Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

The question I would like to pose is this: can ideas, independant of action, be bad or evil? For example, most people consider racism to be bad. But if a racist, for whatever reason (such as fear of social sanctions) never acts on his racism, would his racist ideas still be bad? Or does it not make sense to talk about ideas being "good" or "bad" unless they result in "good" or "bad" actions?

In my opinion good and evil are both relative and based on perspectve. This is because the most, for a lack of a better word, "Evil" person does not believe themselves to be evil. Evil is a term used to dehumanize a person in order to hurt or harm them.
So dies evil breed racism or does rasicm breed evil?

I agree with Tpt. There are facts, then there are opinions. Whether or not something is evil is an opinion. A racist person doesn't see themselves as evil, obviously. A lot of people don't understand how I can say that, because there are some things that seem so entirely evil that they could never, by anyone, not be considered evil. Hitler, for example, nearly all of the world's population would agree to be evil. However, there are neo-Nazi support groups who don't think that. Ideas cannot be evil.

well.that's easy gregory. an evil/bad ideea is still evil/bad regardess if it's put into action. it's the ideea we're commenting on.
If he would act on it, then we would have an evil/bad action, besides the evil/bad ideea

Everyone has evil ideas at some point or another during their lifetime. As long as they don't act on said idea then no harm is done and it's nobodies business.

yup...only priests and/or very religios persons blame thmselves for ....unholy thinking

Well in sociological terms, having ideas for lets say racism is called prejudice. Acting on those ideas or ideologys is called discrimination.

No, I dont believe in 'evil' ideas. I dont believe Hitler's ideas were evil...his method might have been...erm...not very ''good'' but his ideas warent evil, neither were Stalin's nor Mussolini's nor Castro's...i think these people (or example) had interest in what they were doing, and their ideas had a goal of some kind, but i dont think they were 'evil'.

Well, just for the record, I think ideas can be evil, and I certainly think Hitler and his ideas were evil, and I have always been uncomfortable about belief in moralistic relativity.

hitler was indeed evil. his dim minded ideas...made him..dangerously limited, for a man with such power to actually exercise his ideas

Hitler was very intellignet Dexx. If he wasnt he would have never got to where he had.

You think Hitler's ideas were evil? How are Bush's ideas not evil..they are as evil, or even more evil than Hitler's were.

Hitler happen to be in history as the wost of the worst...which also happens not to be true.

His people happen to be supporting him a lot, and there are still people from the WWII who are alive and think Hitler was fantastic. In Italy, there are still calendars of Mussolini sold arround shops everywhere. In Russia portraits of Stalin are again still sold.

These people had an ideology they were following, how does that make their ideas evil?
You saying Marx's ideas were evil also?

Well, for a start, I would massively reject any vague implication that any idea Bush has ever had is remotely as evil as Hitler's.

And I believe the ideology was evil. Simple as that. So what if lots of people followed it?

Bush is going into Iraq, bombing Iraq and has done so for the past 13 years. 13 years oif sanctions and bombing, and then after all that time, he says, ''oh yah, im gonna go in with my forces, raguardless what any other country says, because i think you have weapons of mass distruction...although you hardly have anything to eat''

yeah, thats may not be evil from YOUR POINT OF VEW. To Iraq and Afgganistan and few others arround that place, as already evident, it is VERY evil.

SAme thing goes for Hitler...exactly the same. To you and many others his ideas were evil, to many others hes ideas warent.

Moral relativism. I reject it, like I just said.

I believe Bush had justification going into Afghanistan and Iraq, and your comments are not well informed. But this is not the proper place for such argument. Regardless, I think it is in VERY poor taste to compare such actions with Hitler's policy of GENOCIDE. It's not even remotely the same, and I am rather disturbed.

Hitler was evil. His ideas were evil. His actions were evil. Everyone who followed him thinking he was right, was wrong.

what does that intelligence have to do with being evil or having dim minded ideas...such as racism..extreme racis, anyway. How can you plan to eliminate an entire nation, and hope to succede. that is the definition of evil. he commited genocide....it doesn't matter how intelligent you are

i didn't say anything about bush. He might as well have fascist principles, but he's in no way comparable to hitler.



and to get back on track...i can't say i understand your thinking.
how does following an ideology rid you of being purely and truly evil?

