Good Vs. Evil
Tuesday, March 4, 2003 by joetheblow | Discussion: WinCustomize Talk
Reply #23 Tuesday, March 4, 2003 8:17 PM
That's what I forgot at the grocery store today.
Yes, those /are/ evil - but a delightfully good sort of evil.
Reply #25 Tuesday, March 4, 2003 8:31 PM
Reply #27 Tuesday, March 4, 2003 9:21 PM

Reply #28 Wednesday, March 5, 2003 12:20 AM
My initial question was perpusely vague. How can I ask who wins, and why with out setting some peramiteres. Some seemed to speak of beliefs and others of who writes history. Some feel it is an opinion.
i was tuaght to believe that Good always wins over evil because that is the way it is. Whether acts are considered good or evil is almost erelevent when it comes down to what it really is.
A rose by any other name would smell just the same.
Someone could say an act was evil while other say it is good, but in the end it is what it is and nothing more.
Hiroshima? Consentration Camps? 9/11? Slavery? Torture? Money? Trade and Barter society? Capitalist Society? Communist Society?
Reply #29 Wednesday, March 5, 2003 12:23 AM
Then you claim the Earth is round. Blasphemer!!!
Reply #30 Wednesday, March 5, 2003 12:31 AM
Evil? What is it? Okay, 'evil' being that which is first 'thought/created' and then propelled in malicious ways often by a belief system wrought with inequities and malcontent...mostly vocalized by a constituency of religious bias...and propelled by vacuous minds fraught with mindless adherence to a following of said beliefs... Yes, Ignorance is not bliss...ignorance is bloodyl, "Shmoopy"

Reply #31 Wednesday, March 5, 2003 12:38 AM
-Joan of Arc

Reply #32 Wednesday, March 5, 2003 12:55 AM
So who is Evil? The apple? Once I believe someone told me the apple was evil. So if he belived it is it true?
almost forgot
My belive is that Good overpowers evil because of one difference and only one. Good has the ability to do evil, but the knowledge and strength to know not to. With out that ability eventually you will self distruct. As evil, eventually the actions would show the lack to care your yourself and make a decicion that would ultimately take you and possibly anyone around you to distruction.
Reply #33 Wednesday, March 5, 2003 1:00 AM
Or the "sociopath" whom can feel compassion and self-pity for himself but none for his fellow men and would easily 'bash the brains in' of his enemy without even contemplating his 'enemy's' wife and family and children.
Hence, our psychopaths borne without compassion ore empathy or good... "emotional, empathic ignorance" can be just as much a stigma upon one's soul as intellectual ignorance...
Sad, but true.

Reply #34 Wednesday, March 5, 2003 1:04 AM
Positive energy against the negative...
Sadly, it's the Positive-Negative ions of the universe that have developed nuclear energy... Something Einstein immensely regretted.
Without the 'negative' there is no need for 'positive' and visa-versa...hence...our ongoing struggle to maintain the delicate balance of 'harmony'...

Reply #35 Wednesday, March 5, 2003 1:26 AM
A terrorist, I am sure all of you think his is evil not?
one mans terrorist is a ohter man's freedomfighter.
Reply #36 Wednesday, March 5, 2003 2:13 AM
I am sure a terrorist by name is not good at all, but those who call a terrorist a terrorist probably would not call them heros of which the other side would.
What I think is the case is probaly universal law that good is a mixture of 2 sides and the ability and knowledge to still be good. While evil is only one sided and inbalacanced. I think this is why good stays on top because of the balance. Evil can not maintain the balance.
So the nuclear reaction might be seen as distuction but it is possible that when the noise settles, the Good is the only thing left. Battle and brused but still there.
This is what I have accumilated so far on my stay on Earth. I do not know when I have to report back to the mother ship but hopefully it won't be soon.

Reply #37 Wednesday, March 5, 2003 3:06 AM

Reply #38 Wednesday, March 5, 2003 3:07 AM
None of the history books will say that the one who won was evil. They will say that only after the winner is defeated by someone else.
We've had a freedom fighter in India, Bhagat Singh. He was of the opinion that for the colonial rulers (British) to hear, he will have to speak loud (read explode bombs, use guns etc.). Though he never actually killed anybody, he was arrested and condemned to death for his militant views by the Empire. He was branded a terrorist. He was Evil. But after India achieved Independence (through non-violent means, I am proud to say), he was proclaimed a martyr. So now, we read that Bhagat Singh was a Good man.

Reply #39 Wednesday, March 5, 2003 3:53 AM
1. context is everything (had to say it)
2. don't judge the past by today's standards (and continuing that thought: don't judge other cultures based on your own)
3. good and evil are social constructs, what is "good" to group A at point B in space and time may be considered as "evil" by group C in space/time location D
4. people who need such social constructs in order to survive in this world are cannot take things as they are. They should expand their view perhaps
Ah hell, listen to Paxmaster and Mr Plurality.
Reply #40 Wednesday, March 5, 2003 9:39 AM
Hmmm I don't know what to say about good vs evil I let my heart tell me (which is why I'm always feeling guilty so I must be evillllllll) hehe!
I think we are born knowing by our hearts what really is evil if we listen to it more, I'm sure the ppl that do evil things on earth "know" by their own hearts what they do is evil but they do it anyways...
Please login to comment and/or vote for this skin.
Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
- Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums and downloading skins.
- Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
- Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
- It's simple, and FREE!







Reply #21 Tuesday, March 4, 2003 8:08 PM