Originally posted by KingTut
The number one thing humans pursue is happiness. You kill people, you end their chance to be happy for the rest of their life. That's bad. It follows that Hitler is bad.
Unless it made Hitler and a lot of other people happy, thus making it good.
You could of course say that everything that makes somebody sad is evil, but that would mean that everybody that ever existed is evil, even Jesus.
Originally posted by Fishy
Unless it made Hitler and a lot of other people happy, thus making it good.You could of course say that everything that makes somebody sad is evil, but that would mean that everybody that ever existed is evil, even Jesus.
It's all about the net amount of happiness. Hitler and those who killed with him couldn't possible have amounted the happiness that those they killed could have had for the rest of their life.
Originally posted by KingTut
It's all about the net amount of happiness. Hitler and those who killed with him couldn't possible have amounted the happiness that those they killed could have had for the rest of their life.
Sure they could have, I don't think those Jews were really happy in concentration camps anyway.
Besides like said if that's how you judge if somebody is evil or not then everybody is evil. Even the most peaceful people in history, like Ghandi and Jesus
Originally posted by Fishy
Sure they could have, I don't think those Jews were really happy in concentration camps anyway.Besides like said if that's how you judge if somebody is evil or not then everybody is evil. Even the most peaceful people in history, like Ghandi and Jesus
On your first point, don't be rediculus, sending the Jews to the concentration campswas also bad. I guess there's really no way of being absolutely sure
that the the nazis achieved less happiness than the jews could for the rest of their life. However, the nazis only would have been happy for a few years. After 1945, being shunned for being inhumane would not have made the nazis very happy.
Originally posted by KingTut
On your second point, Ghandi and Jesus achieved a positive net of happiness for the rest of the world, unlike Hitler's (most likely) negative net.
The crusades, religious wars, inquisition and what not did not exactly make people happy. Even during Jesus his life there were a lot of people out there that weren't happy with him. Evidence for this is of course his dead and the amount of people that screamed for him to be killed instead of a well known murderer.
Ghandi kicked the English out and united a community just so it could be divided and even now India and Pakistan don't like each other. The English weren't to happy with Ghandi either.
He pissed of a lot of people.
But you are right of course if that is how you measure evil then Hitler was surely evil and Jesus and Ghandi were not. You can't really blame them for the aftermath of their well meant decisions so it's quite unfair of me to do so.
However, your definition of evil can still differ from that of a lot of other people which one's again brings us to the question of the topic. Was Hitler evil?
According to your definition definitely, according to somebody else his definition not necessarily.
Originally posted by FishySeems then nothing can be good or evil in your view which fine but I think your trying to hard to prove your point and not taking any common sense into account.
Yes, that is exactly what I am saying. Unless you are God you don't know what is evil or not you can just form an opinion on it.Making him evil in your opinion.
Point is Hitler took many lives in his actions and if there is one universal principle to the human race it is this death is bad. Hitler did alot of it I don't see where you can go about saying he wasn't bad unless your trying to simply prove a point that bad things do happen but evil is only an absolute extreme which once again means all you guys are trying to do is put a simple twist on words.
The fact is once you take one philosophical view like your trying to do then you can never be wrong 😬
You can never be proven wrong because if you base it all on the idea one person's views change the entire order well then no one will ever agree universaly on any single event.
Altough you take events and time out the mix all your left with is alot of human death and since the first cavemen formed groups its been the universal notion that killing someone else without reason like defense is wrong I don't see how you can argue anyother point.
Originally posted by Newjak
Seems then nothing can be good or evil in your view which fine but I think your trying to hard to prove your point and not taking any common sense into account.Point is Hitler took many lives in his actions and if there is one universal principle to the human race it is this death is bad. Hitler did alot of it I don't see where you can go about saying he wasn't bad unless your trying to simply prove a point that bad things do happen but evil is only an absolute extreme which once again means all you guys are trying to do is put a simple twist on words.
The fact is once you take one philosophical view like your trying to do then you can never be wrong 😬
You can never be proven wrong because if you base it all on the idea one person's views change the entire order well then no one will ever agree universaly on any single event.
Altough you take events and time out the mix all your left with is alot of human death and since the first cavemen formed groups its been the universal notion that killing someone else without reason like defense is wrong I don't see how you can argue anyother point.
It's quite easy actually.
When Hitler killed those people he didn't consider it evil, when the popes called for crusades they didn't consider it evil. When Imams called for holy wars they didn't consider it evil, when Jean of Arc called for the French to kill the English and kick them out nobody really considered her evil, except for the church and the English...
When Bush invaded Iraq a lot of people wouldn't have called it evil and a lot would have. When Saddam was executed a lot of people cheered and a lot of people condemned it and called it bad and evil.
Simple fact is, just because we consider it to be something does not mean it is. After all it is very clear that millions of people do and did not agree with that statement.
What makes you more right then them?
In an absolute kind of way it's impossible to say if Hitler was evil or not, unless of course God exists and you are either God or personally know God and talked to God about this.
Originally posted by Fishy
In an absolute kind of way it's impossible to say if Hitler was evil or not, unless of course God exists and you are either God or personally know God and talked to God about this.
