Quote from Terpsichore

If the question was, "Is it wrong/Is it morally wrong/etc." then it could be answered, but it is simply to broad and ambiguous to ask whether killing is evil. Define evil, for starters: What does that mean in philosophical context?

Doing harm or damage to an object or creature.
That is what it is in Western philosophy.
Since it is usually contrasted with good,
anything that is not neutral or good is automatically
evil.

I like to think that I am a moral nihilist so that I believe that anything can be justified just how you perceive it. So I can't really take place in this discussion because there is two sides to this discussion basically everything to do with morals so I will remain neutral.

Protect Independent Film
All that we see or seem Is but a dream within a dream. - Edgar Allen Poe

Imagination rules the world. - Napoleon Bonaparte

All men are born with a nose and ten fingers, but no one was born with a knowledge of God. - Voltaire

No unless you've been caught or feel guilty.

no idea... but not that i agree with this thought but...
according to the bible when you die you go to heaven so what would be wrong with sending some one there early.. not to mention itf they die it was gods will so... can it really be evil if it is gods plan...

please dont hate this heathen for questioning...

Quote from Mamsmilk

Quote from Terpsichore

If the question was, "Is it wrong/Is it morally wrong/etc." then it could be answered, but it is simply to broad and ambiguous to ask whether killing is evil. Define evil, for starters: What does that mean in philosophical context?

Doing harm or damage to an object or creature.
That is what it is in Western philosophy.
Since it is usually contrasted with good,
anything that is not neutral or good is automatically
evil.

But then, what about killing animals for food, or harming another person without intention or in self defense? Those things are not defined as evil by western philosophy.

And if evil is defined as "what is not good" then what is good?

Quote from Terpsichore

Quote from Mamsmilk

Quote from Terpsichore

If the question was, "Is it wrong/Is it morally wrong/etc." then it could be answered, but it is simply to broad and ambiguous to ask whether killing is evil. Define evil, for starters: What does that mean in philosophical context?

Doing harm or damage to an object or creature.
That is what it is in Western philosophy.
Since it is usually contrasted with good,
anything that is not neutral or good is automatically
evil.

But then, what about killing animals for food, or harming another person without intention or in self defense? Those things are not defined as evil by western philosophy.

And if evil is defined as "what is not good" then what is good?

Life is a value and taking a life to keep a life going
neutralises the act on the value level
as long as the one to commit the act
did something that is beneficial to many
for a long while. (Every act is both good and
evil depending on the amount observers.)

Morals don't involve animals. Animals don't have
morals, so I don't think we should alienate ourselves
from the natural system they follow when it comes to them,
as long as we keep it natural, meaning we don't nuke them
alive just for the lulz.

Everything that makes a lot of people feel good and satisfies
the needs of the majority is good. (You can't satisfy everybody
since the world is based on sacrifices.) Things that make us feel
good do not bother our conscience, which we inherit from the people
who raise us and the isms that surround us.

Quote from Mamsmilk

Quote from Terpsichore

Quote from Mamsmilk

[quote=Terpsichore]If the question was, "Is it wrong/Is it morally wrong/etc." then it could be answered, but it is simply to broad and ambiguous to ask whether killing is evil. Define evil, for starters: What does that mean in philosophical context?

Doing harm or damage to an object or creature.
That is what it is in Western philosophy.
Since it is usually contrasted with good,
anything that is not neutral or good is automatically
evil.

But then, what about killing animals for food, or harming another person without intention or in self defense? Those things are not defined as evil by western philosophy.

And if evil is defined as "what is not good" then what is good?

Life is a value and taking a life to keep a life going
neutralises the act on the value level
as long as the one to commit the act
did something that is beneficial to many
for a long while. (Every act is both good and
evil depending on the amount observers.)

Morals don't involve animals. Animals don't have
morals, so I don't think we should alienate ourselves
from the natural system they follow when it comes to them,
as long as we keep it natural, meaning we don't nuke them
alive just for the lulz.

Everything that makes a lot of people feel good and satisfies
the needs of the majority is good. (You can't satisfy everybody
since the world is based on sacrifices.) Things that make us feel
good do not bother our conscience, which we inherit from the people
who raise us and the isms that surround us.[/quote]

I suppose this leads to the point of: Good and Evil are relative.
Which makes the thread impossible to answer definitively.

And yes, we should not nuke animals alive just for the lulz. That I consider evil.

Well, In my opinion i don't think its right to kill an evil. Their is always two side in every story, while you think you doing justice by kill that evil, the other hand you doing a evil too by taking someone life away. So you just start all over again but this time some else will think your an evil and will try to kill you.

Quote from Terpsichore

Quote from Mamsmilk

Quote from Terpsichore

[quote=Mamsmilk][quote=Terpsichore]If the question was, "Is it wrong/Is it morally wrong/etc." then it could be answered, but it is simply to broad and ambiguous to ask whether killing is evil. Define evil, for starters: What does that mean in philosophical context?

