What is "evil" to you?

[Western42]

Someone who the majority consider to be in the wrongs and, as such, must be stopped.

 

[PancakesWitch]

People that commit damage to others, be it innocent or not, wihtout any sort of empathy over their victims

 

[Viator]

Someone who the majority consider to be in the wrongs and, as such, must be stopped.

Except the majority can be very VERY wrong, and can commit evil that far surpasses what a single individual can employ. It would be a mistake to define evil simply on the basis of majority rule. The problem of Evil is a very old philosophical question, and not so easy to define.

 

[Ai-chan]

Someone who the majority consider to be in the wrongs and, as such, must be stopped.

Except the majority can be very VERY wrong, and can commit evil that far surpasses what a single individual can employ. It would be a mistake to define evil simply on the basis of majority rule. The problem of Evil is a very old philosophical question, and not so easy to define.

This philosophy that if the majority says something is wrong, then it must be wrong is very prevalent in East Asia (Japan, China, Korea). If you are not in agreement with the majority, no matter even if you're completely right, you are evil. In Japanese schools, those who are 'evil' gets bullied. So it is in your own best interest to either join the popular opinion or to stay on the side and don't go against the majority.

This kind of philosophy that if you're not part of the majority, you are wrong and evil has been very damaging and outright dangerous to the minority. It has been used as the basis for bullying, persecution, isolation and execution.

 

[ChaosGodOfJashin]

Except the majority can be very VERY wrong, and can commit evil that far surpasses what a single individual can employ. It would be a mistake to define evil simply on the basis of majority rule. The problem of Evil is a very old philosophical question, and not so easy to define.

Indeed because democracy is from the people themselves. It's undeniable a good ideology but.. if the people is retarded then thats another story.
Evil is basically a concept just like space, time and everything. Is a hero who killed the demon lord good? Not always. Why? Because the demons could be actually good but rather the humans are the evil. Everyone sees everything in different point of views. Theres no such things such as true evil or true kindness. Theres no such things as true neutral also as you will need to throw everything away.

There will always be evil in good and good in evil. Some people just don't see it. But I see that basically your 'humaneness' determines which is good and bad. Just follow your heart thats the beaut of life after all.

 

[Feather]

Anyone aware of the fact that they are harming others but still doing it is evil. Even if they can justify it. Doing evil because of evil don't make good.
If they are unaware of their actions or the effect of their actions, they are not evil, but actively ignoring signs of them doing wrong is also evil.
Willingly being ignorant is also evil.
When something is in a grey area, its usually because of the lack of information or inability to stop evil.
When evil cannot be stopped without being evil, it is still evil, it should not be forgiven, otherwise the evil will stay and become the norm.

 

[Deleted member 57675]

People who harm or hate others to the point where they wouldn't mind putting others down below their feet and have no remorse for it because they viewed them as lesser beings. People who are corrupt. People who wouldn't mind taking the lives of others or continue doing what they do if it allows them to profit more. People who caused severe damage to a person's life to the point that it cause the people they harmed to be scarred by the trauma forever and they would be willing to do it again. And the worst is when those people get away with those fucking things and gets a slap on the wrist. And when they get out, it seems very possible they gonna repeat it again.

 

[Apin]

I think before you can define evil, you have to define good.

Now, let's get rid of everything we know of good.
"Oh she helped an old lady cross the road, she's a good person!" Blegh.

Instead let's go to the most basic intrinsic truths. (Or at least try to).
In this world, there is the self, and then there are others. So how does one do good? Well, it'd have to be by either making oneself happy, or another.
But to make oneself happy, only serves the self.
Making it inherently selfish. (Not necessarily evil, just not good)

So, in my mind anyways, to be good, one must put another's needs above yourself, with no inherent 'gain' for yourself. (To be 100% good anyways)

Now with that being said and out of the way. If to put others needs above your own is good, then putting your wants above all others is what I consider evil. The universal "You" as it were.

It's why I think a lot of people consider a total lack of empathy, as evil. Because it helps no one and solidifies the self.


(I will admit, I never really explained why happiness equates to good. Mainly because when defining good as "righteous or moral" the only real measuring stick I can use, is happiness, otherwise we have to go into a philosophical debate on those as well...while happiness and sadness are a universal constant, albeit, murky to define)

 

[RepresentingWrath]

Politicians.

