far as
"Different people who advocate the idea that there is some kind of objective morality do not seam to have the same meaning of the term."
then lost the will to ... oh never mind.
Yeah :dabs:
Lots of reasoning about moral relativism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_relativism) does that to me, poor grammar and spelling or not. (And to top it off that particular author should at least mention the divine command theory, and such, but he doesn't.)
As far as I'm concerned relative morality is seriously fucking nasty business.
It's the best excuse I've ever heard to turn a blind eye to what's wrong. All in the name of liberal thinking, or somesuch.
I'd rather subscribe to utilitarism than that, so "for the greater good" and "the majority rules", and all that.
Morality, IMO, should be democratic in a way that ignores borders.
There should be an objective morality, one that's determined democratically.
Not an absolute one tho', 'cos we change and we learn.
Hitler thought he was right, 'cos he was mental, but he wasn't right :snooty:
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.