What is Evil?

[Doug McCrae]

Re: What is Evil?

 

Let's distinguish between evil and Evil. The former just means 'extremely immoral' and there are plenty of examples of it down here on Earth. The latter is something metaphysical.

 

Psychopaths do what they do because they don't give a shit about other people's feelings. If their minds are like ours then they're evil. If not, then they're monsters.

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: What is Evil?

 

I think there is a good reason that evil races or species or individuals are a staple primarily of the fantasy genre. (Space opera has gottem too' date=' but space opera and fantasy are basically the same genre in different clothes)[/quote']

It's a staple of almost every genre: Superheroes, war, spies, westerns, pulp, etc.

The concept of evil works best in a religious or supernatural sense. God and Satan can be described as intrinsically evil and you can't question their motivations because they are beyond human reality.

What do you mean by "works best"? There is plenty of good literature that involves good and evil that doesn't deal with religion or the supernatural at all. And who exactly is describing God as instrinsically evil? And people question His motivations all the time. IME, most people who believe in God believe that He is very much a part of/connected with human reality.

 

Down here on Earth, the closer we look at the brain/mind of real people, the more we realize how little control we really have over our actions. I know it's easy to dismiss all psychology as hoohah, because so much of it has been exactly that. But recent advances in brain chemistry and the ability to view brain activity in living people is providing good, scientifically credible evidence that sociopaths and child molesters and others whom we would consider to be evil often do have aberrant neural physiologies. As much as it impinges upon our ideas of free will and just retribution, we are eventually going to have to admit that not everyone is capable of restraining themselves from committing attrocious acts. I think the concept of evil is just a mask that keeps us from having to examine why people do 'evil' things.

What do you mean "we"? I've studied brains/minds a lot myself, and I still believe in free will. I still believe that people are responsible for the good and the evil that they do. I don't dismiss psychology as hoohah, but I do dismiss the claim that there is no evil, only bad brain chemistry. This is evidenced by the fact that the amount of evil varies between different societies and countries. Do you think that they have different brain chemistries? Was the brain chemistry of the Nazis different from the brain chemistry of Veimar Republic? I am willing to accept that there are some people who are truly insane in the sense that they literally cannot stop themselves from doing evil, but this is a tiny percentage of the total amount of evil that is done in the world. And at the end of the day, I really don't care why people do evil things. I just care that they be stopped.

[keithcurtis]

Re: What is Evil?

 

I suspect Socrates would disagree with you. Aristotle would probably be right on board' date=' though...[/quote']

 

Not fair. Socrates disagreed with everybody.

 

Keith ":)" Curtis

[TheQuestionMan]

Re: What is Evil?

 

To paraphrase "By your actions shall I judge you". Evil for me and in my campaigns are socially reprehensible actions (I won't define it, that's a whole other debate). Society decides what is "Good" and what is "Evil". Through many methods. Read the definition of Sociopath. As you grow up, experience more, your opinions develope.

 

Ceerfully yours

 

QM

[cyst13]

Re: What is Evil?

 

Phil,

 

Good catch on the part where I declared both God and Satan to be intrinsically evil. I was in a rush when I wrote that post and that was an unintentional typo. Remove the word God from that sentence and you get my intended statement. I still think the concept of evil is most prevalent in the fantasy genre because that is where people most explicitly define their adversaries as being evil. Yes, people, including our President, continue to do this today, but it's not neccessarily the fallback position.

 

As to whether I believe different societies have different brain chemistries, almost. Neural structure would be more precise. Everytime you learn anything, you change the network of neural synapses in your brain. Ergo, any society or culture that has a different set of beliefs than another culture would necessarily have differently organized synapses in their brains. That doesn't mean either culture is insane, though.

 

While it is extremely unlikely that all of Nazi Germany spontaneously went insane in the 30's, I don't think it's much of a stretch to suggest that Hitler was insane, especially if you read about his state of mind in the last days of his life. He would have attracted like minded people to the top tier of his govt. and then it would have all rolled down hill.

 

I perhaps overemphasized the role of physiological insanity in my first post. Behavioral and social psychology also are important. The new science of memes which is developing also is relevant to this.

 

Even if you don't buy any of the above, though, the one point I would most like to make is that there are reasons why "evil" people or societies do what they do. They are not just compelled by a mystical force called "evil". Contra the penultimate sentence of your last post, it does matter why people do what they do. If we don't understand that, we will be doomed to always reacting to attrocities after they have occured rather than preventing them beforehand.

[cyst13]

Re: What is Evil?

 

I wanted to add a bit more.

