From: theirony2013@gmail.com   
      
   On 2026-01-16 14:49, Steven Douglas wrote:   
   >   
   > JTEM  posted:   
   >>   
   >>   >    
   >>   > Calling evil something that can simply be   
   >>   > "defeated" assumes it is a single, concrete   
   >>   > thing.   
   >>   
   >> I have to agree that this doesn't make sense at   
   >> all.   
   >>   
   >> What if any criteria does something have to meet   
   >> to qualify as evil?   
   >>   
   >> I think that...   
   >>   
   >> #1.  Intent.   
   >>   
   >> You had to intend to do whatever it is that we want   
   >> to call evil. Obviously hitting a patch of black   
   >> ice and skidding into a young family on the sidewalk   
   >> is bad but, did you even know they were there? Did   
   >> you even know there was black ice present?   
   >   
   > I agree. There must be evil intent, and an accident   
   > in which a bad outcome could not be foreseen is not evil.   
      
   I disagree. We call them 'acts of God' for a good reason.   
   If you believe in God, that makes him accountable.   
      
      
      
   >>   
   >> #2.  Knowledge.   
   >>   
   >> You had to know the harmful nature of the act and   
   >> wanted that harm to result, or at least never cared   
   >> either way.   
   >>   
   >> NOTE:  Back when we had journalism, the standard was   
   >> "Known or should have known." Saying "I didn't know"   
   >> was never a defense if it was deemed reasonable to   
   >> assume that the information was readily obtainable, or   
   >> needed to be obtained FIRST regardless of how difficult   
   >> it would be to secure it.   
   >   
   > I agree.   
   >>   
   >> #3.  Results/Potential   
   >>   
   >> If I sit in the grass, take careful aim then shoot   
   >> someone in the head just as a Thrill Kill that would   
   >> likely meet anyone's definition of evil. But what if   
   >> I miss? What if you never even knew that I shot at   
   >> you?  Nobody was harmed, right?  So was it evil?   
   >>   
   >> I would believe "Yes."   
   >   
   > Yes.   
   >>   
   >> NOTE:  The law does treat ATTEMPTED murder differently   
   >> than murder, even though they set out to kill someone   
   >> and usually went through the motions of securing their   
   >> death. The defense argument is that the failure is the   
   >> result of a change of heart, conscience (guilt), doubts...   
   >   
   > Attempted murder is still evil.   
   >>   
   >> What am I missing here?   
   >>   
   >> What "Element" is necessary to qualify something as "Evil."   
   >   
   > You're right, it's the person's intent to purposely   
   > do evil that makes their actions evil.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)