become increasingly common in the political vernacular of recent years. For Iran the United States is the Great Satan. For the United States, Iran stands at the pinnacle of an Axis of Evil. We often refer to the evil acts of others. But do we discriminate when it comes to evil. Do we associate it with the Devil. If we believe in God should we not also believe in the Devil. If we believe in the greater good of humankind should we not also acknowledge the depths of depravity to which it can plunge. Does evil exist or is there always a reason for it. I once wrote an essay on Shakespeares, Othello. In it I argued that there was no specific reason or cause for Iago's actions. Merely that he represented 'evil incarnate.' He was simply evil. So does evil exist? Should we use the term as freely as we do. Should we conduct politics in terms of good and evil. Or is it natural for us to do so. We can all do good and we can all do evil. But is it always a matter of choice. Is it the duality of human nature. Is the human soul the battlefield for the eternal conflict between God and the Devil.

for me the terms 'good' and 'evil' are just a way that people use to describe their own opnion regarding something.

The comical reality is that both the US and Iran have "God" or in the case of Iran "Allah" on "our side."
We can't be like the three monkeys who shut out evil but, is evil an entity in itself?
Porsha have you picked the right thread for this discussion? You must know that all of our policos are upstanding, god fearing people and would never do anything evil.
And I'll click my heals together and I'll be back in ......
hugs
Gracie

My MY, what a large topic.

I would say most of the Western World's view of evil is shaped by Christianity. In this sense, evil is completely absolute. God and the devil being opposite sides of the coin cannot never be anything but good or evil respectively. This is the case in which president Bush uses the term evil. It is also the classical way to motivate hatred towards an enemy. If we are a nation that stands for good then if there is a nation that stands for evil, one can come to no other conclusion but that they are our enemy.

But, this is why I find this classification dangerous. Because in reality there is no nation that is completely evil. There is no person that is completely evil. This is subjectivity that Nikki was talking about. I see it all in shades of gray. The proof for the subjectivity of good and evil is the fact that moral codes vary from culture to culture. Now the counter argument is that some cultures have it wrong... But, how could that be so if we are all apart of humanity.

Now of course there are people who have more evil than good, ahem Cheney if not his lackey Bush. BUT I am sure both of them have done something that we would label good. Like umm give there mother flowers or love their wife. You know?

As for Othello. Iago as evilllllll... I have alot of trouble with that Porscha. To me Iago's actions might be termed "evil". But, if you try to understand why he undertook those actions it becomes clear that he is not evil. Of course Iago was jealous of Cassio for being premoted but I think he was more jealous of Othello. What I mean by this is that he loved Othello. He saw Othello's actions as not returning this love. It was out of the feeling of rejection and love that Iago destroyed Othello. Now, this seems a bit ridiculous to destroy the one you love. But, ever heard of, if I can't have you no one will? I think thats how it was.

And, I think it illustrates the fact that human beings are contradictory which furthers my point about subjectivity and the gray gray of good and evil. Anyway wrote too much.

Sorry if this was dredging to get through but one of my favorite topics.

Ms. Q

Can one exist without the other? The two terms define one another.

Some very interesting points made here. It is a big subject if only because what is considered evil is also considered to be wrong. In the eye's of society ( not necessarily the law ) we as people are deemed as wrong. For many we are at best figures of fun. For other's we are unnatural, disordered even perverted. In the view of much of the religious community we are a sinners ( evil? ) because we oppose the Word of God. A contentious point I know. Anyone who has been in an enviroment, either work or college, where your sexuality or true gender is a secret to others, will have heard these views openly espoused. By merely existing we undermine the supposed bedrock of society, the family unit as it is commonly understood - marriage between man and woman. We have here what is known as gay marriage. Except it is not marriage it is a Civil Union. Which when you think about it is not so much acceptance as institutionalised non-acceptance. It may be recognition, which is good, but it is still legislation designed to set us apart. I digress a little here I know. But I don't think we should see evil merely in terms of violence, genocide and death.
There seems to be a consensus about the duality of the human soul ( I hope you don't mind that I use the term soul here ). To be able to recognise good you must also be aware of it's opposite. As such we all have the capacity to do evil. Which many of us may think but rarely act upon. I have done bad things but I don't believe I have ever acted with malicious intent toward another. My mistakes were the result of not being able to handle a situation. If I have ever done evil it has only been the manifestation of my own inadequacies.
Just briefly I must clarify my definition of Iago as evil incarnate. All the points you made Miss Sunshine were taken into consideration but were dealt with in isolation and deemed as the physical manifestations of the whole. I believe the bitterness, frustration, envy and jealousy, both sexual and emotional, the desire for vengeance and ultimate and inevitable self-destruction were representative of all the worse traits of man as to be easily understood by an audience. As such he was evil incarnate. I'll send you the essay, hon. No you're ok, just kidding lol.

