are we all sinners ??

[josephdc]

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

How can your motive be good when according to you there's really no such thing as good or evil?

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...

Doesn't that contradict your earlier statements? How can his intentions be good when there's really no such thing as good and evil as you said?

[miyay]

What do you mean sis?

bro, i think the question is clear...

[miyay]

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..

murag brotherhood due to identity of interest

[josephdc]

@ miyay:

Sorry about that.

Okay, the way I understand it sis is that surely it's not you or me, or anyone who dictates what is morally right or wrong. When injustices happen for example, we always appeal to an objective standard of goodness and we point out that the perpetrator or perpetrators violated that standard.

[miyay]

who makes the objective standard of goodness?

[josephdc]

^ The way I see it sis is that the objective standard of goodness is not "made", it simply exists. We all recognize it intuitively when we see or experience injustices.

[treize]

.. 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 ??

Yes fin I've talk to criminals before, some of them are my friends, and they are aware that killing is not right.. and they have their own different reasons for doing it... even though they have different reasons yet bottom line of these reasons is due to selfishness...

[splendid moonlight]

Ooops, sorry double post!

[splendid moonlight]

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...

According to some, the end does not justify the means.

There is an ethical principle called double-effect in which an act would produce both good and evil. According to this principle, some would say, the good must always precede the evil before an action could be morally justifiable (other books explain it differently, though). Intentional abortion for the purpose of saving the mother could be considered immoral on the grounds that evil (killing the baby) precedes the good (saving the mother).

Very tricky indeed. It's like a game with its own set of rules. If blah is blah, then blah is blah. But if blah is blah, then... blah.

[jamesmusslewhite]

Yep, everyday. It is our nature, some are just honest enough to admit it.