Of course, God might feel he doesn't have the right to an opinion, what with Sodom and Gamorah, and whatever the other two cities were called.
Oh, and the 'Angel of Death' incident in Egypt.
Admittedly, I'm nitpicking needlessly now.....
Originally posted by FishyYou see your not follow ing me now. I know exactly what your trying to say and even admitted that in your context you can not be wrong.
It's quite easy actually.When Hitler killed those people he didn't consider it evil, when the popes called for crusades they didn't consider it evil. When Imams called for holy wars they didn't consider it evil, when Jean of Arc called for the French to kill the English and kick them out nobody really considered her evil, except for the church and the English...
When Bush invaded Iraq a lot of people wouldn't have called it evil and a lot would have. When Saddam was executed a lot of people cheered and a lot of people condemned it and called it bad and evil.
Simple fact is, just because we consider it to be something does not mean it is. After all it is very clear that millions of people do and did not agree with that statement.
What makes you more right then them?
In an absolute kind of way it's impossible to say if Hitler was evil or not, unless of course God exists and you are either God or personally know God and talked to God about this.
The notion I was trying to explain is that any event and or view you place on a certain point in time can be looked at from many views yes but if you notice there is a universal law to mankind.
We do not wish to die as a species therefore killing of a sepcies memebr unless in denfese is wrong. It has been this way since the begining of humankind. Every civilization has had laws against it even ancient nomadic hunter gathers applied this rule. Now yes in certain events and times in history this rule has been broken and gray areas cast on it but if you remove the event and different points of view you realize that there is no changing what Hitler did.
Hitler without any excuse or motive of self-defense against his own life decided to use his power to take life away and in large numbers. You can't put personal perspective on that. Killing in and of itself has always been frowned upon throughout history. It is a universal law and anyone that breaks it is bad.
No view can change that 😬
Originally posted by Newjak
You see your not follow ing me now. I know exactly what your trying to say and even admitted that in your context you can not be wrong.The notion I was trying to explain is that any event and or view you place on a certain point in time can be looked at from many views yes but if you notice there is a universal law to mankind.
We do not wish to die as a species therefore killing of a sepcies memebr unless in denfese is wrong. It has been this way since the begining of humankind. Every civilization has had laws against it even ancient nomadic hunter gathers applied this rule. Now yes in certain events and times in history this rule has been broken and gray areas cast on it but if you remove the event and different points of view you realize that there is no changing what Hitler did.
Hitler without any excuse or motive of self-defense against his own life decided to use his power to take life away and in large numbers. You can't put personal perspective on that. Killing in and of itself has always been frowned upon throughout history. It is a universal law and anyone that breaks it is bad.
No view can change that 😬
But Hitler could justify it, he called it saving the Germans saving the Aryan race, it helped create a better world for everybody at least that is what he believed.
It's the same reason people believed the crusades were right and many people today believe that the holy wars of Islam are right... Because they believe genuinely believe that it would have made the world a better place once those people were gone.
And who knows perhaps they would have been right... If Hitler would have won WWII we certainly wouldn't have been complaining about him being evil.
Originally posted by FishyYou see once again your placing relevancy on events and the time and place and completely ignoring what I'm saying 😛
But Hitler could justify it, he called it saving the Germans saving the Aryan race, it helped create a better world for everybody at least that is what he believed.It's the same reason people believed the crusades were right and many people today believe that the holy wars of Islam are right... Because they believe genuinely believe that it would have made the world a better place once those people were gone.
And who knows perhaps they would have been right... If Hitler would have won WWII we certainly wouldn't have been complaining about him being evil.
Yes you can play spin docter on any individual event in history it doesn't change the notion of death and how it is perceived by the entire species. To the entire species death is bad and the taking of a felllow species member without just cause is that one thing.
You remove the time and place and however you want to justify your personal opinion of perspective Hitler killed many people under his orders. It doesn't matter what he thought or what other people thought was happening he killed people when he himself wasn't in danger there is no excuse permitted for him. 😬
Oh and on a completely different note if you don't think people would have still thought Hitler was evil even if he won look at Stalin. The world still sees him as one of the absolute dictators this world has seen. So winning and loosing doesn't always equate to how the world perceives you 😉
Originally posted by Newjak
You see once again your placing relevancy on events and the time and place and completely ignoring what I'm saying 😛Yes you can play spin docter on any individual event in history it doesn't change the notion of death and how it is perceived by the entire species. To the entire species death is bad and the taking of a felllow species member without just cause is that one thing.
You remove the time and place and however you want to justify your personal opinion of perspective Hitler killed many people under his orders. It doesn't matter what he thought or what other people thought was happening he killed people when he himself wasn't in danger there is no excuse permitted for him. 😬
Oh and on a completely different note if you don't think people would have still thought Hitler was evil even if he won look at Stalin. The world still sees him as one of the absolute dictators this world has seen. So winning and loosing doesn't always equate to how the world perceives you 😉
Stalin didn't rule the world he didn't write history either especially not western history and he is still considered as one of the most popular Russian leaders ever. Second only to Lenin if that.
Now if you take away the time and the circumstances then you would have a completely different situation and Hitler would all of a sudden lose his reason for killing the Jews. You can't take away the time and reason for acts like that you have to look at the entire picture.