Morality is subjective, but that does not mean "evil" does not exist. The sad outcome of the word being used by fundamentalists or superstitious people to describe any and all who are not like them... Huh, I just contradicted myself... How quaint.
But to be serious, "going against the group for selfish gain" does exist... Even objectively so. And if we use the term to refer to "that"... Then yes, evil does exist.
Even if you see morality as illogical and as holding us back, it still exists. If you killed someone, you would go to jail. Why, because evil exists. Furthermore, evil is not someone who is psychologically ill, it is simply profound immoral and malevolent. Evil is not even religious. In addition, just because someone thinks they're right, doesn't make it justified
Even though the perception of "good" and "evil" are more subjective than objective, it is impossible to deny the existence of those concepts, at least in the realm of the ideas.
Also, we figure out things in the world basically by comparing them to their opposites and their similar. This way, evil exists just as much as good exists.
You won't have an excuse. If I have to prove it myself with self-experimentation, I shall. Your evil agenda to ignore evil is toxic. Fortunately, I have the antidote. Too bad I have to inject it into Jesus first to see if it works. It might create the Antichrist....Or not.
Evil is defined as "morally wrong or bad; immoral; wicked". Since there are many things that are defined as morally wrong or bad, such as murder, theft, torture, etc., then yes, evil exists. Everyone follows some sort of moral standard, unless they are a crazy psychopath, which there aren't too many of.
I believe everyone has the option to choose between the two. Is the action of giving up one's life for a stranger not good? While it is true that the person may have done bad things in the past like shoplifting and abusing his children, isn't that one action that ended his life considered good? If evil doesn't exist, then how can good? For those who do not believe in evil, then is there no good in the world, either?
It doesn't matter whether people think they're doing the right thing. That doesn't determine whether their actions are evil.
The main reason why evil exists in the first place is the rejection of objective morality. The fact that people decide to take matters into their own hands and abandon the good things is why evil exists. People now view morality as a personalized guidebook for life. Why do people think the Holocaust was wrong? If morality was subjective, the would say, "because Schindler's List made me feel sad." If morality was an objective thing, they would say, "because it's wrong." People who say it was wrong do not base it on what they feel subjectively. They base it on God's eternal law.
And, good and evil are opinions of what, people? Or are they opinions of things that people do? Because morality is about what is good to do or what isn't. The Nazi Party wasn't evil because of the people who were in it, it's because of what they did to other people.
Good and evil are simply perspective. What one thinks is evil may be perfectly acceptable for the other.
There has to be evil in order to have good. They are in a binary system. For there to be good, there has to be evil. Evil decisions are almost always logical and with reason.
I will begin with likely the most obvious and famous example of supposed evil. Adolf Hitler. He lead Germany to invade Poland, France, and other countries for the globalization of what would be the Third Reich. He led the Nazis in capturing, enslaving, torturing, and killing members of the Jewish community as well as members of other communities. I say this as if any of you do not know who he is.
Most people do forget that he was intelligent. Though he wasn't a popular artist, he studied art, was well read, and published a book. He was a solder in the German army during World War Two, and managed to become elected as chancellor of Germany.
Was Adolf Hitler an evil person? I don't believe so.
Let us look at the state of German prior to his election. Germany wen to war in World War One in order to defend a country that was already at war. They did not start the war. As a result Germany was unfairly blamed for the war, they were placed in a suffering depression in which there was a lack of food, money, and jobs. The people of Germany was desperate.
In Hitler's mind he was doing what he felt was the right thing to do; to make a better country for his people. In attempting to better the country for the Germanic people, he tried to expand it. He also attempted to eliminate those people he felt were a problem with society. He believed that those people were wrong in who they were, and what they were doing. He felt that by getting rid of them, he would create a better place for his people. He also believe that Germany deserved to be a bigger better and more in control country than it was; he was trying to give the people what he felt they deserved.
Is that evil? I see that it is wrong, but not evil.
The same can be said for any of the well known dictators, serial killers, and weird people. This list included Osama Binladen, Charles Manson, Ted Bundy, James Holmes, and yes, Even the shooters and Sandy Hook. These people did what they believed to be right. They may not have done things the way they should have, but they were trying to better the world in one way or another, That is not evil.
