Actually your more ignorant then anyone here, Auto. Stop trying to take what i said and put it out of context you can deny all you want, as i posted earlier, I wont force you to believe in any thing. I'm pointing out the obvious that you can't seem to see. Jutus and me even pointed out all the facts, for you to prove that humanity is evil. so either way you look at it wither you want to or not humanity is evil.

Quote from tekushikume

Actually your more ignorant then anyone here, Auto. Stop trying to take what i said and put it out of context you can deny all you want, as i posted earlier, I wont force you to believe in any thing. I'm pointing out the obvious that you can't seem to see. Jutus and me even pointed out all the facts, for you to prove that humanity is evil. so either way you look at it wither you want to or not humanity is evil.

There's the ignorance.

You haven't proven anything. I've practically disproved everything you've said. The only thing you're able to process through that doesn't even make any sense is saying that humanity is evil, and the pointing the worst of any person. I can do the opposite.

Humans donated to Haiti.
There are charity groups.
A lot of people volunteer at soup kitchens.
The world isn't like a movie. There are not gang wars going on as often as you believe.
Firefighters.
Cops.
Paramedics.
There are many intersections with no stoplights, yet you don't see cars speeding through trying to get through it first.
People wave hi to each other as cars pass by, even if they don't know each other.
People share seats on public buses.

And there's this thing called COMMON COURTESY.

I can keep going on. But unlike you, I'm not going to use it as my only argument.

Wow you really don't get anything do you? I never once said gang wars happen often ,Learn to read please. Second just because people help others doesn't mean it doesn't have evil intent, I'm not a ****ing saint, and i'm sure as hell your not either. People lie each other there is racism, people hate other people cause there gay, there murder for the most trivial of things, presidents have lied to us. I just want to know what kind of world do you live in because it's not the real one. So keep going on being stupid like you are, it's not my concern if you are to retarded to understand the real world

Mostly Devil's advocate
Seems to me, the first thing that needs to be done here is to define "evil" in some way. People are saying that morality is subjective. Therefore all points of view are equally valid. Therefore, all people have the same moral weight to throw around. Therefore, the point of view more widely held has a greater total weight than the lesser held view. Whether or not humanity can be considered evil can, as such, be broken down to whether we have done benefit to more things than we have harmed, as it is evident that things which we have harmed would consider us evil and things that we have benefited will think us good. Almost certainly, the creatures that we have done more harm to will think us more evil and vice versa, so what I propose is a utilitarian measure of humanity's impact on the planet in terms of all conscious beings.

I think it's going to be fairly clear however you measure it that we cause more suffering to the creatures of the planet than we cause pleasure.

On the good side, our waste provides food for rats, flies, and foxes. Once in a while we stroke a kitten.

On the bad side, we have driven species after species to extinction. We have destroyed habitats. We have poisoned, swatted, and shot, the aforementioned pests that live off our waste. We have dominated the planet and forced all living things to adapt around us or get out of the way.

As a species overall we have done more damage to this planet in terms of its other inhabitants than any other animal.

What about on an individual level? Almost anyone with the opportunity to exploit another human being for personal gain does so. I could point to any number of dictators and the like, but that could be pointed to as anomalies, so instead I give you actual scientific experiment. In a lab, two people were present. One was given $20 and told that they could split it with the other person however they wanted. If humanity was kind and generous, the money would have been split 50/50. Sure, there may have been a few bad people who kept it all for themselves, but they would be balanced by the people who thought that they didn't really need the money and gave extra away in case the other guy had a pressing need of it. At worst, surely you would expect a 60/40 split from overall good people, no? The actual result was 80/20. People, on average, were willing to share just $4.

Given the opportunity, humanity as a whole is 80% selfish, and the 20% examples you gave can hardly balance it out. You have pointed to Haiti, for instance. How much did you give? A few dollars maybe? But they need the money so much more than you. The best overall outcome would be to sell your car and house and move into the smallest flat you can so that they can survive and so will you, but no. People will die because of other people's selfish desires to hold on to their property which they could have done without. This is wrong.

There are even worse examples, like the charities that, for £2 a week, will provide clean water to a child in India. Or education. Or other basic rights. Again, so much happiness could be generated for so many people if we in the rich world were willing to give up a few luxuries. Will it?

Quote from Zed

Mostly Devil's advocate
Seems to me, the first thing that needs to be done here is to define "evil" in some way. People are saying that morality is subjective. Therefore all points of view are equally valid. Therefore, all people have the same moral weight to throw around. Therefore, the point of view more widely held has a greater total weight than the lesser held view. Whether or not humanity can be considered evil can, as such, be broken down to whether we have done benefit to more things than we have harmed, as it is evident that things which we have harmed would consider us evil and things that we have benefited will think us good. Almost certainly, the creatures that we have done more harm to will think us more evil and vice versa, so what I propose is a utilitarian measure of humanity's impact on the planet in terms of all conscious beings.

I think it's going to be fairly clear however you measure it that we cause more suffering to the creatures of the planet than we cause pleasure.

On the good side, our waste provides food for rats, flies, and foxes. Once in a while we stroke a kitten.