I dont support Hitler in any way, far from it, but im looking at this from a neutral perspective. (or trying to)

You cant just go and say ''well hes evil'' What the hell does that mean? Are there conditions you have to fullfill in order to be pronounced evil?

So...what about Stalin, is stalin more evil than Hitler?

What about Castro? Do you think Fidel Castro is evil?

well..i'd say killing 6 mil people + war casualties qualifies you as being evil.

erm...fascism is an ideology, Nazism is a branch of fascism...Fascism has cerain views on cerain things, as does Nazism. That is an ideology, NOT set out by Hitler. He added his own shit to it..and followed it. He followed the ideology.

Hes truly and purely evil? There are some strong words there Dexx, why are you singeling out Hitler? Why dont you go back, way bac, read history from the begining....then say if Hitler was truly and purely evil.

what's with all the name parade? it does not matter. they MIGHT be evil, or they MIGHT be just bad leaders....OR maybe they tried to rule in their own thinking, and failed along the way.
But not any communist leader falls in the same category as hitler, because hitler has the big red ball of GENOCIDE on his side. Which pretty much sepparates him from a lot of leaders...he's right there with gingis han(sp), which was also evil

Oh yeah, Stalin was a bad leader now, was he....hes not evil, even though he killed 40 million people in the time of his rule, hes only a bad leader, but not evil! Give me a brake. What he did isnt called genocide its called ''bad leadershp'' now is it?

hmm..i can't seem to get you to listen ...it's not that complicated.
it doesn't matter which ideology he followed (whether he started it or not). what makes you evil is your way of thinking...he acted on evil thought principles.


i know the history, lb..and i wonder why do you think there is anything he could have done to justify or in any way compensate for the genocide he's responsable for.
The race superioritu/inferiority concept he had makes him evil.

awh...it's disappointing of you ...read the damn line propperly.
out of the three options i presented about how stalin COULD be you picked the one most suitable for a counter-argument.
i speciffically said he MIGHT be a bad leader OR EVIL.
read carefully...

I dont understand you Dexx....why are you singeling out ONE or TWO people which you say are evil? I dont understand why?

Have I ever tried to justify his actions? No, I actually did not, i am trying to understand what is it that makes you so sure that this one man was EVIL not just overly ambicious and mentaly unstable??

I read it...but why Stalin MIGHT be evil, and Hitler IS evil?

this is getting tiresome.
because he killed a sh!t load of people, that's why. mentally unstable does not rule out being evil.

because we were talking about hitler...
stalin was just an attempt of an argument from you. no need to cmpare hitler with anyone to say he was evil. stalin is a different case.

Number one, look at my very first post in this thread. I didnt only mention Hitler. Ush, continued onto Hitler.

Secondly, please enlighten me as to how exactly is Stalin different case?

Thirdly, all leaders killed a shit lot of people, tell me one witch hasnt.

And lastly, on topic, my argument is that there are no evil ideas, since thats what this topic is all about. There are mental cases, there are overly ambicious people...but evil ideas...i dont believe so.

One man's food is other man's poison!

i didn't blame you for continuing with hitler..so i don't why why you'd mention who did. irrelevant anyway..because i'll stop mentioning hitler after this psot, seeing it is pointless.
a leader who didn't kill a shit load of people? are you serious?
all leaders kill people?..that's just childish and i won't bother to comment on it.
as for belief on evil ideas..i doubt you really think that way, and i think you're now only going with the flow of what you originally said...but that's just me. i might be wrong..

Yes you are wrong. Very wrong. I believed that there are 'evil' ideas, about 4 years ago....since then, i spoke with few proffessors of mine (psychology and sociology) and i got to release certain things.
I know exactly what im talking about, and please dont tell me what i think, or dont think.

You didnt answer my second question either.


People are slefish by nature...its how we are. WE do whats neccessary for ourself.

You're view on this is black and white, which again, world isnt. You dont have ''evil'' and ''good'' people, thats utter bullshit.

not all people are selfish. some are...and together with a few other traits, (greed, envy, vengeance, etc.) one MIGHT consider someone evil....ofcourse, that criteria of apprechiation is 100% relative, and deppends on the person.
This isn't black or what at all, for me.....that criteria of apprechiation constitutes everyone's 'grey'

True. Not all people are openly selfish..some more than others. What i mean in fact is that, the ideas that are maybe called ''evil'' are somewhat selfish, but not necessarily evil.

