This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »
Do you define what is "right" by what society deems ok, by what suits you, or by a higher cause?
Do you define it by whats "best" and not just whats best for you?
And do you find evil acceptable if the perpetrator didnt know what they did was wrong?














greg dahlen 20+
Emil Johansson
When people do bad things or things considered not allowed. Others have tendencies of pushin them away. We "brand" them criminals and we blame them for badness. But really they are people just like us. During world war 2 germans voted for nazis yet many blame hitler instead of gemrany. They blame one man for persuading an entire country thats absurd. but germans today are not evil. that dousnt mean they couldnt do bad things.
Roy Bourque 20+
As far as society goes, there are many allowances that have long term consequences, either to you, or to those who became victims unawares. Righteousness is often not the criteria, so I don't trust it.
As to what suits me, there are desires that I strive to overcome because I see myself as part of a collective whole. To benefit at the expense of another is to accept that others have the right to benefit at my expense. I will not cross that line.
I do not find evil acceptable if the perpetrator didn't know it was wrong. But I am willing to forgive and make allowances if such was the case, so long as the perpetrator is willing to take responsibility for learning what is good.
As far as what is right, we could debate that issue all day. I pray to God for the answer to those questions.
Krisztián Pintér 200+
Random Chance 30+
I decided I would listen to myself.
The world society is so messed up, mentally ill or outright insane, that they don't know what is right anymore.
In fact, the rules of right and wrong, are wrong, proving that most who try and live by them are insane, because they don't know the difference between right and wrong.
If right, whatever that might be, is right, then it already is a higher cause.
Because we as an animal, don't love, then love to me, is also a higher cause.
Cause, if I don't really know what the right thing is to do,
then I can do "a" or "the" loving thing, and it will all work out.
What ever one believes in, comes down to whether or not they are going to trust it.
If they are going to trust it, then it makes no sense to worry about it.
Worrying shows one doesn't really trust it, and it makes no sense to believe in something that one ultimately doesn't trust, absolutely, completely and with total abandon.
One must come to know who they are though, before they can really choose what they believe.
For instance, take Christians.
Christianity is based upon forgiveness. Something they apparently highly dislike doing or meting out.
This is clear to me because the tomb of Jesus was empty, meaning his body, or He, for humanity, was freed from death.
Otherwise, his body would have been found in the cave, or whatever it was, when the witnesses for humanity showed up.
Thus, all that humans could possibly do from then on, has already been forgiven. Doesn't matter what it is.
This must be the reason that Christians love to kill today just as they have throughout history.
Because all has already been forgiven.
What might be evil however, is that Christians, along with some other religions, want to destroy the human spirit.
Now that, I find to be evil.
natasha nikulina 50+
The dark side of this approach is that one may not live long enough to see the evidence :)
*Edited
The bright side is that those who have courage to choose the 'higher cause' don't need evidence , if their ' higher cause' is high enough.
Rob Cork
John Smith 30+
What's right and what's wrong is determined by ethics (which is based on logic and science), which do not need societal approval, such as basic human rights, however sometimes determining what's legal and what's not depends on societal approval because ethics cannot give you an answer, the (il)legality abortion is an example of this, lastly there are mixed cases: ethical answers that depend on previous societal choices, an example is the (il)legality of marijuana because you cannot make an ethical case against legalizing marijuana in a society that has previously chosen to legalize alcohol and tobacco, while you can in a society that has already outlawed those other drugs as well.
Peter Law 30+
:-)
Feyisayo Anjorin 50+
It is human to make mistakes; it is Godly to accept our maker's discipline and to change when we realize our wrong.
Leanna Walters
Maaher Sayeed 10+
With regards to the second part, it depends on how evil the act or intention. Like I said above we would expect every individual to fall back on to balanced moral behavior and conduct. But evil acts in ignorace have to face its consequences as well. There is no place for blatant and deliberate ignorance in our fast paced world where the wisdom sit in every palm in the form of a mobile browser.
Robert Winner 50+
As an example: Many people find the right to bear arms offensive. However it is legal and acceptable under the laws and the existing culture.
As to the second part of the question: Within each culture we all understand the difference between what is acceptable and unacceptable. I do not accept ignorance as an excuse in almost all cases. However, if I were to visit your culture and it was taboo to touch the top of the head and I patted a childs head as I would do in my culture then I have offended others unknowingly. I would hope that someone would inform me so I could make amends and learn from my mistakes.
When in doubt the "Golden Rule" is always a good measure.
All the best. Bob.
edward long 100+
Lawren Jones 10+
Simon Says