Evil in SR - imbrace chaos, Let the World Burn Options

[hahnsoo]

[Crimson Jack]

Yeah, you're right. There's a bit of that in the Harlequin adventure as I recall.

[hyzmarca]

Evil is a perception of the imperfect mind. Because we lack omniscience we cannot comprehend the greater good that comes immediate suffering. To the perfect mind, its all good.

[Sandoval Smith]

Except for what's bad.

*edit*
Hit 'post' too soon.

That statement fails on account of what happens when you've got more than one omniscient being wandering around. As soon as you've got one working on a plan that achieves Ultimate Good that results in less suffering than the other, you7ve got your evil again.

[shadow_scholar]

But if one omniscient being's ideas differ from another's, then that isn't true omniscience.

[Vuron]

In general I'd say I loathe moral relativism (it's only evil if the person who does it thinks it's evil) as I truly believe there are objective standards for what represents "evil" behavior.

That being said very few people in SR are of the over the top evil badasses like a Sauron (and pretty much almost all fantasy evil) or a Sith Lord (Star Wars is basically fantasy in space). While there are things like the Invae and Darke most of the "evil" is of the standard everyday variety that comes when greed and self-interest wins out over empathy and compassion.

The Corporator who is motivated by greed and approves testing a toxic product on humans is certainly evil however he generally isn't going to work each day thinking "How can I ruin more of the world today?" well unless he's a senior executive at Aztechnology. He might not think he's evil but he certainly is not adverse to "evil" means to meet his desired ends.

Further even the really bad organizations like Aztechnology aren't monolithic evil but are rather made up of tons of people acting in a immoral and amoral way on routine basis.

Of course depending on whether you buy into the horror plotline (which seems to have fallen away with the seperation of the ED and SR gamelines) then there is a very real force of evil waiting on the outside looking in and waiting. However if you really follow ED wholehog the horrors are not monolithic but individually motiviated in fulfilling thier alien desires.

[torzzzzz]

But surely to do something 'evil' is only so in the eyes of the mass populous? If know one is there to say it is evil then is it? brings to mind the theory, will a tree that falls in a forest make a noise if no one is there to here it?

the same concept appears to be relevant to good and bad!

why is is bad? because from a very early age you are told it is, never why ....it just is?

torz x :)

*damm spelling*

This post has been edited by torzzzzz: Apr 13 2005, 07:01 PM

[Vuron]

[Charon]

I think the only absolute taboo that have held in all culture at all time are incest and murder in the strictest sense. If you start stretching just a little, like sex between cousins or killing someone of a lower social status, then these behaviors were/are seen as acceptable in some place and in some era.

Consider that Thomas Jefferson had slaves even as he was writing the declaration of independance. Was he evil? Not for the era. But today if I try to get myself a slave anywhere else than on collarme.com , yeah, that probably would be seen as evil by most people, wouldn't it?

EDIT : Hmm, can't think of many culture were theft is acceptable either, though some have had decidedly bizarre notion about ownership.

[Nikoli]

I dunno, I think Shedim and Greater Shedim fall into the Evil category pretty darned well.

[nezumi]

[Vuron]

[hyzmarca]

[Dawnshadow]

Actually, if I'm remembering correctly, the descendents of Adam and Eve married the 'other people'...

Moral relativism is strange. It's a cop out, certainly -- but it's also the only answer that makes sense in many ways as well -- since morality is very nebulous. People define their own moral codes with every choice they make. They decide how important something is, they decide whether or not something is wrong by what they do.

Even going into something as basic as 'don't kill' and a social contract aren't necessairily good or evil. A contract that binds society to the whim of a madman is a very evil construct. A society that insists that it is better to let a madman kill your family then you then kill him is also 'evil' -- just not in the way that people normally consider it. True pacifism is evil in that sense as well -- if you have the ability to stop a rape, for instance, but don't, then you have endorsed the rape, whether or not you try. If you don't try your hardest, then you have said 'I don't consider it that evil.'

Most explanations ever given for what is universally evil can be broken down when you start examining the small stuff that makes them up. Even something like blood magic in Shadowrun -- there's disagreement on whether or not it's 'Evil', or just 'prone to be evil'. I forget who said it, but their group had a very interesting (and accurate, in my opinion) view of it.. the punk using blood magic to fireball them is evil, the mage using her own blood to heal them is 'really really weird'.

