Whether you like it or not. There ARE things which are absolutely evil and things which are absolutely good.
I know most atheists atempt to discredit this idea (There is a huge problem if there is such thing).

So what is one example of something absolutely evil?
Killing a baby, an innocent baby for any reason is evil. (please dont derail this thread with attacking the Bible)

If you think killing a baby is ever justified, I think it is safe to say, that you are sick and perveted.

Some cultures did practice killing babies, however, we would call them 'immoral'.

Since we are the only creature on this planet, who has the ability to do evil and good and not just to respond to external stimuli. This notion of good and evil had to come from somewhere.
Evolutionarily speaking why should I care if a child was killed in Africa?
There is no natural explanation for the concept of good and evil. So where did it come from?
I personally think it came from a cosmological battle between good and evil, although I cant conclude and prove that it, it explains things much better than anything else.

Ok. So you believe that an ongoing "cosmological battle between good and evil" is more likely than a typical evolutionary response to dead offspring? Awesome! However unlikely.

The problem with this idea is that it ignores countless hundreds of years of ethical reasoning. Such ethics problems are usually put forward as "choice A or choice B" type scenarios, where the user *must* choose one of two options and then explain the reasoning.

One such question would be "A train is hurtling down the tracks, out of control. On its present course, it would hit and kill 5 people who are trapped on the line. However, you are at the switch, and can change the course of the train in time so it goes down a different set of tracks. Unfortunately, on this set, there is one man trapped on the line, and the train would hit and kill him. What do you do?"

The question is a good ethics one, because even if the person you are asking refuses to do anything (on moral grounds), they end up responsible for the deaths of 5 people. Most people choose to switch the tracks; some do it because they believe that the lives of many are worth more than the lives of one, some because they rationalize that the chances of one man freeing himself are greater than 5 people freeing themselves.

Taking the "innocent baby" example, there are questions that can be formulated to show the ethical problems behind the statement "Killing an innocent baby, for whatever reason, is evil". Suppose you had a time machine, and you went back in time to when Adolf Hitler was born. You know that this innocent baby will grow up to kill more than 6 million people, and wage wars that kill far more. For the purposes of the scenario, you only have a limited period of time to do anything in the past, so you have no chance of removing him from his family in the hope that he will grow up differently. Your choice is whether to kill the baby who would grow up to be one of the most evil men of the 20th century, or to leave and let history pan out the way it has.

Again, most people in this scenario would kill the innocent baby. The rationalization being that one baby's life isn't worth the lives of all the people that the baby would grow up to kill.

So the problem isn't really one for the atheist; it is more one for the "ethical" believer. So what would your answers be?

Adrian makes a very good point. However, you also have to take into account that "good" and "evil" are two VERY subjective terms. What might be "evil" to me, might not be "evil" to you.

Example: Abortion. Many people in society (American society, as I won't pretend to speak for any other society) believe that this is "evil" because it "kills an innocent baby". Now, I know a whole lot of people who in no way shape or form consider abortion "evil". Myself included. How do you reconcile that with the concept or "good" and "evil"?

There are also many in the world who believe that prayer can answer any call and then decide not to seek medical treatment for their sick child because they think that the "good" of prayer will cure them. When the child then dies, it must have been "god's" will and "god's will" is a good thing, even if the follower cannot see it at the time. (See, cited an example and didn't "attack" the bible. Yay me!)

The terms of "good" and "evil" must first be defined individually before we can assign them value.

No matter how one dances around the topic...the end result is an individual value judgment applied.

Me?? There is no such thing as "good" or "evil" or "sin" there are just the deeds people do (crimes) and the consequences of those actions. Which have no bearing on any form of justice, retribution or punishment.

(August 13, 2010 at 2:58 am)solja247 Wrote: Whether you like it or not. There ARE things which are absolutely evil and things which are absolutely good.

I’m afraid these terms are entirely subjective. What is considered “Evil” in one society may not necessarily be considered evil in another society.

