Are we alone? Don't know! Uncertain! — TheMadFool

It's absolutele certain that we are not alone. The universe has an abundancy of life. Of course rhere is a small chance of no life being there, but then again, around every Sun-like word there are planets with life. That's no Russel's reapot.

Knowledge of good prevents one from committing acts. They committed those acts because they did NOT know what good and evil were. — AlienFromEarth

This doesn't make any sense at all. As @TheMadFool says with his not so accurate but lovely quote:

I sinned, not towards an end, but because I loved the sin — Some saint (forgot his name)

Also you contradict yourself with it.

There is no lower level of instinctual knowledge, than to know what good and evil are. — AlienFromEarth

If knowing good and evil is instinctual, then not knowing what good and evil is would be impossible. Hence, as "knowledge of good prevents one from committing acts" there is no evil in this world.


On the most basic level though, I see a problem with your definition of evil.

That which intends to unjustifiably harm innocent people. — AlienFromEarth

What is justifiable and what is not is completely subjective. Hence by your definition, what is evil and what is not is completely subjective, ruling out "pure evil".

Justification has absolutely nothing to do with subjectivity. You cannot justify something that cannot be justified. Obviously, that's a logical contradiction. So what is an example of that?

If I try to justify NOT justifying something I'm trying to justify, well, there you go. A simple example in practice. You see, I can't try to justify something by NOT justifying it.

So what IS justification then? Being justified means you did something that can either be intended or unintended, but you have proof that it was still the logical thing to do.

So I can be justified in getting up in the morning even though I'm so tired and really don't have enough energy to do it in a healthy manner, if I notice my house is on fire and I need to get out. So, in this case, the intention is survival. However, I do not intend to purposely interupt my sleeping patterns, which causes me a bit of frustration and discomfort, but I justify doing it for the purpose of survival.

In the end, "justification" is a provable, logical event, and not at all subjective.

Also, only a conscious being knows what good and evil is. A non-conscious organism does NOT know what good and evil is. Again, if there is no lower level of knowledge than the concept of good and evil, then those who commit evil, obviously not only do not know what good and evil are, but are not conscious beings, thus lack all knowledge, period.

A non-conscious organism has robotic properties. However, it is not a robot, it's body is designed to house consciousness, but for whatever reason is unable to do so. This results in a body that can certainly adapt itself to it's environment, but is not truly aware of itself or it's environment, much like a robot is not really aware of itself or it surroundings.

Again the difference between a p-zombie and a robot is physical and thus, behavioral. The human body is interconnected to itself, so any attempt it makes to change itself does not necessitate strict instructions to follow. Any mistakes it makes can be correccted. Severe damage to the brain and other organs, bones and tissue in the body can be repaired and re-adapted.

Whereas, the robot must follow some strict code, and have it's core components in working order, even if it's programmed to be able to reprogram itself. It still requires something that doesn't change. If it does not do this, it can result in unrecoverable crash even though physically it may be identical to it's original state.

The definition of evil: That which intends to unjustifiably harm innocent people. — AlienFromEarth

4)Committing evil cannot be considered a "mistake", as it is deliberate as the definition of evil above states. Deliberate is the opposite of mistake. — AlienFromEarth

Are you saying then that a person can commit an act they themselves consider unjustified?

No I am not. If they consider it unjustified, they wouldn't do it. What does that mean about evil though? It means evil people do not consider anything justified, as they are not conscious beings. Why do they commit evil? Because they are not consciously aware of doing it. They are biological entities that cannot control themselves.

Why do put them in jail or even execute violent criminals if they can't be responsible for themselves? SIMPLE: To prevent them from hurting anymore people.

You see, criminals being philosophical zombies, is really the only way to explain why some people are evil.

If they consider it unjustified, they wouldn't do it. — AlienFromEarth

It means evil people do not consider anything justified — AlienFromEarth

Is this not a contradiction?

Conscious beings would not do anything unjustifiably. Now if they make a mistake, well they were still trying to do the right thing, just didn't work out the way they intended. Of course, you did say WILLINGLY unjustified. So making a mistake is UNWILLING UNJUSTIFIED. So it's not in your hands.

UNCONSCIOUS beings cannot comprehend anything, and are completely at the mercy of the elements and their own uncontrollable impulses and urges. Now, these urges and impulses WILL eventually come out, no matter the amount of deterrance we give them. This is why we put them in prison, and sometimes execute them. The point is, they know nothing of the concept of evil or good, and that being the fundamental level of knowledge, they cannot possibly know about the higher level that is "justification".

Now if they make a mistake, well they were still trying to do the right thing — AlienFromEarth

I’m contending that if a person always considers their own actions justified then evil is always a mistake, never deliberate.

An evil doer never considers their own actions justified, because they are not conscious beings. Thus, they are also incapable of considering their evil actions UNjustified as well. They don't consider anything at all. They are biological automatons. They are philsoophical zombies.

innocent — AlienFromEarth

This is the term that has multiple definitions. Is the son of Hitler, no someone who say didn't get their ass kicked and who actually succeeded, say successfully killing off oh.. half the world's population and enslaving the other half to grueling labor and torture, not just for punishment, but often for fun.. let's take this fictional person. He has a kid. That kid is as innocent as you or I. Is he not?