 

Using evil in games also constricts the range of action available to PCs as well as the range of stories available to tell. For instance, there are numerous RPGs set in WWII in which PCs fight evil Nazis, but I do not know of any RPGs set in Weimar Germany in which the PCs attempt to change the social conditions that allowed the Nazis to come to power.

 

If you have monolithically evil groups who have no motivations other than evil itself, all you can do is destroy those groups. If individuals are given to have realistic motivations, though, you can attempt to change the conditions in which they exist to prevent them from doing the things you do not wish them do. If the victors in WWI had given Germany a better chance to recover its economy after being defeated, the Nazis would not have had such fertile recruiting ground. That's an analysis that only applies to humans, not "evil" creatures.

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: What is Evil?

 

I still think the concept of evil is most prevalent in the fantasy genre because that is where people most explicitly define their adversaries as being evil. Yes' date=' people, including our President, continue to do this today, but it's not neccessarily the fallback position.[/quote']

I'm not sure what you mean by this last sentence. Do you not believe that evil is a real thing in the real world? Are not acts of theft, slander, rape, and murder evil? Do these things not occur in real life? Should we not try to stop the people who do them?

 

As to whether I believe different societies have different brain chemistries, almost. Neural structure would be more precise. Everytime you learn anything, you change the network of neural synapses in your brain. Ergo, any society or culture that has a different set of beliefs than another culture would necessarily have differently organized synapses in their brains.

My point is it doesn't matter what the internal mechanism of evil is in a person's brain. Excluding people who are truly insane, people choose their beliefs and their actions. If you choose to believe something evil, and that motivates you to do something evil, you can't say, "It's not my fault! I'm not really evil! It was my neural structure!"

 

My point about Nazi Germany vs. the Veimar Republic was that a society chooses its values. They're brain chemistry (or neural structure) isn't any different from any other society, and yet different societies display different amounts of good and evil.

 

Even if you don't buy any of the above, though, the one point I would most like to make is that there are reasons why "evil" people or societies do what they do. They are not just compelled by a mystical force called "evil".

Yes, but those reasons are not an excuse. Reasons for doing evil don't make it any less evil.

 

Contra the penultimate sentence of your last post, it does matter why people do what they do. If we don't understand that, we will be doomed to always reacting to attrocities after they have occured rather than preventing them beforehand.

Not really. We have cops around. People who might otherwise be inclined to steal or commit other evil acts are aware of their presense and think, "I better not do it." Thus evil is prevented without needing to study anybody's brain chemistry, neural structure, or memes. This has been an effective means of preventing evil for all of human history. Granted, it isn't perfect, and some evil occurs anyway, but it works to a large extent. In addition, we also teach children right from wrong as they grow up. Or at least, we should. Some parents shirk that responsibility, and sometimes society can alter the moral message the parents intend to instill, either for better or worse.

[cyst13]

Re: What is Evil?

 

Phil,

 

I think you and I are actually on the same page, we're just getting tripped up on an undefined term: Evil. The Webster's dictionary I have at home defines evil as: 1. morally wrong or bad, immoral; wicked: evil deeds, an evil life. They follow that with six other definitions which are just more synonyms for 'bad'. Then come definitions seven and eight: 7. the force in nature that governs and gives rise to wickedness and sin. 8. the wicked or immoral part of someone or something.

 

It's the definitions seven and eight (especially seven) with which I take issue. I don't believe there is any force in nature that causes people to do bad things. I think people have mundane reasons for doing what they do and there is no need to appeal to metaphysics to explain that. It is common in the fantasy genre to use the #7 definiton of evil. Orcs, demons, Satan and other evil beings do bad things simply because they are motivated by the force of evil. It's uncommon to see this trope outside of the fantasy genre. (although it's in Star Wars)

 

I'm not sure that a society can choose its values since a society is not a single organism (eg. there were Germans who did not adopt Nazi values), but I agree with you that there were real world reasons for why the Nazis chose and were able to do what they did. I used that example to argue against the idea that the Nazis had no motivations other than the force of evil. From what you've written, it doesn't seem you believe this either. However, this is common in the fantasy genre where evil races come together simply to cause evil.

 

You're right; simply knowing there are reasons why bad things happen doesn't mean you can just put you head in the sand and allow them to go on happening. I don't like to get into arguments of moral responsibility because they quickly slip into metaphysics. I do believe, though, that every society has to regulate the actions of its citizens in the best interests of the society as a whole and with respect for individual rights. Fortunately, this belief does not require a belief in evil as a force of nature.

 

The only part of your last post with which I disagree is the idea that we do not need to understand why people do bad things in order to stop them from doing bad things. Police departments are continually working to find the best way of doing their jobs. How important are community relations to effective police work? Does promoting job skills in low income neighborhoods help to reduce crime? Does imprisoning people who commit crimes deter them from committing further crimes upon release? These and other questions are all important to understanding how best to encourage people to obey society's laws.