(August 13, 2010 at 2:58 am)solja247 Wrote: I know most atheists atempt to discredit this idea (There is a huge problem if there is such thing).

Sweeping generalisation. Not even going to answer that.

(August 13, 2010 at 2:58 am)solja247 Wrote: So what is one example of something absolutely evil?
Killing a baby, an innocent baby for any reason is evil. (please dont derail this thread with attacking the Bible)
If you think killing a baby is ever justified, I think it is safe to say, that you are sick and perveted.
Some cultures did practice killing babies, however, we would call them 'immoral'.

I agree with Adrian's example here, what if that baby was going to become someone like Hitler?

In black and white terms as you write it above any person with a sense of morality would be abhorred by killing an innocent child.

(August 13, 2010 at 2:58 am)solja247 Wrote: Since we are the only creature on this planet, who has the ability to do evil and good and not just to respond to external stimuli.

And you can prove this? You know the inner workings of the minds of ALL creatures on earth?

(August 13, 2010 at 2:58 am)solja247 Wrote: This notion of good and evil had to come from somewhere.

It did. Our heads.

(August 13, 2010 at 2:58 am)solja247 Wrote: Evolutionarily speaking why should I care if a child was killed in Africa?

I think this is more to do with how human minds work that evolution.

We visualise events not related to us by essentially emulating them in our heads. So if someone tells you about babies being murdered in Africa your brain with essentially recreate a simulation of how that would make YOU feel if it happened to your child. That’s just brain chemistry regarding processing abstract ideas.

(August 13, 2010 at 2:58 am)solja247 Wrote: There is no natural explanation for the concept of good and evil. So where did it come from?

CONCEPT. Idea. It came from our heads!

(August 13, 2010 at 2:58 am)solja247 Wrote: I personally think it came from a cosmological battle between good and evil, although I cant conclude and prove that it, it explains things much better than anything else.

Well done. You believe in fairy tales. I'm sorry to tell you that does not make it true.

(August 13, 2010 at 6:23 am)Tiberius Wrote: Your choice is whether to kill the baby who would grow up to be one of the most evil men of the 20th century, or to leave and let history pan out the way it has.

I think going back in time and changing anything would be a serious mistake. Even if the intent was a good one, the outcome could be very bad.
Though hitler did great wrongs, he played a huge role in creating the present day we all know so well. Removing him will create an alternate future with alternate people. You could very well end up removing many millions from ever existing. Doing more damage than hitler did. You could even remove me and yourself completely out of existance.

No matter how good our intentions are, there are many things we should never interfear with. Most importantly, the past.
--
I'm going to try and keep on topic so...

Quote:If you think killing a baby is ever justified, I think it is safe to say, that you are sick and perveted.

Babies were once used as catapult ammo. Thrown into castle walls to demoralise the enemy forces. Even loaded into cannons. Our todays view on etheics didn't exist a few hundred years ago.

Quote:This notion of good and evil had to come from somewhere.

From us. We created the concepts of good and evil and our view on what is considered good and bad developed over many thousands of years. Over a hundred years ago it was ok to beat your wife. It was ok to have them wear a device that prevents them from talking and is somewhat an embarrisment to wear. It was ok to torture people.

Quote:So where did it come from?

Read above.

Quote:although I cant conclude and prove that it, it explains things much better than anything else.

And so I reject the idea due to lack of evidence. It doesn't seem more plausable at all. Far from it.

(August 13, 2010 at 9:47 am)Ace Wrote: I think going back in time and changing anything would be a serious mistake. Even if the intent was a good one, the outcome could be very bad.
Though hitler did great wrongs, he played a huge role in creating the present day we all know so well.

I hope you are not suggesting that what naturally happens just plain should happen and should be allowed to happen unaltered? That would be the naturalistic fallacy, surely?

Quote: Removing him will create an alternate future with alternate people. You could very well end up removing many millions from ever existing. Doing more damage than hitler did.