Somewhere down the line, there's someone related to you who got away with unspeakable acts that by pure fact, enabled you to become the person you are today.

That said people far too frequently confuse evil with animals who simply don't know any better and thus need to be controlled. Mental illness too.

If a conscious person always considers their own actions justified but is sometimes wrong about this, then they are capable of committing an evil act that they considered justified (i.e. they’ve made a mistake). So evil doers aren’t necessarily unconscious.

I’m assuming that your stance on evil commits you to some kind of religious point of view. Is that the case? Also, how do you reconcile your view of evil with evolutionary theory? Is there adaptive survival value to pure evil? Perhaps even more than to good?

It's absolutele certain that we are not alone. The universe has an abundancy of life. Of course rhere is a small chance of no life being there, but then again, around every Sun-like word there are planets with life. That's no Russel's reapot. — Zweistein

God is infinite, so His universe must be too. Thus is the excellence of God magnified and the greatness of His kingdom made manifest; He is glorified not in one, but in countless suns; not in a single earth, a single world, but in a thousand thousand, I say in an infinity of worlds. — Giordano Bruno

In space there are countless constellations, suns and planets; we see only the suns because they give light; the planets remain invisible, for they are small and dark. There are also numberless earths circling around their suns. — Giordano Bruno

Giordano Bruno was, unfortunately or not, burnt at the stake for heresy. Now, no one would look askance at you for asking the same questions he did. My, my, how the times have changed.

no because if they do something, like accidentally kill someone, it's a mistake. Not evil.

Mistakes are unintentional. Not deliberate. Evil is deliberate.

The definition of evil: That which intends to unjustifiably harm innocent people. — AlienFromEarth

An evil doer never considers their own actions justified, because they are not conscious beings. — AlienFromEarth

And intention in a conscious act; so if “evil doers” are unconscious then they aren’t capable of intention, and so aren’t capable of evil.

nope. Not religious, just logical and autonomous. Oh and conscious. Lets not forget that.

Evil is deliberate. — AlienFromEarth

So this appears to be your main problem. Evil can’t both be deliberate and unconscious.

no it isn't. An intention could be that of a robot, but that merely is an extension of the organism that created the robot. It merely means, inclination, gravitation of sorts, likelihood of action, etc.

Nowhere did I state that intention was a conscious decision.

Do you think deliberation can be an unconscious act also?

deliberate =/ intention.

Now let me clarify, organisms are different from inanimate objects. They are also different from robots.

I actually misspoke above, robots themselves do not have intentions, rather, their creators do. And even if they were created by another robot, who created that robot? And so on. It comes down to some organism that created the first robot. Thus, the robots intentions are not it's own, it is merely the intentions of the organism that created it.

Not religious, just logical and autonomous. Oh and conscious. Lets not forget that. — AlienFromEarth

Whether you know it or not, your description of evil puts your thinking in the category of ‘secular’ religion. You may have absolutely no affiliation with organized religion( thus it is secular) , but your approach is a classic example of a religious metaphysics, and not even a very modern one at that. It is incompatible with the implications of evolutionary biology as well as modern psychology.

Thus, the robots intentions are not it's own, it is merely the intentions of the organism that created it. — AlienFromEarth

I agree. But I also say that those organisms providing the intentions can do so precisely because they are conscious, and intentions spring from consciousness.

If evil doers are on your terms unconscious just as robots are, then they can’t actually intend anything and so are not capable of evil.

the problem with it being "religious" metaphysics is that no religion in history as ever attempted to truly separate good from bad in human beings. Rather, ALL religions have ALWAYS pronounced evil to be a choice in every human being. That is precisely what I am arguing against.

I'm saying evil is NOT a choice. And that people who are evil are NOT redeemable, and you should never attempt to forgive them. I'm saying GOOD people are the ONLY conscious beings, and evil people lack consciousness entirely.

All of this is absolutely counter to all religious sentiment. Again, all religious argue that evil and good are within all human beings. I do not believe that, therefore I cannot consider my understanding of this as "religious".

but they're not robots. Robots are inorganic. An unconscious organism is still an organism, and like their conscious counterparts, their bodies are designed to be able to re-order themselves to adapt. Whereas a robot can only follow programming instructions, and even if it's programmed to reprogram itself, it still requires other instructions to be followed to the T in order to reprogram itself.

A human needs no such instruction set. A human can completely override a genetic predisposition and change their lives however they want. Obviously they can't disobey the laws of logic, but they are fundamentally capable of changing anything about themselves. Although it may take time. Robots can never do this.

Humans have innate interconnectedness, whereas robots can only attempt to mimick that. If robots were to ever have our fundamental interconnectedness, they would cease to robots, and would then become organisms.

A human can completely override a genetic predisposition and change their lives however they want. — AlienFromEarth

Even if they’re unconscious?

yeah, well with unconscious beings it wouldn't be their "intention". But yes, even their bodies can re-order and re-adapt in ways that robots could never dream of. This is because they are organisms. Above that, all organisms are designed to house consciousness. If the organism doesn't possess consciousness, then it is defective. But still an organism.

well with unconscious beings it wouldn't be their "intention". — AlienFromEarth

This is what I’m getting at. If an evil doer is unconscious then they lack that intention.

This is fun going in loops with you. They don't lack intention. INtention is not a conscious function. An intention really, is an organism that sets out to do something.