The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
0 Points

evil does not exist

Do you like this debate?NoYes+3
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/27/2016 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 3 weeks ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 349 times Debate No: 95668
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (7)
Votes (0)




A short debate with 3000 characters per round. I will argue evil does not exist
first round acceptance
second round arguments, define terms
third round counter arguments
forth round conclusion, no new arguments


I will accept your debate and prove that evil does exist. I look forward to what you have to say
Debate Round No. 1


the Google definition of evil is " profoundly immoral and malevolent"
and exist as "have objective reality or being"

Evil is an idea that can not exist in the real world
The idea of evil by its nature is subjective. You may think an action is evil but another person may claim it is good. For example one may believe that killing any living thing is evil, where others may say that killing animals is just part of life. Here are some questions than may arise.
Who's beliefs are correct? and what if killing one things saves five others? Is an evil action always evil or can exceptions be made?
and finally how gets the right to answer these questions?
so evil is clearly not objective

I also want to talk about volition. Most people would agree that killing is immoral. An earthquake may kill people but an earthquake is not malevolent, it has no will to kill people. Most would agree that an earthquake is not evil it has no freewill. Say some is killed by an animal for food is that animal evil? It is just following its instincts it did not relay have an active choice in the madder. People also follow there instincts and there brain reacts to outside stimulus. so if the brain controls peoples actions, and has no power over the outside world can they relay be evil or act evilly? I would say no.
I also want to say morals change with time, and what one group thinks is immoral another might have no issue with, so I ask can something be evil today and not be evil in say 100 years?

There is no way to measure or quantify evil, and there are a lot of grey areas about what is and is not considered evil. this lack of agreement shows the frail nature of the idea of evil, and its inability to exist in the world.


Yes everyone can agree that animals are not evil because they do not have a higher intelligence to think about that, and we can agree that natural disasters can be considered not evil since they are not a alive thing with any form of intelligence. I would think that evil would lie with humans. And yes what is evil may be subjective in the form of small things like animals I am talking big league when it comes to evil. For example, Hitler is evil his motives may seem good at first however in the end his motives was because he was a selfish dick who wanted more than he had and he died from it, of course before his death he killed 11 MILLION people you can not justify that as good. That was plain and simple evil
Debate Round No. 2


First I would agree that what happened to the Jews in W.W.2 was tragic, and that Hitler played a huge role in that tragedy and is an undesirable human. However that does not mean that he is evil. He did what he thought was best for himself and Germany, so I argue this does not prove evil exists.

I want to make a more abstract example, say there is an election, I think candidate A's views are immoral and and bad for the country, but that does not make him evil. I have my right to think candidate A is immoral but it does not make him immoral. The lack of evil does not mean that people still can't think this or that about anything. One could even think that someone is evil, but it does not make it so, same as one thinking the world is flat makes the world flat.

I want to comment that just because something is not good that does not mean it is evil. Good is also very subjective and what is good for the majority may not be good for the minority and vice versa.


But that's thing thing Hitler did not do it because he thought it was best, he did it because he thought that he and all who looked similar to him was better than everyone else. Yes the mass populace may say that this is bad and that is bad but you have to look at it objective to really see if something is bad .For example in the holocaust Hitler killed more than Jews he killed EVERYONE that was not a perfect arion which is why it was evil he did not do it for the best of Germany he did it because he wanted to and he thought he was better and that arions were better, so saying he was not evil is the same as saying a serial killer is not evil for murdering someone
Debate Round No. 3


You have yet to convince me that evil exist and I think I have made some compiling arguments against the idea of evil.

