As other's have already rightly remarked, the straightforward, honest answer here is "the opposite Quadra from me". There are so many ways of approaching "evil", and the epistemic gap between Yourself and other's implicit notion of evil makes response tenuous at best. Good and Evil only fully cohere within an ontology of Dualism, which I'd wager a majority of people on these forums only tacitly agree with at best--cultural conditioning being what it is--and would outright disagree if pressed to think on this consciously.
For the many secular--lacking a strictly defined, central compass--the evaluation of "evil" is largely a deliberation between IEs and personal preference. For some, evil will be that which is ostensibly 'wrong' (in accordance with their temperament), most commonly an aversion to violence, which is largely a self-preservational extension of sympathy. For many, 'evil' is a hyperbolic placeholder for whatever personally inconveniences them or others, with an extension of sympathy vicariously evaluating the situation of others through the self. Most secular morality requires no consistent, core definition, as it's central-most feature is largely self-preservation, this is plainly obvious, as killing other humans--lest it be publicly justified as an organized act of war or restitution--is universally deemed murder. Admonishment of killing, theft, deception, exploitation, etc requires no set of moral axioms beyond self-preservation. It is only within the arbitration of intermediary agency, such as Religion or a State, that subjective ethics begins to socially engineer a populace, to say nothing of morality actually taking form in tradition. Mortality impairs our capacity to evaluate situations impartially - as seen in the fundamentally asinine reaction that violence is inherently wrong. All too human.
Personally, I find ethics remarkably boring, but every type exerts their own hot air (just look at my long-winded tripe lol) trying to propagate something essential to their valued IE, so these threads are bound to happen. For my part, given that I am a Dualist, my view of the aforementioned traits attributed to self-preservation is that many of these notions are embedded within us intrinsically, and point to a higher Order, however there is a selfishness in mortality, and without virtue to pursue the Good, rendered directionless, our moral nature spirals into self-serving indulgence and gratification (shameless debauchery presented as self-affirmation and 'exploration' being a clear example), propagating itself, like a virus, onto others. I believe Evil, existent independently of subjective preference, does exist. I am not a materialist. That said, on a personal level, how most would treat 'evil' as a placeholder for all the shit that most bothers them, some of the traits that make me most aggressive are: treachery, a leading astray, insidiousness, child predation, and those who would erode and deconstruct meaning; that which teleologically serves nihilism is my enemy. Ultimately, however, actual Evil transcends type.
-
Reply With Quote
