Evil and Good Reverse

Ethics, Morality, and Sin

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
Purple Knight
Prodigy
Posts: 3465
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2020 6:00 pm
Has thanked: 1129 times
Been thanked: 729 times

Evil and Good Reverse

Post #1

Post by Purple Knight »

From today onward, evil is called good, and good is called evil.

Qualities like selfishness and callousness are now the qualities that are admired and encouraged, and qualities like compassion and generousness are now reviled.

Question for debate: What changes?

Personally I think nothing changes, except that society becomes more honest.

nobspeople
Prodigy
Posts: 3187
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2020 11:32 am
Has thanked: 1510 times
Been thanked: 824 times

Re: Evil and Good Reverse

Post #2

Post by nobspeople »

Purple Knight wrote: Fri Feb 04, 2022 10:57 pm From today onward, evil is called good, and good is called evil.

Qualities like selfishness and callousness are now the qualities that are admired and encouraged, and qualities like compassion and generousness are now reviled.

Question for debate: What changes?

Personally I think nothing changes, except that society becomes more honest.
If murdering is evil now, and then is considered good, one could argue more murders occur (if society deems it necessary to 'do good').
If giving to the needy is good now, them deemed evil, less would be given to the needy.
Same could be said about anything good/evil.
Have a great, potentially godless, day!

User avatar
Purple Knight
Prodigy
Posts: 3465
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2020 6:00 pm
Has thanked: 1129 times
Been thanked: 729 times

Re: Evil and Good Reverse

Post #3

Post by Purple Knight »

nobspeople wrote: Mon Feb 07, 2022 8:28 amIf murdering is evil now, and then is considered good, one could argue more murders occur (if society deems it necessary to 'do good').
If giving to the needy is good now, them deemed evil, less would be given to the needy.
Same could be said about anything good/evil.
That depends on whether people give to the needy because they think it's good or simply because they want to.

There are a lot of homeless beggars where I live recently and the city puts up signs that handouts don't help, yet the bums beg right under the signs, and they make good money doing it. People know these people are alcoholics/druggies (who came to my state because it legalised marijuana) and they willingly feed those addictions.

Perhaps they think, "I've done my good deed for today," or perhaps they don't. But it does seem to me that good is good regardless of how many people it hurts, and evil is evil even if it helps people; it's more about the nature of the act itself. For example, giving is considered good. It makes me wonder if we could have a better world if some or all of the acts changed natures.

nobspeople
Prodigy
Posts: 3187
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2020 11:32 am
Has thanked: 1510 times
Been thanked: 824 times

Re: Evil and Good Reverse

Post #4

Post by nobspeople »

[Replying to Purple Knight in post #3]
That depends on whether people give to the needy because they think it's good or simply because they want to.
I don't think intent matters in the end. If someone does something that's to be bad or they think is bad, but good comes of it, the end result isn't bad, no matter their intent. And vice versa. At least, at present. Once hindsight becomes 'usable' in the future, the future could see it differently.
People know these people are alcoholics/druggies (who came to my state because it legalised marijuana) and they willingly feed those addictions.
I don't give to any person I don't know as a general rule - and I try not to give to anyone period.
But, there are times these 'beggars' aren't druggies or addicts. Some are abled bodied people looking for extra cash - I've known a couple personally (though the actual % of actual to pretend 'down on their luck people' is unknown).
But it does seem to me that good is good regardless of how many people it hurts, and evil is evil even if it helps people; it's more about the nature of the act itself.
I see it differently. While the intent is a part of the equation, to me, it's almost nil - the end result is what really matters. The intent can't do much to someone, the end result is what matters to the recipient.
That said, the intent may mean a lot to the person 'doing' the act. That's a different scenario.
For example, giving is considered good. It makes me wonder if we could have a better world if some or all of the acts changed natures.
I think the line between a better and worse world is a fine one. Not one thing itself could change that. It's a cumulative effect, in the long run IMO.
Have a great, potentially godless, day!

Post Reply