Lets look at he big businesses. most of them are responsible for polution, water, air, noise polution, whatever else. The ideas of that manager, business leader, arent evil, they are selfish, and to his own interest. They are more than evil to the people who have to endure all their big business crap.

Calling ideas(people) 'evil' depends on witch side of the fence you are.

Saying that believing people can be good or evil is too black and white is disingenuous to what is a simplified argument, by asking if ideas can be 'evil'. Obviously, I think evil is not an absolute but something people have in quanitiy, and with a thousand thousand complications.

But some people are just so clearly one side of the fence it makes perfect sense to call them evil. Hitler is one such person, Stalin is another. That people are selfish by nature also rather muddles the issue for me; that does not detract from evil acts or thought or intent, as for as judging it morally is concerned.

I assume I would rather vehemently disagree with whatever your professors told you, Lil.

I agree with Lil on this. Ideas cannot be evil. Hitler's actions were evil, his ideas were not. His ideas themselves did not hurt anybody, it was the fact that he actually did something about them and acted on them. As I explained in my first post, ideas are just that--ideas, and whether they are "right" or "wrong" is a matter of opinion. Again, there are ALWAYS going to be people who disagree with you when you say "this is good" or "this is evil", no matter how obvious the answer should seem to the majority. Saying that somebody's thoughts are evil is, like somebody already mentioned, hugely over simplifying things.

Maybe.

My argment went off on one. It went off on ''are people evil'' rather than are 'ideas evil' because we(or rather I) got Hitler and Stalin into this, i think.

I have an evil idea. It came to me in a dream. A little leprecaun came up to me and said burn everything! Burn,Burn!

Genocide is not evil? Trying to wipe out all other races and ruiling over your people through fear and iron fist tactics is not evil? Total self advancement over all others to sacrifice the weak for progress is not evil? Stalin, Mao, Hitler and all of their henchmen or followers are evil. Some ideas can only be generated through a nat or an original inclination for it. What part of Hitlers ideas were not evil i ask you? Stalin wanted to advance his people for his own ego mind you, he wanted to show the west... so he sacrificed the weak and helpless along with those who would stop him... same as Mao... there are no excusses for what they did.

Why do you think the Iraq people were starving to begin with? There economy was being directed to palaces and armies to try and conquer their neighbors... Sadams henchmen selectively went after people with voices and slaughtered them. Only war would topple the tyranny they suffered... civilwar would have only toppled Sadam and no one was left to stand because there was fear.

Hitler was indeed evil. I think killing several million people out of blind racial hatred qualifies you as evil. He may not have been evil when he simply had the idea, but the fact that he carried those ideas out in such horrible ways makes him purely evil.

Just because his followers liked him doesn't make his actions any less heinous or horrible. I have seen many of his followers and believers, they are called skinheads. And most of them are so purely filled with idiocy and ignorance that they make Bush sound like a linguist.

The fact that he was "intelegent" doesn't make his actions any less evil as well. If anything, that just makes his actions even more horrific because an intelegent person should know that killing millions of innocent people just because you don't like them is wrong in every sense of the word.

Who defines what's bad or evil?

Different people have different ideas about the two, something that may seen alright to us, may be viewed as immoral and "evil" to others.

In an example, I have a Baptist friend, and she's shocked by the things I do in every day life, to her they are "evil" but to me it's the norm where I am from.

The word itself can mean many things.

You guys are so one sided.
Was Hitler Evil?
Depends whose perspective.
Sure you and I and a bunch of other people think he's evil, but to him and his advisors and his followers he wan't evil.
Ideas arn't evil. Its how they are evil. Genocide as an idea is not evil. How or if, it's carried out is evil.
But most of your arguments excluding some of Lil's, don't touch on point of view! It HAS to! that is the basic definition.

You seem to be contradicting yourself. You say that we can't say that he was evil--that it's a matter of opinion--and then go on to say that the thing he's known for is evil.

And on unrelated notes ...

I'd like to heartilly thank the three or so posters who have actually tried to answer my question during all this Hitler talk (no, I'm not really complaining--that's life on a message board for you).

I, personally, do not think an idea can actually be evil. Of course, a lot of ideas can lead to evil, but that's not the same thing, I think.

Indeed.

And what Irene said also. Like I said, over and over again, depends on which side of the fence you are.

As I said, Hitler was indeed evil. He killed millions of people just because of his blind hatred for them. If that's not evil then I don't know what is.

