are we all sinners ??

[splendid moonlight]

---

According to Ethics, there are three determinants of what is morally right or wrong: the end of the doer, act of the doer, and the circumstance.

Killing a priest (Amorsolo's example)

end: to take his money. EVIL
act: killed him. EVIL.
circumstance: you wanted to maintain your social life and you're running out of money. EVIL

Then, killing a priest is morally wrong.

Anyway, just wanted to show how the 3 determinants is used. Ethics is a tricky subject when it comes to determining what is right or wrong.


If you come to think of it the concept of good and evil has its own purpose. If we were all the same and did only evil (like killing), the human species might have been extinct by now. It would be so easy for us to kill one another.

[AmorsoloX]

Anyway, just wanted to show how the 3 determinants is used. Ethics is a tricky subject when it comes to determining what is right or wrong.

If you come to think of it the concept of good and evil has its own purpose. If we were all the same and did only evil (like killing), the human species might have been extinct by now. It would be so easy for us to kill one another.

agree agree.. the human species invented such thing as good and evil to promote cohesion within the social groups.. in the early history.. man depended on team work to survive nature.. straying away or being cast out of the tribe or group would mean certain death..

let go back to my examples previously...

1.) soldiers, torturing a captured enemy to gain intelligence and therefore possibly save the life of comrades...

2.) driving out or killing all of the members of the rival tribe to gain their land and resources to provide the basic necessities of one's own tribe...

3.) cheating during exams in order to pass the subject..

the method might be "evil" but the motive is "good"..

agree on ethics as a very tricky and very subjective field...

[AmorsoloX]

Killing a priest (Amorsolo's example)

end: to take his money. EVIL
act: killed him. EVIL.
circumstance: you wanted to maintain your social life and you're running out of money. EVIL

or you can look at this...

end : to take his money.. evil
act : killed him.. evil
circumstance : because you really needed the money badly like you need money to treat your child who is confined at the hospital and theres no other way.. good

has anyone here saw the movie Q? where denzel washington barricaded a hospital to save the life of his son?... his intentions are good but his methods are evil..... in the end. his son, lives...

the ends justify the means...

[silent-kill]

if we based this question in the bible or any other belief system then the answer is Yes

but if we based this question to Nature/Universe then No
why? because there is no concept of good and evil here

[fingolfin]

which is an evil act...

1.) killing a priest

or

2.) killing a taliban

or

3.) killing a criminal


bottomline.. your just killing a human... it only becomes "sin" when you put biases into it...

sin is basically what we dont like or anything that we feel is not appropriate... and such things vary from person to person

.. there you go. I totally agree. It's simply subjective and depends on which your "morals" stand upon.



.. @makei and treize ... please, kindly answer my question ... have you ever talked to a criminal before ??

[YellowSubmarine]

which is an evil act...

1.) killing a priest


2.) killing a taliban

or

3.) killing a criminal


bottomline.. your just killing a human... it only becomes "sin" when you put biases into it...

sin is basically what we dont like or anything that we feel is not appropriate... and such things vary from person to person

Depende.

Killing a priest for attempting to molest you is not evil for me. Killing a taliban to defend yourself is not evil. Killing a criminal for self defense is not evil


I think the commandment "Thou shall not kill" is not absolute

[YellowSubmarine]

-double post---

[josephdc]

which is an evil act...

1.) killing a priest

or

2.) killing a taliban

or

3.) killing a criminal


bottomline.. your just killing a human... it only becomes "sin" when you put biases into it...

Just killing a human being? Are you saying the act of killing is a morally-neutral act?

So for you bro killing is not really evil, it only appears "evil" if one sees it as evil?

So for you evil does not really exist?

sin is basically what we dont like or anything that we feel is not appropriate... and such things vary from person to person

So what you're really saying is morality is really just a matter of personal preference or taste?

[josephdc]

i see. who dictates what is morally wrong or right?

What do you mean sis?

[josephdc]

agree agree.. the human species invented such thing as good and evil to promote cohesion within the social groups.. in the early history.. man depended on team work to survive nature.. straying away or being cast out of the tribe or group would mean certain death..

I see bro, so for you morality is a social convention that we humans develop in order to survive as a specie. That means that different societies will develop different moralities, right?

let go back to my examples previously...

1.) soldiers, torturing a captured enemy to gain intelligence and therefore possibly save the life of comrades...

2.) driving out or killing all of the members of the rival tribe to gain their land and resources to provide the basic necessities of one's own tribe...

3.) cheating during exams in order to pass the subject..

the method might be "evil" but the motive is "good"..

How can the motive behind those examples be "good" when there's really no such thing as an objective "right" and "wrong" according to your view?