I believe that the majority of people are misinformed, and misguided about these names. They see the bad things they do, and place them in the "Evil" category,
As an example to the misinformed, The cross you see in the picture of this opinion is up side down. Most would interpret that as a satanic cross. It is not. It is a very religious symbol. Saint Peter was crucified up side down on a cross because he believed that he did not deserved to be crucified in the same manor as Jesus Christ.
The society or ethics committees define Morality for a society, this may differ from culture to culture, but what is termed as Evil is so often a matter of some psychological problem or a poorly defined Ethic. Some societies regard certain gestures and symbols as Evil, yet they are considered as relevant and great in other countries. Many behaviors called Evil can be put down to the perpetrator having a psychological condition that if picked up and treated, would have stopped him from committing such deeds termed as Evil.
There are good and bad activities, but they cannot be really called Evil (Profoundly Wicked, Sinful, Ungodly).
As Sin and God don't really exist, and they are not Wicked, maybe psychotic (treatable) or misled.
A suicide bomber is evil, but Bush and Blair are not war criminals! We question one but not the other! Western societies justify their abuses in the form of good and evil! Someone who slaughters their community is evil, someone who slaughters another nation is not?!
Do the maths eh!
Good and evil are words that people use to describe something, and they are both opinions. Take the Nazi party for example, during their rise to power, some people believed that they where one of the greatest things to happen to Germany and that it was good, and others thought that the Nazi party was one of the most diabolical regimes to ever be introduced to humanity. Good and Evil only exist in the minds of the people who label things as "good" or "evil".
Hitler did a reprehensible thing for what he considered to be an altruistic reason. An altruistic action or philosophy is one that is done for the welfare of others. Hitler acted as he did because he felt it was in the best interest of his people, and when one acts in the best interest of their people, they are not committing an "evil" act. To flip the topic around a bit, we separated from Britain 230-some-odd years ago because those men and women thought it was in the best interest of their people. These are two actions that, when it comes to the typical mindset of morality in this country, could not be further apart on the scale of "good" and "evil", but both were violent, for example. Both required the manipulation of people to support the cause. Both required civil disobedience and the targeting of a group of people because of who they were. In this regard, the Final Solution and the American War for Independence are the same thing. Do we not consider that war for independence to be an act of "good?" Do we not consider the actions of Hitler to be "evil?" Yet, both were done for altruistic reasons, meaning that both the Final Solution and The American War for Independence took place because their respective leaders believed it was in the best interest of their people. They believed they were doing "good." If altruism is considered a nobler quality (meaning one that would be classified as "good"), then the fact that altruism can be used for amoral purposes shows that altruism is subjective, and since altruism is subjective, then the idea of "good" and "evil" is flawed with a paradoxical definition. If altruism can be used for "evil", then altruism is not inherently good as we claim it is, yet if altruism can be used for "good", then altruism is not inherently "evil." So, this means altruistic actions are both and neither. Thus, nothing is inherently "good" or "evil." "Good" and "evil" are subjective terms.
You can not classify said object with evil characteristics without comparing it to a "foundation". This foundation must be a relatively congruent object and must be exactly opposite of the characteristics of the second said object. Thus, giving you a basis in which you can call something "evil". But now the question is, we cannot classify anything "good" or "evil" because they both link to morals, and morals are self-perspective guidelines.
Look, i dont want to make this long long. But i do believe that Evil does not exist. It is a matter of perspective , one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. Let say I punched a dude , others will think that is wrong, but in my perspective, the guy deserved it because he flipped me off. See, just a matter of perspective. Now apply that to this question and into life .
I think it is a word created by mankind to describe something that do not understand. Usually it is used to describe an action or a person, but i do not think either thing can be truly evil. I do understand that there are many disgusting acts and crimes that have been committed by people but i do not think that they are evil. It seems too simplistic to describe someone as evil. Evil generally means without any good, whereas we need to realize that everyone, even the most horrible of people, have a good side.