There was more to Hitler's murders than 'blind hateret' Besides, like we said, over and over and over again, it depends from which presepctive you're looking at, does it not.

To many Americans Bush isnt evil, and America certanly isnt evil. Ask at least the half of the world, and they will all tell you that America is EVIL and so is Bush.

Please inform me as to what plausable reasoning was behind the barbaric actions of Hitler. What excuse could he have too murder millions of people. I'd really like to know. You are right though, it does depend on your perception of his actions, either the logical perception: He killed millions of people for no good reason, thus making him evil. Or the overly optomistic and naive perception: He was only following his beliefs and had some sort of reason beyond hatred and being evil.

Also, I don't think Bush is evil, just stupid. He has made mistakes, but he hasn't done anything purposely evil to anyone. At least not comparable to the skale of Hitlers actions.

I know it's fashionable to dislike America for the rest of the world. But to say America is evil is by far more foolish then appointing that same title to Hitler, someone who was far more deserving to the word "evil".

You've said over and over again that people disagree about whether a given person is evil. But I don't think that in itself proves anything. Some people belive that Hitler is not evil. Some people also believe that the British royal family is made up of shape-shifting alien lizards. You can find people who'll believe damn near anything--but just because there's a difference of opinion on a topic doesn't mean that one of the opinions isn't objectively right, and the other opinion objectively wrong. I'm rambling, but I guess the point I'm getting accross is that perception does not dictate reality, so whether somebody is evil or not really isn't a matter of perception.

Have I at any point justified or tried to justify Hitlers actions? Please, why dont you quote me at the place where i justified anything Hitler said/did!

It isnt 'fashionable' to hate America, it is what happens. Why dont you ask middle east if America is evil? Why dont you ask if Bush is evil? They will ALL tell you, that he is. A country that has been bombing another country for 13 years and keeping that country in sanctions is going to be labeled as EVIL...it has nothing to do with fashion!

To you, America is not evil, to many others it is, and no matter what you say about Bush and his intelligence, to many people in the East he is as evil as Hitler, or maybe more, since most of them never felt Hitler's 'wrath'

You get few people from Africa or Asia, and ask them who do you think is more evil, George Bush or Hitler, i can guarantee you that they will say Bush.

Its the perspective! That is important! From which side of the fence you are standing!

I have no problem with people thinking Bush is evil, I don't like Bush, never have, never will. And I fully understand why they think Bush is evil. I don't fault them for that. I do however, fault them for thinking that America is evil just because Bush is president. That would be like me saying German was evil because it was ruled by Hitler. It's simply silly. As is saying Bush is more evil then Hitler. It just isn't so. You can't fault an entire country for one mans mistake or evil actions, because there will be many many people in his own country that won't aprove of his actions. I also fault them for thinking that Bush is actually more evil then Hitler.

Bush is doing what he's doing in retaliation for 9/11. Had the terrorists never attacked the twin towers, then none of this would have happened. Hitler, on the other hand, did what he did out of pure, evil hatred.

I challenge you to give me any plausable reasoning behind Hitlers actions. There simply are none. He did what he did out of hatred for the Jews, and out of everyone who didn't conform to his way of thinking. He even went so far as killing German people who didn't think the way he did, you don't see Bush doing that, do you? If people really do believe Bush is more evil then Hitler, then I'm very glad I'm on the side of the fence that I'm on.

Anyways, I'm straying way off topic. The topic is this....is Hitler evil? Lets look at the definition of the word "evil" shall we?

"Morally bad or wrong; wicked: an evil tyrant.
Causing ruin, injury, or pain; harmful: the evil effects of a poor diet. Characterized by or indicating future misfortune; ominous: evil omens. Bad or blameworthy by report; infamous: an evil reputation. Characterized by anger or spite; malicious: an evil temper."

Sounds like that fits Hitler like a glove, does it not? He purposely brought pain and suffering to millions of innocent people, just because of his "beliefs" and ideas that he brought to life. According to definition, that makes him evil.

Evil Is very much so a matter of perception.
you are saying what you think is good and evil is reality.
Maybe in your own little world but not in the real one.
Hitler is to black and white. We need a more grey example to truly disuss this.
Bush also is to argumentative.
Maybe Stalin? I dunno

I can only agree with what you said BF

and to answer gregory his question: No I do not believe that any idea without action can be inherrently evil.