 

[Lloyd]

The only evil is sin.

 

[BearlyAlive]

Anything that actively tries to hinder you from reaching your goal. Like sweets or porn

 

[OfficialGENESIS]

Not flushing the toilet after pooping is evil.

Lol.Agree!

 

[Gryphon]

My hard definition of evil is when someone's doing something they know is wrong, they have no real reason for doing it but they continue anyway, and then when people call them out for it or try to make them stop they don't give two shits. In real life, there are a lot of people out there that exist like that, but in stories its considered poor writing if someone's evil for the sake of being evil. I honestly don't know why its considered bad writing but for a lot of people it is. The only time I consider evil for the sake of evil bad writing is if the evil never gets their comeuppance.

The villains in my stories are all usually at the butt end of a tragic tale. If my story was told completely from their perspective, it would straight up turn into a tragedy. The latest antagonist I'm writing in my story fits that bill perfectly and I'm a fan of writing those types of villains.

Also the plot that you just described sounds a lot like Maria Nikki, aka Future Diary.

 

[TheEldritchGod]

So why are they villainous?

History is written by the victor. What makes them the villain is that they lost.

What is the personal limit of someone being evil (to you)?

I don't tolerate any evil.

Is it when they did a no-no that is in your book?

Uh, no. It's when they did something evil. A no-no is different from evil.

Is it when they decided to plot against or use you?

People plot against me and use me all the time. They do the same to you. Life is about manipulating others and being manipulated in turn. The question is if I tolerate the manipulation and being used. Right now, as I type, I am getting paid to do a job. My job has a great deal of down time. I am being "used". I am also told what to do. That is "manipulation". It's all a matter of perspective.

I sold part of my life under certain terms and conditions. I get paid money and I am Manipulated and Used in return.

Why would that be evil?

What do you think

I think that you do not know what evil is. I hope you never find out.

Because I am not thinking anything and just go doomslayer with ny MC and turning him into the next Balor of Supreme Magus seems like a better option to tie him down with morals and obligations.

I assume you want some advice as you have not phrased a question.

Writing an anti-hero is different from being a villain in that the difference is in how the reader views them. They might do the exact same thing, but in the end the difference is how their actions are viewed. It isn't even if they win or lose, as you can have a victorious villain and a tragic Anti-hero who loses.

I don't think you understand good and evil to the point where you could properly write an anti-hero. It isn't easy.

Wiki: Enlightened Self-Interest

Try reading that.

You will find it is all too easy to cross the moral event horizon and make a MC that the reader will hate. Being flawed and making mistakes is fine, but there are acts that will take your MC to the land of UNLIKABLE. Once there, your reader will stop reading for you have gone too far.

Evil, to me, is purposely harming others for your own desires. Yes that means CEOs paying people so little that four people have to share a single room apartment and charging them lunch at the company cafeteria while paying yourself $200 mill bonus because of record breaking profit. *Cough* Kotick *cough*

And if we replace the CEO with someone who works for only 1 million, but he sucks so the company collapses and nobody has a job anymore, that's good?

Guess what? 1% of the people make 50% of the money. 20% make 80% of the money.

NOTHING YOU DO WILL CHANGE THIS.

Take the money from the rich and hand it out to the poor, in a matter of days, the bell curve will redistribute itself and it will be 1% makes 50% and 20% makes 80%. YOu know why?

YOU ARE 46 COIN FLIPS.

Every human is made from 46 coin flips. 23 from mom. 23 from dad. On top of that there is the random chance that your parents met. You could have been from an entirely different set of coin flips. THIS MAKES EVERY HUMAN VERY VERY VERY VERY VERY RANDOM IN ORIGIN.

Because every human is random in origin, when you put people in large groups, usually over 140, you start to see what you always see when you have random beginnings: A random Distribution of results.

Thus, 1% will produce 50% of the result, and 20% will make 80% of the result, and that's how it will be. You may have variation from outside sources, but in the end, you will wind up with the same distribution and any attempt to change it will only result in decreasing the amount of available output for EVERYONE.