 

I've just been researching early 19th C. England for a game and it is startling to read how the House of Lords had no concept that the rising crime rates in England were connected to the rampant unemployment and grinding poverty in the country. They just kept expanding the bounds of capital punishment. If you don't understand the causes of any disease (physiological or social), it becomes very difficult to develop an effective treatment or cure.

 

In sum, I agree with most everything you've written (with the above exception). Our disagreements arose from using a word like 'evil' which has at least two different connotations (mundane and metaphysical). If there were a term to describe people or societies who do bad things for mundane reasons, I'd be all for it.

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: What is Evil?

 

It's the definitions seven and eight (especially seven) with which I take issue. I don't believe there is any force in nature that causes people to do bad things. I think people have mundane reasons for doing what they do and there is no need to appeal to metaphysics to explain that. It is common in the fantasy genre to use the #7 definiton of evil. Orcs' date=' demons, Satan and other evil beings do bad things simply because they are motivated by the force of evil. It's uncommon to see this trope outside of the fantasy genre. (although it's in Star Wars)[/quote']

Nowhere in my posts have I been using definition seven. I apologize if I have failed to make that clear. I state for the record that I do not believe that evil is a supernatural force. I am primarily concerned with definitions 1-6.

 

I'm not sure that a society can choose its values since a society is not a single organism

What does being or not being a single organism have to do with it? Every society has certain values. Where do these values come from? Do they descend from the sky like the weather? No! People choose their values, and a society is made up of people.

 

(eg. there were Germans who did not adopt Nazi values)

Yes, there can be individuals within a society who, for better or worse, don't conform to the society's values, but that doesn't negate the society as a whole choosing its values.

 

, but I agree with you that there were real world reasons for why the Nazis chose and were able to do what they did.

But do you agree that those reasons had nothing to do with their brain chemistry or neural structure?

 

I used that example to argue against the idea that the Nazis had no motivations other than the force of evil. From what you've written, it doesn't seem you believe this either.

That's correct. You don't need to argue against something I didn't say.

 

I don't like to get into arguments of moral responsibility because they quickly slip into metaphysics.

Eh? Who's been arguing metaphysics?

 

I do believe, though, that every society has to regulate the actions of its citizens in the best interests of the society as a whole and with respect for individual rights. Fortunately, this belief does not require a belief in evil as a force of nature.

Right on both counts.

 

The only part of your last post with which I disagree is the idea that we do not need to understand why people do bad things in order to stop them from doing bad things. Police departments are continually working to find the best way of doing their jobs. How important are community relations to effective police work?

I assume you mean relations between the community and the police. And the answer is: not very much at all. Community values are much more important. Which community will have more crime: one where everyone loves the cops, but parents don't bother teaching their kids right from wrong; or one where everyone hates the cops, but parents diligently give moral instruction to their kids?

 

Does promoting job skills in low income neighborhoods help to reduce crime?

No. But promoting moral values does.

 

Does imprisoning people who commit crimes deter them from committing further crimes upon release?

Yes. Not 100% of the time, but far more than not imprisoning them. And while they are imprisoned, the rest of society is protected from them.

 

These and other questions are all important to understanding how best to encourage people to obey society's laws.

Only if you have the correct answers to the questions.

 

I've just been researching early 19th C. England for a game and it is startling to read how the House of Lords had no concept that the rising crime rates in England were connected to the rampant unemployment and grinding poverty in the country.

Why then was there so little crime in this country during the Great Depression? Unemployment and poverty were far more widespread than they are today, and yet there was less crime. Could it be that people had stronger moral values then? India has one of the highest poverty rates and lowest crime rates of any technologically advanced country in the world. Why is that? Values.

 

If you don't understand the causes of any disease (physiological or social), it becomes very difficult to develop an effective treatment or cure.

This may be the crux of our disagreement: I don't believe evil is a disease. It's starting to sound like to you do believe in definition 7 after all. You do believe that evil is a disembodied force, you've just substituted "metaphysics" with "psychology/sociology".

 

If there were a term to describe people or societies who do bad things for mundane reasons, I'd be all for it.

There is such a term: evil.

[cyst13]

Re: What is Evil?

 

Phil,

 

I've never seen someone get so worked up about another person agreeing with him. I'm not out to get you, Phil, and everything I write is not intended to be an argument against you. I wished to point out that there are real world reasons why people do what they do. You and I seem to have different opinions about what those reasons are, but we both seem to be in agreement that the reasons do exist.