An argument I very, VERY strongly reject, Tpt. Again, I despise moral relativism, and I think perspective has nothing to do with it. And I believe ideas can be evil.

And as Gregory says, the fallible opinion of people on who they support has NOTHING to do with it.

And Lil, the censorship system is not there to simply be bypassed by the use of accents, etc. I think everyone should refrain from bad language.

Try to keep your head cause otherwise, this is going to disappear in no time!

I think the politics needs to be removed to a very great distance also. We'd all like to comment on many of the points Lil raises on diverse issues but this is not the right place.

But then...everyone is in sense evil. Because according to deffinition...most people are in fact evil.



(p.s. I noticed how all your replys have your edit...that started to happen to me too)

I do think Evil is a very strong word which can not be used often

just like 'hate'

yes, so we'd better leavel all the hitlers and bushs out of this. There is indeed a lot i would comment but....not the place to talk about politics.

You're right... indeed. But you know, philosophy is politics and religion...most are teehee

philosophy and politics?..far from it

anyway..thing is..they're not allowed. i'm sure we can avoid them with little effort.

Actullay, I never said, claimed, or implied that "what think is good and evil is reality." I said that some notion of good and evil was reality. It might or might not be mine.

I dont think philosophy and politics are far apart! What was Plato doing i wander!

I don't know if It's how i was brought up or what but I cannot see how you can believe that.
Evil is a label. it comes with somethign else.
For instance Person A is evil because he did this thing. So we should put him in jail. We label people evil in order to justify doing something to them that we could not to if we did not consider them evil.
For instance. I shot Person A because he is evil and harmed my family.
Now, I believed that Person A was evil and was able to shoot him. Next think of your closest family memeber or your best friend. Could you kill him or her?? Just walk up to them and shoot them? I hope to God that you could not. Now imagine that someone else did something did something terrible to that same person. now if you had never known that person you would probablly think it justafiable to harm of kill that person. But what if that person was your other best friend, or someone else you knoew really well and knew their potential. Would you stil be able to hurt them?
Now I think that you lable the anoymous person more evil than the best friend who both did the exact same thing. therefore it is justifyed to hurt them. But a third party would lable them both evil or bad. and justify hurting them both with that.

nicely done Tpt.

It is a label, i agree and who is 'evil' it greatly depends on which side of the fence you are standing.

what does acting against a person ahve anything to do with labeling him as 'evil' or not.
what business is it of mine if a person is evil..so long as it doesn't affetc me and those i know. if it IS someone i know....the difference wouldn't be on viewing him as more or less evil, but in changing him, back to NOT being evil..


this 'evil' word is getting to sound superficial by now . you don't even use it that much irl.

What I am trying to prove is that Evil is just a label used to justify violence!

I still think it's all about perception

no tpt....violence would already mean action. A person doesn't have to act to be evil. Thinking does it.
besides....a person can be evil without being in any way violent, even if acting. manipulative, decieving actions are enough..

again...everyone might do this....and not everyone is evil. So, i should say that i do aprove moral relativism, evil being just a word, not universally fit for any person that ONE thinks is evil, and another does not.

Yup, you don't seem to be talking anything I see as relevant, tpt. What people- who I remind you are fallible- end up labelling other people as, for whatever reason, does not really come into it for me, though I would hope that more intelligent people, as has happened over human history, come closer to recognising what is and is not evil. If one person says a person is evil, and the other says a person is not, either one, or possibly both due to reasoning, are simply wrong. Assuming we are simplifying the situation to extremes.

Incidentally, in your example, no, I would never consider it justified to kill that person except in self-defence or if it was the only way to imminently prevent harm of another.

But like I say, this is massively irrelevant, I do not consider good and evil, conceptually, simply labels we apply. I believe they are objective qualities that we attempt to correctly define with people. That is very hard to do, but some are so obvious that it can be said safely, as has already been discussed.

And I think there are many, MANY people in the world who use the word evil and at no point ever are using it either as a label, or as a means of justifying violence.

Gregory and I are in agreement. We are not claiming that we know what is good and what is evil and that everyone else must conform to us. But we are claming that one CAN be right about these things- it i a truth to be found, and I would hope my ideas are close to the truth.

And this concept can be applied to thoughts as well as actions. Thinking evil thoughts does not necessarily make the person, ultimately, evil. But the thoughts themselves certainly are.

Maybe ush, tho I don't think many ppl have evil thoughts.