Likewise.. universally good tends to break down. Almost anything given as 'always good', can potentially be evil under some circumstances. As an example.. brining a child into the world for love of your partner and love of child-to-be, with the intent to raise the child to be him/herself, and the best person he/she can be. Pretty close to the ideal of why to have a child, and hard to conceive as evil... but if the child turns out to be the next Stalin?

And.. there's so much in the grey area that relativism covers but absolutes don't. Vlad Teppes, for instance, is both a hero and a villan, depending on where you are.

[Vuron]

[Charon]

[Charon]

[shadow_scholar]

Now I don't think legality should be confused with moral judgement. Everyone does things that are considered illegal but that doesn't necessarily make them evil, nor does doing something most would consider evil always be illegal. In my eyes, laws are only there to serve order, to ensure we don't slip into a chaotic society. The odd thing is that those laws were written according to someone's morality.

To get to the purest form of evil I think of it as doing harm to others. If you do something with the sole interest of doing harm, then that's evil. But I consider that to be rather rare. Some have said that murder is universally evil, but I'd kill someone if they intended to do kill me. Is that murder? Depends on who you ask. Shades of grey, man, shades of grey. The only difference is how much of a shade or tint you see in those greys.

[Charon]

[Dawnshadow]

Murder is the catch-all phrase for any killing which there isn't a legitimate explanation given for and accepted of. The police officer shooting down the suspect could be murder -- if the decision is made that he didn't have sufficient cause. Self defense could be murder.. if you break the person's neck because he gave you a bloody nose. And it's especially murder if they don't actually TRY to kill you. If I intend to kill my roommate, and he knifes me as I sleep, then it's murder, as an example.

But... none of those might be EVIL. The police officer-- might be guilty of murder under the law, but it might not have been evil. Could be the inquiry decided his judgement was faulty early on and the suspect shouldn't have been a suspect at all, and so when the suspect turned, officer caught a glint of metal and pulled the trigger... all over mistaken identity? The roommate? If it was 100% certain that I was going to wake up and strangle him, and he had no way to prevent it but knifing me as I slept? Not evil. Still murder.

[hyzmarca]

[Edward]

Many laws today where not made because the act itself was wrong.

For example. Nobody really thinks just for carrying a 15CM sheath knife I am evil or that the act of doing so is wrong but it is still illegal for me to do so in Australia. This is because many of the people that would want the knife would do something bad with it, unfortunately that leaves those of us with a good reason to carry such a knife around at times in a difficult position.

On the point of the historical acceptance of incest in the old testament I think it was lot that was drugged by his daughters so they could sleep with him and for this all 3 of them where rewarded.

Personally I would define an evil act as an act witch causes suffering without due cause.

The perpetrator of that act is only evil if he could foresee the suffering but regardless of weather or not that was his aim.

Although this is reasonably objective 2 points remain that are hard to define. What is due cause, was the person aware.

Edward

[Charon]

[Glyph]

I think good and evil are fuzzy at the edges, but are still more than mere subjective judgements. But even if you believe in moral relativism... there will still be "evil" people. The assertion that there are no evil people, because no evil person sees himself as evil, is too simplistic. It takes everyone's justifications at face value, when those justifications are often concocted to cover up things that the person doing them knew were wrong, based on his own moral code.

An example would be someone who shoplifts from a store, and says "They're crooks just like me, because they cheat people with their high prices. And their insurance will cover it anyway, and the insurance companies are even bigger crooks." Does that mean that the person actually thinks he has not done anything wrong? Or does he know he has done something wrong, and is trying to assauge his guilt? So don't assume that, say, a shady real estate broker isn't a bad person, because he doesn't have the same morals that most people do. He could very well have a strict moral code, and be breaking the heck out of it.

I don't know many people who don't subscribe to some kind of moral code or other, and I bet every one of them has broken their own moral code at some point or the other. And yes, I include myself in that category. :P

[Edward]

I agree that almost everybody has a moral code and breaks it occasionally.

I would say everybody but it is unwise to speak in such absolute terms.

The point is that there are levels of breeches. Not every breach of your own moral code will make you think you are evil even if you did not bother with a justification. For example, take the typical middle class lady. Swearing is considered bad and against there moral code but would they consider themselves (or another) to be evil if they said a swear word occasionally.

I think not, bad yes but not evil.

Personally the only reason I don’t sware often is it offends people but I honestly do not understand what power words like fuck, hell and shit have that these people can not bare to hear them. If you know pleas tell me.

Most people I know (and in this I know there are exceptions) have never breached there own moral code to the point that had they observed another doing those acts they would have considered them evil.

Edward

Edit: Wow the board let me say that.