How do you define a good person or a bad person?

[RestlessSoul]

Just thought that up did you?

No, someone else did, around 2,000 years ago. Doubt it’s been bettered since though.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Even if one doesn't have any sort of religious belief, for example?

That depends on your subjective positive beliefs about what beliefs and religion are. But since you subjectively believe that is not the case, you are in effect no different than those of the theists, who don't understand when they are subjective.
You both share subjective beliefs about in effect being objective for which it is not the case. But the joke is to understand that you have to be able to admit, when you are subjective.

 

[Mock Turtle]

No, someone else did, around 2,000 years ago. Doubt it’s been bettered since though.

So what does a corrupt tree mean - blame your parents, and theirs, and theirs, and...?

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

So what does a corrupt tree mean - blame your parents, and theirs, and theirs, and...?

Well, in the end for my belief system and it is a belief system, a corrupt tree is any culture, which in the end believes that objective morality is possible in practice. But that is not science, it is non-science for how we ought to live as humans.

 

[Mock Turtle]

Well, in the end for my belief system and it is a belief system, a corrupt tree is any culture, which in the end believes that objective morality is possible in practice. But that is not science, it is non-science for how we ought to live as humans.

Don't count me in here, since I have no beliefs in objective anything - just what makes sense to us humans and works for us.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Don't count me in here, since I have no beliefs in objective anything - just what makes sense to us humans and works for us.

But you are not us humans. And neither am I. The "us" is a subjective belief and in effect religion for a complex understanding of religion and not just your Western culture understand of it in in effect is supernatural.

 

[Mock Turtle]

But you are not us humans. And neither am I. The "us" is a subjective belief and in effect religion for a complex understanding of religion and not just your Western culture understand of it in in effect is supernatural.

It might be a bit unfortunate but humans just cannot live without some beliefs.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

It might be a bit unfortunate but humans just cannot live without some beliefs.

Correct and that includes you and everybody else. So I don't consider it unfortunate, but a fact about humans and yes that includes you and I.

 

[RestlessSoul]

So what does a corrupt tree mean - blame your parents, and theirs, and theirs, and...?

That’s not how I interpret it, no. In fact I think I see what you mean now, and I think you’ve misread it.

The verse is from Matthew 7, 15:16 if you want to read it in context. The tree is the person, the fruit is the action, or perhaps the outcome of the action. As a good tree can be recognised by the good fruit it brings forth, so a good person can be recognised by the good that she does.

 

[Mock Turtle]

That’s not how I interpret it, no. In fact I think I see what you mean now, and I think you’ve misread it.

The verse is from Matthew 7, 15:16 if you want to read it in context. The tree is the person, the fruit is the action, or perhaps the outcome of the action. As a good tree can be recognised by the good fruit it brings forth, so a good person can be recognised by the good that she does.

I thought it might be that, but it amounts to the same thing - the person being evil and therefore everything they do will likely be evil. And where might such evil come from - their genetic heritage perhaps? Anyway, I am not of the opinion as to evil, or plain bad, being inherent, and as commented earlier, it is the deeds done that make for bad or evil rather than bad or evil being inherent in any individual. Perhaps some will be seen as more bad than good because of the amount of bad behaviour, but there often are reasons as to why this happens.

An example here in the UK. Two ten-year-old boys horrifically murdered a two-year-old they enticed away from his mother. After their convictions and incarceration, one apparently we haven't heard of again - given a new identity and seemingly living a normal life - the other has been back to prison for various offences. Both were involved in the murder but seemingly they differ as to being evil. Explain.

 

[Nakosis]

Well, so do I and according to that you are harmful.
The problem is that it is not objective and to learn to understand that, is not something all humans learn.
In effect for sociology, psychology and philosophy for harm if you want to avoid that, you have to learn it is relative and inter-subjective.

Humans have a social process to show we are not a threat.
It has never failed but perhaps you would be the exception.
Most folks because of our social process believe they can tell the good from the bad.

It works so well, it can be abused by a bad person if they are detached from social norms.

I was a bad person once playing a good person. Not really hard if you know the rules.
Now I am a good person playing a good person. Perhaps that is religious free will.

 

[YoursTrue]

A person is neither good nor bad. A person simply is. It is their reactions to their stimuli that determines behavior, which, based on societal standards, is deemed "good" or "bad."

So what standards of good and bad do you agree with? Or can't you say?

 

[YoursTrue]

You shall know them by their fruits. Even so every good tree brings forth good fruit. But a corrupt tree brings forth evil fruit.

Interesting thought because I just read about a man in France stabbing children on the playground.

 

[YoursTrue]

A person is neither good nor bad. A person simply is. It is their reactions to their stimuli that determines behavior, which, based on societal standards, is deemed "good" or "bad."

That's not what I was asking though. Someone might say about another that person is good. Or that he is bad.

 

[YoursTrue]

By the impact they have on others

What if a person is incapable of thought from infancy on?

 

[Quagmire]

A bad person is anyone above the age of five who thinks the world revolves around them and expects everyone else to think so too.

A good person is someone who realizes the world revolves around me.

 

[SalixIncendium]

So what standards of good and bad do you agree with? Or can't you say?

I'm not sure what you're asking for here. Can you be more specific?

 

[SalixIncendium]

That's not what I was asking though. Someone might say about another that person is good. Or that he is bad.

And, as I said, neither of these are accurate. There is no such thing as a good or bad person.

 

[Heyo]

So what standards of good and bad do you agree with? Or can't you say?

I have three pillars of morality:
1. Well being.
2. Equality.
3. Liberty.
There is a fourth or (0th) that overrides the other three (which are co-equal) but only in a extreme situation.
0. Survival. Can't blame someone if they are fighting for their life or that of their fellow humans.

These are not universally agreed upon but by a vast majority.
Would you agree to those?

 

[osgart]

Malevolence bad. Benevolence good.

Plus meaning your intentions to drive to benevolent action and behaviour.

Actions come from the heart within. Behaviour and actions are the effects, not the cause of good persons.