I want to quickly comment on some of your last points
You say Hitler did not think it was for the best, he do it because he thought aryans where better than everyone else, but those are not exclusive he could think and did think both. He wanted to have the people he thought where best to run things because if they where the best, giving them power would be for the best. Hitler also was not aryan, so he clearly was just not thinking about himself. Also on that point just because it was not best for Germany does not mean he did not think it was best for Germany.
You said "you have to look at it objective to really see if something is bad" I agree with the sentiment, but since there is no objective bad, nothing can be called really bad. This idea also works for evil, since there is no objective evil there is nothing that is truly bad.
The final thing I will say on your points, you said "saying he was not evil is the same as saying a serial killer is not evil for murdering someone" with this you are not wrong I would say a serial is not evil same as I would not call Hitler evil. more so in the case of serial killers, many of whom have mental disorders. I would say in cases of serial killers with a disorder it is not to different from the animal killing people, and we agreed that the animal is not evil.

To bring it all together, evil is not real because
1 There is no objective evil
Ideas of evil change and vary
-This is why people who kill like Hitler are not evil, but we can agree it is tragic that the people where killed.
3 It can not be measured or Quantified


You say that evil does not exist from the points you made so this is what I will do. Lets see what you said

There is no objective evil? Not true the best example I have ever heard for evil is, evil for evils sake, which means no ending purpose, just for the hell of it

Like I said with the one above there is a direct point of view of evil IT does not change what people think of it does, again you have to look at it objectively which most people can not do

You can infact measure evil, here is a article I found with what most would consider a accurate scale about evil

So for my final thing I just want to say, everyone can agree that good exist in the world yes? then you believe in evil and the reason why is because for good to exist there needs to be a opposite so we can know the difference. Like for light to exist then dark has to, it is the same principle. That is why evil does exist
Debate Round No. 4
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by BackCommander 3 weeks ago
Con, good is just as subjective as evil. For instance, cutting down a forest to build homes for the homeless can be seen as good, as now the homeless don't have to sleep on the streets. It can also be seen as bad, since it has displaced and killed the creatures that called that forest home, and almost certainly threw the surrounding ecosystems into chaos.

I agree with magic_magpie on the subject of the article you linked. For one it's a psychological spectrum that they're using to "measure evil," which really speaks for itself on the subject of subjectivity. It also paints psychopaths as absolutely evil, which is hardly fair. A psychopath doesn't have the capacity to weigh action against emotion, therefore they cannot be labeled as evil, their views of right and wrong are fundamentally different due to their condition. Do some research into the people who live normal everyday lives even after being diagnosed with psychopathy.

As someone who falls onto the psychological spectrum closer to "sociopath" than to "normal" I feel the need to ask if someone like me would be considered evil? As someone who has extreme difficulty viewing situations in the sense that the outcome may effect others, as someone who can empathize with others but has to logically walk through how exactly someone came upon the feelings they're experiencing, am I evil? I'm just curious to know where the line is to the average person.
Posted by magic_magpie 3 weeks ago
Dude, you make a lot of assumptions I do not believe in "good"
I also have problems with that npr article. First he says clinical psychopaths are true evil, and how is someone who has brain abnormality evil? Second the fact i disagree shows that evil is subjective. Third he says Hitler was doing what he thought was right but that he was just wrong and we are right but how gets to decide that?
Posted by magic_magpie 3 weeks ago
BackCommander I Agree with what you are saying dude
Posted by magic_magpie 3 weeks ago
Sorry for the wait for my argument, I got busy
Posted by BackCommander 3 weeks ago
Con, Hitler thought that Jewish people were to blame for his country's misfortunes. He legitimately thought that he was doing good. Evil IS subjective. You look at what Hitler did and see evil. I see a terrible impressiveness. I would stop there but it makes me sound like a Nazi sympathizer. Horrible things happened under his leadership but it taught us all what exactly a single man is capable of, and what lengths people are willing to go to when they believe the side they are on is the right one. Not evil, just misguided.

On the subject of serial killers they aren't, by their very nature, evil. There could be many different reasons for why they do what they do. An easy one to help my argument is mental illness. A person who kills without any moral understanding that killing is wrong or even an understanding of life and death, is not evil simply because they kill.
Posted by canis 4 weeks ago
Only rational behavior exist. Good/evil is a matter of inner/outer context and perspective.
Posted by vi_spex 4 weeks ago
evil dosnt exist in reality
No votes have been placed for this debate.