Ush, again, it is the perspective. You said: ''I would never consider it justified to kill that person except in self-defence or if it was the only way to imminently prevent harm of another''

And thats fine, but in some cultures for example, killing person for being a homosexual for example is their culture, and to them it is not evil, and their would kill 100s of people if they have to who are found to be homosexual, to them homosexuality in itself is an evil act or idea or however else you want to call it, and they would commit some inhumane act to those people. Some do that in the name of religion also, irrlevant, but what im saying is that what is acceptable in one part of the world, it totally isnt in the other. What you call evil, someone in Zambia (i just said that country randomly) will not find it evil.

Thinking about sex in some strictly religious countries is an ''evil'' thinking, drinking somewhere in the world is an evil act. Killing person for their crimes in America's justice system is acceptable...to me, it isnt, and i would, in a sense call that act 'evil'

yes, well...this should explain it..

Does anyone know what genocide is? Because apparently some people here do not know or realize that the only way to accomplish it is horrific.

Dexx speaks truly, Lil. I refute that view. it is NOT down to perspective. All perspective can be is in some degreee of correctness in relativity to the truth.

I have rather plainly said this many times now. I reject any idea of moral relativism!

Therefore, those who think killing homosexuals is good, and that homosexuality is wrong, are- I am very certain- WRONG, and I do not give a damn what they erroneously think is right. They are mistaken to call it evil.

I do not know how much more clear I can make my beliefs. My view is that good and evil are concepts that exist independantly of our opinion on them.

I'm beginning to agree with you more and more ush

My beliefs are exactly the same Ush. I believe that those people are not doing the right thing, or ''good'' are being ''evil'' or whatever.. it was an example, i thought in a moment.

I understand what you are saying, kinda...i do partaly agree with you, but i dont believe that someone can be labeled as 'pure' evil as Dexx said earlier. I dont believe that one person is just ''evil''. That person maybe evil to a certain group of people, but not to everyone. His ideas maybe evil towards cerain group of people. to those people hes evil, but to someone else he isnt and they would argue differently.

Those people would stand in front of us and tell us that being a homosexual is an evil way to be, and nothing we say or do will convince them otherwise, no matter how 'not evil' that might be.

I dont think we are evil, we just...are. Ive thought about horrible things, ive done some stuff i aint too proud of, but i dont think im evil.

As I say, in these theoretical situaitons we are talking in absolutes that do not work in real life. As I also said, these things have a thousand thousand complicatins when practically applied. I don't go around assinging people to good and evil spheres. I certainly would not say an evil act makes you evil, or even thsat it is some sort of balancing act. it is VERY complex. I just simply believe good and evil are independant and objective concepts, not simply relative terms of our own creation.

And I would say that those who preach evil and cannot be talked out of it- whether due to their own beliefs or otherwise- should ideally be stopped.

And I do believe that some of the examples given earlier were SO evil that I can call them so, rather unqualified. There is a point at which it becomes clear, despite these complications.

ok, lb..lemme put it this way...do you think jack the ripper was evil? if so, why?

well that explains you not believing in moral relativism. But what sets a concept in our mind, rather than our opinion on them. you're saying that the concept of something exists..out there....outside of our influence. we can have an opinion on it...but without changing it.
i tend to think that a concept of someting is different in everyone's mind. ...that our opinion makes it.

We are in agreement Ush....kinda.

No, he was not evil, he was mentaly unstable, whats your point?



...... what...are you talking about....? exactly....

Ush Makes a very good point but I would like an example where using the word evil was not a label to justify an action. I was using hurt or kill as extremes.

"Those people would stand in front of us and tell us that being a homosexual is an evil way to be, and nothing we say or do will convince them otherwise, no matter how 'not evil' that might be."


Yep, and those people are factually stupid.

nevermind mentaly unstable. you say hitler wasn't evil, jack the ripper wasn't evil...name one evil person throughout history..


i was talkin with ush

OK, I do think that ideas, even when independent of action, can be evil. Using your example of racism, regardless of whether the racist acts on his/her notions, the seed for evil is still in existence. Think Chinese Whispers. What if the racist did nothing physically about his views except perhaps share how he felt with another, perhaps impressionable friend? This friend would then have the racist views planted, and it could continue. So, although the racist did nothing obviously noticeable about his ideas, he still managed to get his point across. Sometimes whispering speaks the loudest. Just a theory........