Do you consider the equivalent of not being born or coming to existence equally immoral to being killed?

Quote: You could even remove me and yourself completely out of existance.

Do you think that we deserve to exist any more than alternative people in our place?

Quote:No matter how good our intentions are, there are many things we should never interfear with. Most importantly, the past.

Do you think that is intrinsically so? I personally think it all completely depends on if the alternative is more or less moral than how things are now. That is tautologically true morally speaking of course. But my point is that if we take your point as intrinsically true, that "what is" is just better than any possible alternative... I'm pretty sure that's committing the naturalistic fallacy. Anyone can correct me if I'm wrong.

Quote:I hope you are not suggesting that what naturally happens just plain should happen and should be allowed to happen unaltered? That would be the naturalistic fallacy, surely?

What I'm saying is what happens should remain so. From living in this time line to going back and altering it (pretty much deciding who exists and who does not) is what I would call very wrong. History whether it's good or bad must remain. It's there for us to look back on and learn from. To change it would lead to a timeline that would be very unrecognisable to us. No one has the right to decide who gets to live or not. Which is why the past must remain untouched.

Quote:Do you consider the equivalent of not being born or coming to existence equally immoral to being killed?

It depends. If you exist in this timeline along with many others, and I went back in time to alter the future by removing a very evil past that ends up preventing you and many others from existing, does that count as killing? I couldn't do it, because I have no right to decide who gets to exist or not. This is our timeline, changing the past could create a reality where the present and future is far worse than the one we had.

Quote:Do you think that we deserve to exist any more than alternative people in our place?

Absalutly not, which is why the past must remain the way it is. Who are we to say who exists or not by changing it? The damage that could be done by altering the past is beyond comprehension. Which is why I'm glad we cannot interfear with the past.

Quote:Do you think that is intrinsically so? I personally think it all completely depends on if the alternative is more or less moral than how things are now.

It doesn't matter how good or bad the alternate reality would be. It's about taking away people's existance and asking yourself...do you have the right? The damage that could be done is far beyond comprehension and even the smallest of changes in history is enough to take many lives away. Even if our intention was good, the out come could be a very evil one. If I was aboard the titanic one day before it sunk, I would say nothing and wouldn't interfear at all. I would let it steam off to it's doom. Saving it will create an alternate future. If the titanic never sank, how would we learn from the mistakes made? Purhaps by saving it, another ship with far more people on board sinks instead by making the would be mistakes of the titanic? History must play out as it has, changing it could be devistating.

---

Here's another example. I love jessica but due to certain problems I can't be with her. Now she has a little girl. if I went back in time and got into a relationship with her long before she met Olly, her little girl would not exist. I would of created an alternate reality. Taking away someone's existance.
Is that right or wrong?

So even if I could go back in time, I would change nothing. What has happened must remain so or an alternate future you will create in it's place.

(August 13, 2010 at 2:58 am)solja247 Wrote: So what is one example of something absolutely evil?
Killing a baby, an innocent baby for any reason is evil. (please dont derail this thread with attacking the Bible)

If you think killing a baby is ever justified, I think it is safe to say, that you are sick and perveted.

Some cultures did practice killing babies, however, we would call them 'immoral'.

I guess God is immoral, too, since he killed innocent babies.

God gives Joshua the city of Jericho. All, including babies, are killed with swords, and the city is dedicated to the Lord. JOSHUA 6:21-27

solja247 Wrote:There is no natural explanation for the concept of good and evil. So where did it come from?

From evolution. From our instinct to preserve our species and the planet we live on. From us, our minds. We made it up. Besides, good and evil are very subjective terms.

solja247 Wrote:I personally think it came from a cosmological battle between good and evil, although I cant conclude and prove that it, it explains things much better than anything else.

A... what? You mean, like, there's a bunch of superheroes and villains fighting somewhere in the universe RIGHT NOW?

P.S. Watch this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hCovYF51qHE