Katana VentraIP

Good and evil

In philosophy, religion, and psychology, "good and evil" is a common dichotomy. In religions with Manichaean and Abrahamic influence, evil is perceived as the dualistic antagonistic opposite of good, in which good should prevail and evil should be defeated.[1] Taoist philosophies typically perceive the world through a dualistic cosmological lens, where this dichotomy is a central concept, and often symbolized by the taijitu, commonly known as the "yin-yang".

For other uses, see Good and evil (disambiguation), Good (disambiguation), and Evil (disambiguation).

Evil is often used to denote profound immorality.[2] Evil has also been described as a supernatural force.[2] Definitions of evil vary, as does the analysis of its motives.[3] However, elements that are commonly associated with evil involve unbalanced behavior involving expediency, selfishness, ignorance, or neglect.[4] Shakespeare once famously wrote the phrase, "There is nothing that is either good or bad, but thinking makes it so."[5]


The principal study of good and evil (or morality) is ethics, of which there are three major branches: normative ethics concerning how we ought to behave, applied ethics concerning particular moral issues, and metaethics concerning the nature of morality itself.[6]

a personal preference or subjective judgment regarding any issue which might be earn or punishment from the religious authorities

praise

religious obligation arising from leading to sainthood or damnation

Divine law

a generally accepted of behaviour which might enhance group survival or wealth

cultural standard

or behaviour which induces strong emotional reaction

natural law

imposing a legal duty

statute law

Proposition 8 "Knowledge of good or evil is nothing but affect of joy or sorrow in so far as we are conscious of it."

Proposition 30 "Nothing can be evil through that which it possesses in common with our nature, but in so far as a thing is evil to us it is contrary to us."

Proposition 65 "According to the guidance of reason, of two things which are good, we shall follow the greater good, and of two evils, follow the less."

Proposition 68 "If men were born free, they would form no conception of good and evil so long as they were free."

What do people find good, and what do they despise?

What really is good, and what really is bad?

It is possible to treat the essential theories of value by the use of a philosophical and academic approach. In properly analyzing theories of value, everyday beliefs are not only carefully catalogued and described, but also rigorously analyzed and judged.


There are at least two basic ways of presenting a theory of value, based on two different kinds of questions:


The two questions are subtly different. One may answer the first question by researching the world by use of social science, and examining the preferences that people assert. However, one may answer the second question by use of reasoning, introspection, prescription, and generalization. The former kind of method of analysis is called "descriptive", because it attempts to describe what people actually view as good or evil; while the latter is called "normative", because it tries to actively prohibit evils and cherish goods. These descriptive and normative approaches can be complementary. For example, tracking the decline of the popularity of slavery across cultures is the work of descriptive ethics, while advising that slavery be avoided is normative.


Meta-ethics is the study of the fundamental questions concerning the nature and origins of the good and the evil, including inquiry into the nature of good and evil, as well as the meaning of evaluative language. In this respect, meta-ethics is not necessarily tied to investigations into how others see the good, or of asserting what is good.

holds that good and evil are fixed concepts established by a deity or deities, nature, morality, common sense, or some other source.

Moral absolutism

claims that good and evil are meaningless, that there is no moral ingredient in nature.

Amoralism

holds that standards of good and evil are only products of local culture, custom, or prejudice.

Moral relativism

is the attempt to find a compromise between the absolutist sense of morality, and the relativist view; universalism claims that morality is only flexible to a degree, and that what is truly good or evil can be determined by examining what is commonly considered to be evil amongst all humans.

Moral universalism

Goodness and morality in biology[edit]

The issue of good and evil in the human visuality, often associated with morality, is regarded by some biologists (notably Edward O. Wilson, Jeremy Griffith, David Sloan Wilson and Frans de Waal) as an important question to be addressed by the field of biology.[64][65][66][67]

(1999) Evil: Inside Human Violence and Cruelty. New York: A.W.H. Freeman / Owl Book

Baumeister, Roy F.

Bennett, Gaymon, , Peters, Ted, Russell, Robert John (2008). The Evolution of Evil. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht. ISBN 978-3-525-56979-5

Hewlett, Martinez J

Katz, Fred Emil (1993) Ordinary People and Extraordinary Evil, [SUNY Press],  0-7914-1442-6

ISBN

Katz, Fred Emil (2004) Confronting Evil, [SUNY Press],  0-7914-6030-4

ISBN

Neiman, Susan. Evil in Modern Thought – An Alternative History of Philosophy. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2002.

Oppenheimer, Paul (1996). . New York: New York University Press. ISBN 978-0-8147-6193-9.

Evil and the Demonic: A New Theory of Monstrous Behavior

Shermer, M. (2004). The Science of Good & Evil. New York: Time Books.  0-8050-7520-8

ISBN

Steven Mintz; John Stauffer, eds. (2007). . University of Massachusetts Press. ISBN 978-1-55849-570-8.

The Problem of Evil: Slavery, Freedom, and the Ambiguities of American Reform

Stapley, A.B. & Elder Delbert L., Using Our Free Agency. Ensign May 1975: 21

Stark, Ryan. Rhetoric, Science, and Magic in Seventeenth-Century England. (Washington, DC: The Catholic University of America Press, 2009), 115–45

Vetlesen, Arne Johan (2005) Evil and Human Agency – Understanding Collective Evildoing New York: . ISBN 978-0-521-85694-2

Cambridge University Press

Wilson, William McF., and Julian N. Hartt. Farrer's Theodicy. In David Hein and Edward Hugh Henderson (eds), Captured by the Crucified: The Practical Theology of . New York and London: T & T Clark / Continuum, 2004. ISBN 0-567-02510-1

Austin Farrer

on In Our Time at the BBC

Evil

Good and Evil in (Ultra Orthodox) Judaism

ABC News: Looking for Evil in Everyday Life

Booknotes interview with Lance Morrow on Evil: An Investigation, October 19, 2003.

Chattopadhyay, Subhasis. in Prabuddha Bharata or Awakened India 118 (9):540–542 (2013). ISSN 0032-6178

The Discussion of Evil in Christianity

Chattopadhyay, Subhasis. in Prabuddha Bharata or Awakened India 118 (4):278–281 (2013). ISSN 0032-6178

Prolegomenon to the Study of Evil.

Contestabile, Bruno (2016). . Contemporary Buddhism. 17: 49–61. doi:10.1080/14639947.2015.1104003. S2CID 148168698.

"The Denial of the World from an Impartial View"