This is why communism is doomed to fail on any scale over 140. Under that, you have the Dunbar empathy limit and you have people's self-awareness to change the outcome. You can manipulate the result if the sample size is small enough. But your example is totally in a vacuum.

What are the other companies like? Are they stuck in a socialist country where they really don't have a choice in their job and have no mobility either laterally or vertically. Most of the Reall World examples you could provide me I bet you I can trace it back to wayward socialist policies that either screwed up what job they could get, or the government has fucked up the economy so bad that everything is too goddamn expensive.

Or...

Maybe the guy you are pointing out is a loser. After all

1% of everyone is 50% of the bad choices.
20% of people are 80% of the bad choices.

Hate to say this, in the end, at LEAST 1% of the planet are just fuckin' too stupid or evil to be worth your time and attention. They ACTIVELY are idiots who hurt people. Protecting people from their own stupidity doesn't fix this. The system just begins to redistribute itself and a new 1% of people become evil idiots.

There comes a point you have to let people suffer for their own choices. If you give everyone a fair and equal choice, there will always be SOMEONE who chooses the choice that ultimately hurts them. If you try to save them, you are just making it easy for them to hurt themselves MORE. In the end, there is a limit to how many you can say.

Which brings us back to the original topic...

Is it EVIL to write off 1% of the population, if you set up society so they are only paying for their own stupid choices?

 

[Toripuru-S]

Can’t really define evil, I just know it when I see it

Yes! The evil radar!

That's how I feel about it too. Sometimes it can't be explained, only felt. I describe that feeling, as a feeling of repulsion. Not sticking around, no attempts to explain why, just accept the repulsive feeling and get away from it...

...unless you can't get away...

OH! Maybe that's my big brain explanation ?! Whatever "evil" is, maybe it's something that's impossible to destroy or ignore ?. Lol.

 

[Sylthix]

Evil is very contextual and like the sentiment echoed strongly in this thread, you call it when you see it. The baseline definition of evil to me would be an action that does more bad than good. Murder is a crime, no doubts about that. However if the killing of a man was to save the world, then a unanimous agreement will quickly be achieved due to the cost-benefit exchange. With enough benefits, anything is justifiable due to human greed.

This is not to say that they are not evil though, killing is still a sin, Jesus said it himself but in the world ending scenario, that one evil is very necessary. So with that being said, the opposite of a necessary evil is one where an action does not provide enough emotional or tangible benefits to justify committing that act. Actions inflicted by the Knowledge is also a curse in this discussion. Something that is evil cannot exist without something or body to remember or know it. Even now, we humans, even you who is reading this, often benefit or are benefiting from something that is evil. From the low wages of company workers in the food industry to the child labor in the Congo that produces the cobalt used to make your cars and petroleum. A majority of society do not know nor are reminded of it leading the act to be classified as not evil.

A lot of acts we humans unknowingly perform can be called evil in a sense, but only the ones that matter to the majority are acted upon are stopped.

 

[Ilikewaterkusa]

Yes! The evil radar!

That's how I feel about it too. Sometimes it can't be explained, only felt. I describe that feeling, as a feeling of repulsion. Not sticking around, no attempts to explain why, just accept the repulsive feeling and get away from it...

...unless you can't get away...

OH! Maybe that's my big brain explanation ?! Whatever "evil" is, maybe it's something that's impossible to destroy or ignore ?. Lol.

it's your gut instincts

 

[SakeVision]

whatever makes my stomach turn, and trust me, not many things do. but if they do, jesus, i know I'm dealing with some sick ass bullshit

 

[gaylolis]

i describe evil as something that's harmful to yourself both in short term or long term.

a good example of evil is cokes. i heard a story about an entire aquarium of fish dying since their cousin put a bottle of pepsi in there. not to mention, i heard several ones about people ruining their kidneys from continuously drinking coke and not water.

it made me shudder how when i was a kid, i once went to a coke factory through a school event and drank so many glasses to my hearts' content. i was so glad i didn't have that addiction growing up.

but if it was something like free milo, i would still drink a lot even if i would spend a long time in the toilet.

 

[Cipiteca396]

heard a story about an entire aquarium of fish dying since their cousin put a bottle of pepsi in there

Fish don't drink the water in their tanks. They BREATH it. Please don't inhale weird substances...