Does the "emotional continuum have ends, or is it possibly just a circle?

Or are we in a state of continuous emotional flux? If someone hurts you and you say you forgive them, do you really ever forgive them? Does rational thought not reflect the emotional process but merely disguise it? Thomas Babington Macaulay wroted that " the measure of a man's real character is what he would do if he knew he would never be found out." Or as Tyrant's believe, they will never be punished for their deeds. I remember very well the people who have hurt me but I am not a vengeful person. Neither do I forgive them. What if I had absolute power without restraint. Would I then be tempted to avenge myself? I don't think so, but if I didn't it wouldn't be out of any sense of guilt on my part.

Oh geez, Marsha is opening her mouth again, watchout. My opinion is there is good and bad. Evil is the epitome of bad, meaning the continual intentional causing or wishing of extremely bad things upon a person or place. Obviously who is acting in an evil manor is up to the individual, but calling someone evil just because you don't like them is ridiculous as was Q's statement about Cheney and Bush being evil. They may have made some bad decisions, whether misinformed or whatever, but their intentions were not bad. Chances are Clinton was Q's favorite president and He and Hilliary both believed Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, so get over it. Serial killers and the likes are evil, Are we therefore evil ourselves for wishing those people removed from society, I don't think so.

While I'm on a roll why not one more jab for the evil Bush haters out there. Bush's Patriot Act and spying on americans is thought to be so bad, check your history books folks, Robert Kennedy wiretapped Martin Luther King. Maybe I'm evil for continually, intentionally, pointing out the hypocircy of Bush haters. Thing is I don't wish any of you ill well, your welcome to your opinions, just understand not everyone believes like you do and they might just point out the other side. In the end we all want the same thing, how we get there is debatable.

Really good conversation happening in this thread for sure.

Some stuff Marsha said made me want to say that our differing opinions are proof for the subjectivity of evil. BUT, I thought about it and I don't know if you believe that. Just because Marsha believes that Bush's actions are not evil just maybe bad choices or misguided DOES NOT mean that her view is correct. Now it is hard to know whether her or mine or anyone else's view is correct. But, someone must be right on this issue. Either Bush is misguided or he did what he did out of malicious intent. There is no real half way with malicious intent. In my opinion Marsha just does not have the facts about this issue. BUT like I said its hard to know what is true and not about a subject with so many secrets.

Anyway, let me state though that I think that Bush and Cheney should be tried for war crimes. I think that they are causing the destruction of life for their own personal gain. That is my opinion and we should prob start a new thread debating this topic.

And... please don't assume that I am an all out supporter of Clinton. I think he was better than Bush as far as internal policy but is still part of the imperialistic machine that the US has built. But this is another thread also.

Back to the idea of evil. I liked Robyn's idea about evil being a continuum especially if that were to be some sort of spectrum say to rate how evil a person is. To go along with this idea and bring a little science into it, I want to reiterate the case that no one is completely evil. A person can move further down the continuum but just as absolute zero is impossible to attain so is absolute evil.

I dunno if that idea is as clear as I wanted it to be. But, such is life. Tell me what you think

Summer Sunshine Q

Actually we do adopt a sliding scale of evil in our own attitudes and understanding of the difference between right and wrong. Certainly the Justice System takes a Utilitarian approach to crime and punishment. If concepts such as good and evil, love and hate inhabit the human psyche in equal measure then how do we distinguish between them. How do we make our choices, and is it a question of choice at all. And if we hate someone ( and hate is a powerful emotion ) why do we not act accordingly. What prevents us all from behaving as our darkest desires tell us to. Is it because we are taught to know better, is it out of fear of punishment, a sense of guilt, is it because in the end love conquers all! Why are wars between nations rarely as bloody and venal and full of hatred and loathing as civil wars. Because we hate our neighbour far more than we hate any foreigner. In times of peace we show restraint, remove the shackles of mutual self-interest and common decency, and the freedom we are possessed of is not that desirous of love, compassion and understanding, but the freedom to hate without restraint.

I believe both are very subjective terms depending upon one's point of view, your example of the US and Iran captures this very well, they each believe the other to be evil. It also depends of course upon your own moral standards of what is and is not acceptable behaviour. Like black and white, one cannot exist without the other and they can at times be separated by a very thin line which is all too easy to cross. Particularly in the heat of the moment.

Nikki