The nature of evil

Ray Dillinger bear at sonic.net
Wed Dec 20 07:59:21 PST 2000




On Wed, 20 Dec 2000, Tom Vogt wrote:

>same). your problem is that it works perfectly well the other way
>around: james who says that the nazis are evil is wrong because he is
>himself evil, and he is evil because the nazis say so (because if he
>says bad things about the nazis, he must be part of the jew world
>conspiracy). on a pure logical level, these two statements have
>identical truth values. since they collide, the only possible conclusion
>is that they're both wrong.

That's true, but I do not think it means what you think it means. 

To start with, james, who is not nearly as famous for his crimes as the 
nazis are for theirs,  can be assumed not to have committed nearly as 
many atrocities as the nazis.  Murders on one side -- six million 
(est.)  Murders on the other side -- unknown, but I'm pretty sure we'd 
have heard about someone who committed more than a few hundred.  The 
logic as presented flawlessly distinguishes the evil ones in this case. 

The fact that each side can say the same things about the others is 
beside the point.  I can say that pigs fly, and I can say that birds 
fly.  On a pure logical level, these two statements are identical. 
Hence the only possible conclusion is that they're both wrong?  Uh, 
no.  The only possible conclusion is that it's necessary to observe 
pigs and birds and *see* which statement, if any, is true.

				Bear









More information about the cypherpunks-legacy mailing list