So, by the statement: "everything that is abstract is relative," you are basically saying that anything that is not tangible, anything that cannot be physically seen is then relative, correct?

Let me ask a question, If all things abstract are relative, then the only things we say that actually are factual are those that have evidence correct?

So then I would ask of you, How can we hope to sort out what doesn't exist? We cannot.

I would like to hear your opinions on this question:

Since science has proven there is a pattern that it must operate in to maintain stability, and if it were to deviate from that pattern it would cause chaos and destruction. That means that there is a right way and a wrong way for it to operate, in the same way, there must be a right and a wrong way for humans to function to maintain stability and not cause chaos and destruction to themselves. I am not talking about laws here either, I am talking about moral laws.

Interesting stuff.You can take theis thinking beyond terms of evil to right and wrong. It does seem intuitivly illogical that group A cn be "right" in their opinion while group B can be "wrong" while both groups vehemently believe in the truth of their opinions. However I find myself tripping into this snare of relativism all the time. Take for example the liberals and conservatives or the Bush Administration. Do you think that Bush acts on what he truly believes is the right thing to do? Or does he try to justify decisions that he "knows in his heart" are morrally wrong? Is the conscience governed by personal rules, or true unchangable laws? It's a thought provoking proposition and no one will ever know the truth. (Then again that's a subjective term isn't it?) Some people believe that there really is a Jedi side and Dark side of the force present in the universe, or God and Satan, a law of nature like gravity.This idea is based on a philosophy called common or natural law which states this: Do all that you have said you'll do and do not encroach on other persons or your property. This theme of right and wrong has been present in every culture since primordial times. It is represented in religion and legal sytems. It is the basis for U.S. law, though in all forms it has been warped of some of it's pureness. ( For example, if common law was followed dirrectly, personally doing crack int the privacy of your own home would be legal. It doesn't harm anyone else.)So, does a basic, universal, ethical code really exist? There is also a small modern trend of thought that wonders if right and wrong is a human physiological trait, down to how people's brains are structured. Watered down, it says that that the human species is evolving in opposite dirrections of "truth" (and everything else) is perceived or (example here)how left and right wingers literally interpret reality differently. Personally, I don't know whether I'm inclined to believe in evil as a social veiw or real phenomanae, but I try to live by common law.( Which endorses pacifism, tolerance, privacy, honesty, and freedom in a big way, if you'll notice.) I realize that this could offend people on multiple fronts, but I ask you not to veiw this as a personal attack, but rather a general observation to be approached with an open mind.

quote:

The problem is, without good and evil- that is if we truly believe good and evil only exist in how we feel- we have absolutely no right to look upon evil regimes and say "they are wrong, they must stop!".

I've said it thrice, I don't mean to eliminate laws in order in society and the world, because regardless of what you or I think of them, they are necessarry.

quote:

n this scenario, we would be no better than animals, if that is the case, look at animals (which don't have any laws, or human like emotions) And if you watch them, you will see that there is order not chaos.

Yes, but under a barbaric, unhuman society. Kill if you will, rape if you will, etc.

quote:

I'm not sure if I know what you mean here, you are probably using the right word, but I don't completly understand what you mean by abstract.

Every emotion/thought/idea, basically.

Celticnewager, you've happened upon an idea that David Hume wrote about. It is relativism that attempts to eliminate objective notions of good and evil by reducing them to what we feel.

You will find that most relativists are indeed absolutists: at the very least they believe that it is wrong to force your views upon another or to be intolerant. The supreme morality of relativism is tolerance.

The problem is, without good and evil- that is if we truly believe good and evil only exist in how we feel- we have absolutely no right to look upon evil regimes and say "they are wrong, they must stop!". Because the culture of the regime has as much right to feel good about its actions as you might. And this is regressive. Only person who can appeal to an objective "out there" good can say to Nazi Germany youmust stop in the name of Good or Justice or Truth. The relativist has no legitimacy, no authority to do so, and suppose that they ought to be considered seriously. They can only do it in their name.

quote:

Everything that's abstract (if abstract is the correct word, correct me if wrong) is relative.

I'm not sure if I know what you mean here, you are probably using the right word, but I don't completly understand what you mean by abstract.

quote:

"Order" is created to control society. If you picture us in a world where no law would exist, nor any sort of guilt in the human, you'd realize order doesn't exist in the core of human nature.

In this scenario, we would be no better than animals, if that is the case, look at animals (which don't have any laws, or human like emotions) And if you watch them, you will see that there is order not chaos.

quote:

Celtic, I know why order was created. People have always tried to control others, it's no mystery to me.

