Evil

[Longhorn]

'Evil', like 'good' is subjective. The rule of thumb is basically that we take what is beneficial to humans, society, our species in general and call that 'good' and we take what is harmful to us and we call it 'bad' or immoral.

Both you and Magi answer only to immediately retract it. First you say that good and evil are subjective and then you qualify it by asserting that some things (objectively I assume) are beneficial or harmful. When you identify a benefit or harm you make a value judgement. Why does collective survival trump self-preservation? All death and suffering is personal and cannot be added.

The fact that some things are detrimental to our species' survival is objective, but that doesn't constitute or equal our concept of evil, which is subjective. In the past things that were detrimental to our continued existence as a species were not regarded immoral and vice versa. In my previous post I was referring to the modern view of morality in most of the world, not in general at all points in time. And like I said it is a general rule of thumb, because you will find plenty exceptions on this board alone.

Collective survival trumps self preservation because collective survival is what we are ultimately 'programmed' to do. From an evolutionary standpoint the survival of the species is more important than the survival of a single individual. From a moral standpoint, opinions differ. See? Subjectivity.