Doing harm or damage to an object or creature.
That is what it is in Western philosophy.
Since it is usually contrasted with good,
anything that is not neutral or good is automatically
evil.

But then, what about killing animals for food, or harming another person without intention or in self defense? Those things are not defined as evil by western philosophy.

And if evil is defined as "what is not good" then what is good?

Life is a value and taking a life to keep a life going
neutralises the act on the value level
as long as the one to commit the act
did something that is beneficial to many
for a long while. (Every act is both good and
evil depending on the amount observers.)

Morals don't involve animals. Animals don't have
morals, so I don't think we should alienate ourselves
from the natural system they follow when it comes to them,
as long as we keep it natural, meaning we don't nuke them
alive just for the lulz.

Everything that makes a lot of people feel good and satisfies
the needs of the majority is good. (You can't satisfy everybody
since the world is based on sacrifices.) Things that make us feel
good do not bother our conscience, which we inherit from the people
who raise us and the isms that surround us.[/quote]

I suppose this leads to the point of: Good and Evil are relative.
Which makes the thread impossible to answer definitively.

And yes, we should not nuke animals alive just for the lulz. That I consider evil.
[/quote]
It's not impossible to answer, but there is no solid truth
that we all can worship.

this question can be related to the current u.s.a. issue of torture... is it acceptable to torture if there is a chance that it might save others...

i am tempted to say yes but then i imange some of the scenes that i have stumbled across in goro mangas and i realize that its an very ugly thing... no matter how it is done even if it is just phyco... and there is no physical abuse the pain is unacceptable...
but also i have see photos and videos of terroist attacks and beheadings and relaize that they are tortureing the world at large and not just the ones they physicaly attack... all of the people that have seen the photos and heard the stories of the attacks... for thoese of us who have the slightes bit of emphaty it is an attack on us...

its kinda of noble though the person who is willing to dirty their own soul for the sake of others... not that any or all are like that though...

anyway sorry for straying form the topic...

I have beliefs in the term "Righteous Kill".

[img]http://i590.photobucket.com/albums/ss350/afikolami/untitled3.png[/img]

was looking for the option "sometimes"..murder is evil but maybe by accident, it is reduced to manslaughter...and self defense in case the person was really really bad....

[img]http://i221.photobucket.com/albums/dd199/vivharv/Gokusen-1.jpg[/img]

If someone attacks me ready to kill, they'd better be ready to die.

It's that simple. (IMO)

[color=#ff0000]"“That's the difference between me and the rest of the world!
Happiness isn't good enough for me! I demand euphoria!” "[/color]

@ Battlerenji - are you sure you have the term correct? Nihilism in ethical terms refers to one believing that morals do not exist/cannot be identified; I think you're trying to describe being a subjectivist - though I may have misinterpreted your words (don't mean to preach --- just wondering if you were interested in technical moral philosophy)

On the issue - It's been stated to death already but good and evil aren't terms I would use... Is it morally permissible to kill? I can't claim a moral absolute (if you even believe they exist) but shall say that it's permissible under certain conditions --- I am far from being a Kantian.

Can you imagine an imaginary menagerie manager imagining managing an imaginary menagerie?

Quote from Mamsmilk

Quote from Terpsichore

Quote from Mamsmilk

[quote=Terpsichore][quote=Mamsmilk][quote=Terpsichore]If the question was, "Is it wrong/Is it morally wrong/etc." then it could be answered, but it is simply to broad and ambiguous to ask whether killing is evil. Define evil, for starters: What does that mean in philosophical context?

Doing harm or damage to an object or creature.
That is what it is in Western philosophy.
Since it is usually contrasted with good,
anything that is not neutral or good is automatically
evil.

But then, what about killing animals for food, or harming another person without intention or in self defense? Those things are not defined as evil by western philosophy.

And if evil is defined as "what is not good" then what is good?

Life is a value and taking a life to keep a life going
neutralises the act on the value level
as long as the one to commit the act
did something that is beneficial to many
for a long while. (Every act is both good and
evil depending on the amount observers.)

Morals don't involve animals. Animals don't have
morals, so I don't think we should alienate ourselves
from the natural system they follow when it comes to them,
as long as we keep it natural, meaning we don't nuke them
alive just for the lulz.

Everything that makes a lot of people feel good and satisfies
the needs of the majority is good. (You can't satisfy everybody
since the world is based on sacrifices.) Things that make us feel
good do not bother our conscience, which we inherit from the people
who raise us and the isms that surround us.[/quote]

I suppose this leads to the point of: Good and Evil are relative.
Which makes the thread impossible to answer definitively.

And yes, we should not nuke animals alive just for the lulz. That I consider evil.
[/quote]
It's not impossible to answer, but there is no solid truth
that we all can worship.[/quote]

I doubt there is any solid truth at all; the only solid things are facts. A person kills another person. Morals and ethics are ideas and beliefs put into place by humans.

Yes, humans will never *all *agree on anything, but does worship have to come into play? That would suggest that everyone has a religious or sacred belief on the subject.