True. Our ultimate goal is to the self, which makes us become rather bossy.

bomo, everything is chaos. That's what makes it all beautiful. And you don't understand why there can't be right and wrong because our minds weren't meant for them to understand! I don't even fully understand it, but I know it to be true! Being transsexual has opened my mind up to so many different points of view, which is why I believe that all the religons have it wrong and only a little is really the truth of the matter. What if God created the world, just created it so we could flourish and die and try to make sense of it all. What if there was no opposition? What if there was no fate, no truth, no heaven, no afterlife? It's too hard to undertsand, so we try to find out reasons for it all. Why try to explain it away. We try to find meaning. We try to find existance outside ourselves. We're afraid we may be here for nothing, so we blame it all on other people and say their ways are wrong where really no one is in the wrong or right! It is all chaos, can't you see?

Celtic, I know why order was created. People have always tried to control others, it's no mystery to me.

quote:

I must beg to differ from your opinions, there must be a right and wrong, and there must be truth, there is no other way that logic or order can exist.

"Order" is created to control society. If you picture us in a world where no law would exist, nor any sort of guilt in the human, you'd realize order doesn't exist in the core of human nature.

Everything that's abstract (if abstract is the correct word, correct me if wrong) is relative.

Ok, hold on just for a second, I have a few questions:

If good and evil are relative, then what else is relative?

It leads also to the debate of truth being relative, is it?

And if truth is relative as well as good and evil, Then I can question yours or anyones or anythings existence, it creates a never ending cycle of neutrality and chaos. Because if I question your existence, you then cannot argue the point.

I must beg to differ from your opinions, there must be a right and wrong, and there must be truth, there is no other way that logic or order can exist.

Celtic, I appreciate what you're trying to say, but I didn't mean hues in between, I meant hues regardless, of which good and evil may or may not be a part of.

And I'm going to expand on your laws thing. I think that laws aren't put down to dictate between the "good" and "evil" of society, they're put down to keep order in a logical sense.

WAITING:
I don't think anything is evil. I think some things cause harm (like your example of murder), and some things are helpful. Why do western traditions always think that there are always two poles to every issue! There isn't a right and wrong, there's many other things as well!

I think we all agree that we all view certain things as "evil" (I view murder as evil) and, as Celtic said, boundaries must be placed on humans. But to the entire world, universe even, there isn't one thing that everyone single person would say is evil (no matter how much I think murder is evil, the murderer does not) and, therefore, it does not exist.

It is simply a word/term that we use to associate with things each individual person thinks is evil and that society thinks is evil. But it's relative as to who thinks what is evil.

quote:

is that all emotions

Negative ones.

Evil and good are, god I forgot the world, ah, relative. It's how you see it. So neither actually exist. And maybe you may see something as good, but with a tad of evil, so like wavemaster said, there are many hues in between as well.

So if, like you said, this guy with the emotions that bring him heart failure, well, that is terrible, for him. But maybe he has a daughter who is waiting for his death so she could get his insurance money, so it's good for her.

I'm not saying the laws should be destroyed or anything. Of course, regardless of what anyone thinks of what evil is, certain boundaries must be placed on the human, as we are selfish and power-hungry and are capable of doing anything regardless of how it affects others.

Everything is neutral. Forces to create and destroy and restore and break down are all about us. They are neither evil nor good. They are essential to existance. There are not merely two poles to a spectrum, there is a rainbow of possibilities. There are more than two trees, two genders, two cities, two animals on this world. There are so many more.

I would like to bring an aspect to this debate that is not a well known fact, avoiding all references to God or Satan, and attempting to keep this debate in merely a debate fashion listen to this:

If evil does not exist, than good cannot exsist either, you cannot have one without the other, it would be total chaos in many ways.

Then what you are saying is that all emotions come from either hurt or pleasure, which may be true in and of itself, but I would like to bring another playing card to the table here, watch this:

On the subject of emotions, when a person gets angry on a continual basis, it causes a needle like stab in the casing of a persons heart, it's been a while since I looked at the information on this and it probably sounds half way insane. But believe me on this one, it's legitimate. Over time it can actually cause heart failure of certain kinds.

So I would ask this question to those of you who believe that evil does not exist,

If an emotion that you can have damages your own body, is it a good emotion?

I would tend to say that you would regard such a thing as not good, but then if it isn't good what is it?

It must be evil, there is my argument, hope you like it.

quote:

Okay, I think I've thought enough about this now.

In essence, everything is relative. I mean, that's just a fact.

But society can't live that way. It would be chaos.

Does that make any sense?

Well, of course we can't live that way. It would be insanely barbaric.

Cletic that is DEEP

Okay, I think I've thought enough about this now.

In essence, everything is relative. I mean, that's just a fact.

But society can't live that way. It would be chaos.

Does that make any sense?

that's interesting that you think of that. i guess evil is an opinion...