 

This relates directly to my criticism of the use of evil (def. 7) in RPGs, especially the fantasy genre. Unmotivated evil simply does not make sense. It has no relation to the real world (and I firmly believe that all the best RPGs, even fantasy ones, are relevant to the real world) and it makes for weak, cliched storytelling. As I've said elsewhere, the only option for dealing with unmotivated evil is to destroy it. And stories that revolve around destroying evil get old quick.

[arcady]

Re: What is Evil?

 

The frustrating thing for me is that I find that GMs like to think about this sort of thing, but players -at least the ones I always get- just seem to want to adventure.

 

I prefer a moral system no more defined than that we know in the real world. You cannot really prove the existance of good, evil, nor their lack.

 

Individual groups will have their own ways of judging things, and will put outsiders on a lesser moral level than themselves. Whether or not that is true remains an open question regardless of how sure those individual actors may be of themselves.

 

This is important for me in shaping the world and the story, but my players often never to look under the hood, let alone even pause to see what model car they're in.

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: What is Evil?

 

I've never seen someone get so worked up about another person agreeing with him. I'm not out to get you' date=' Phil, and everything I write is not intended to be an argument against you.[/quote']

I'm not "so worked up" and I don't think you're out to get me.

 

I wished to point out that there are real world reasons why people do what they do. You and I seem to have different opinions about what those reasons are, but we both seem to be in agreement that the reasons do exist.

If that's all we're talking about, then it's a rather silly discussion. I don't think we're in agreement that much at all. That's perfectly O.K. We don't have to agree. I'm not mad at you and I'm not upset. I think we're confusing some of the issues we're discussing. I'll number my points for clarity:

 

1) Evil is real. There is true evil in the world. Some people commit acts of evil. Some societies commit acts of evil.

2) Evil is not a supernatural force that takes over people. It is a choice that people make. It is a choice that societies (made up of people) make.

3) When people or societies do evil, it is never simply for the sake of doing evil. They usually think they're doing good. They do have real reasons and motivations (rational or otherwise) for doing evil.

4) The reasons and motivations don't make their actions any less evil. Even if those reasons and motivations are perfectly understandable.

5) People are responsible for the evil that they do. And the good that they do.

6) All that is required for evil to succeed is for enough good people to do nothing. It is imperitive that people and societies fight against evil. Fighting against evil is good. And necessary.

7) The goodness and necessity of fighting against evil is not lessened by the reasons and motivations for the evil. Evil must be fought regardless of the mechanism behind it.

 

Which of the above do you agree with? Which do you disagree with? I may be misunderstanding you, but it sounds like you agree with 2, 3, and 5, and that you disagree with 4, 6, and 7. I'm not quite sure where you stand on #1.

 

As I've said elsewhere, the only option for dealing with unmotivated evil is to destroy it. And stories that revolve around destroying evil get old quick.

Perhaps you meant that "stories that revolve around destroying unmotivated evil get old quick," in which case I would agree with you. Did you really mean that stories revolving around all evil, even motivated evil, get old quick? People have been writing, telling, and performing stories of good versus evil throughout history, and this theme in literature is still going strong. Most of these stories (the better ones at least) involve motivated evil. I don't think that such stories "get old quick." Some of them are truly great stories.

 

If you think that even stories of fighting against realistic evil "get old quick," I would be curious to know what kinds of stories you like or consider great.

[cyst13]

Re: What is Evil?

 

See, Phil, we really do agree. I would vote for all 7 of the statements you listed. You were even right about my intending to write, "unmotivated or intrinsic" evil gets old. I never actually wrote anything in disagreement with statements 4, 6, & 7. I think you may have assumed that to be my position based on past experience with other people who held a position similar to mine. Whenever someone suggests in public that there are intelligible reasons why some people/societies do bad things, certain elements on the Right accuse them of wanting to let criminals roam free. I'm not accusing you of this, I'm just saying that this background may have played a role in your assumption that I disagreed with any of your listed statements.

 

While I agree with all 7 statements, including the intent of #1, I still don't like the word 'evil'. I realize that you've said you are not using it in a supernatural way, but many people still do use it that way. And it's very difficult to tell in conversation whether some one means evil (def. 1 or 7). As an example, if you have kids, you might admonish them for doing something wrong by saying "You are a bad boy/girl." But I strongly doubt you would call your own child evil, even if you intend def. 1. There is just too much baggage that goes with that word to use it loosely in a rational debate. It's the kind of word that stirs people up to the point that they stop thinking and start shouting.

 

Other than that, though, we seemed to have sorted out all our differences on this subject. Good job!

[cyst13]

Re: What is Evil?

 

As to how this all relates in to the thread's topic: I think unmotivated evil is a boring and unrealistic concept and it's best left in the RPG trashbin along with dungeoncrawls and gold pieces = Exp.