On the bad side, we have driven species after species to extinction. We have destroyed habitats. We have poisoned, swatted, and shot, the aforementioned pests that live off our waste. We have dominated the planet and forced all living things to adapt around us or get out of the way.

As a species overall we have done more damage to this planet in terms of its other inhabitants than any other animal.

What about on an individual level? Almost anyone with the opportunity to exploit another human being for personal gain does so. I could point to any number of dictators and the like, but that could be pointed to as anomalies, so instead I give you actual scientific experiment. In a lab, two people were present. One was given $20 and told that they could split it with the other person however they wanted. If humanity was kind and generous, the money would have been split 50/50. Sure, there may have been a few bad people who kept it all for themselves, but they would be balanced by the people who thought that they didn't really need the money and gave extra away in case the other guy had a pressing need of it. At worst, surely you would expect a 60/40 split from overall good people, no? The actual result was 80/20. People, on average, were willing to share just $4.

Given the opportunity, humanity as a whole is 80% selfish, and the 20% examples you gave can hardly balance it out. You have pointed to Haiti, for instance. How much did you give? A few dollars maybe? But they need the money so much more than you. The best overall outcome would be to sell your car and house and move into the smallest flat you can so that they can survive and so will you, but no. People will die because of other people's selfish desires to hold on to their property which they could have done without. This is wrong.

There are even worse examples, like the charities that, for £2 a week, will provide clean water to a child in India. Or education. Or other basic rights. Again, so much happiness could be generated for so many people if we in the rich world were willing to give up a few luxuries. Will it?

Not to mention that the pests wouldn't have to feed off our garbage if we didn't take the natural resources and use them less then efficiently. If we didn't limit their habitat so bad they wouldn't live beneath our filth and waist, even the word pest describes them in a not convenient fashion, like they just annoy us so we must destroy them, if we didn't ravage the land they wouldn't do the same to our crops.
If our selfishness didn't cause currency to be created we wouldn't have ****ed every other form of trading up, they wouldn't even need our money to continue living. People only give a small amount of money just so they can cling onto the rest of it with their grubby hands. Then turn around and feel great about themselves because they donated two bucks. Frankly it's embarrassing to watch.
It isn't fair to say that if 99% of the population is evil humanity isn't evil, if humanity is human nature, psychological characteristics that all normal humans have in common, I thought it was common knowledge that greed and brutality was evil, but some of you guys insist on passing it off as instinct. If all humans have these instincts than you must be saying that all humanity is instinctively evil.
If instinct is our inherent disposition than according to your logic it must be true.
Though I know that it can't be our instincts, no other being on this planet tries to rape and pillage all they want like us, of course fighting and killing occurs naturally in the animal kingdom but not on the sheer magnitude that humanity has. It is just us choosing to destroy and flaunt our power with such arrogance that we would even turn on one another in such a way that millions would die just for simple things like revenge (Referring to Adolf Hitler) greed and hate.
I don't personally think that there is any excuse for the way humanity treats it's surroundings especially other humans, with such prejudice and bias.
What prejudice you ask? What bias you ask? How about the segregation of races? What about holy wars? These always seem to be happening and the fact that not so much recently, doesn't mean anything. In world war two, we made concentration camps for American citizens that where of Asian origin and they where much less than a suitable place to live, not on par with the German pow camps but horrible non the less. I am sure that if we got into a war with a random country like Australia, we would come up with some sort of discriminating term for them and treat them all poorly. Though this isn't even that bad or indicative of evil it just shows some of the minor side effects just from going to war with the general location of there origin, let alone if they where to oppose an ideal we had.
Not too long ago witches got burned at the stake because Catholics, Jews and Christians all thought that they where opposing their beliefs and burning to death is a horrible way to die, not only that but even before that activities that are pretty similar with the variable of race and religion has always been happening and they still do today, out of the simple prejudices. We will slaughter someone that we think has wronged us and that's how humanity is.

Quote from Jutsu

Not to mention that the pests wouldn't have to feed off our garbage if we didn't take the natural resources and use them less then efficiently. If we didn't limit their habitat so bad they wouldn't live beneath our filth and waist, even the word pest describes them in a not convenient fashion, like they just annoy us so we must destroy them, if we didn't ravage the land they wouldn't do the same to our crops.
If our selfishness didn't cause currency to be created we wouldn't have ****ed every other form of trading up, they wouldn't even need our money to continue living. People only give a small amount of money just so they can cling onto the rest of it with their grubby hands. Then turn around and feel great about themselves because they donated two bucks. Frankly it's embarrassing to watch.
It isn't fair to say that if 99% of the population is evil humanity isn't evil, if humanity is human nature, psychological characteristics that all normal humans have in common, I thought it was common knowledge that greed and brutality was evil, but some of you guys insist on passing it off as instinct. If all humans have these instincts than you must be saying that all humanity is instinctively evil.
If instinct is our inherent disposition than according to your logic it must be true.
Though I know that it can't be our instincts, no other being on this planet tries to rape and pillage all they want like us, of course fighting and killing occurs naturally in the animal kingdom but not on the sheer magnitude that humanity has. It is just us choosing to destroy and flaunt our power with such arrogance that we would even turn on one another in such a way that millions would die just for simple things like revenge (Referring to Adolf Hitler) greed and hate.
I don't personally think that there is any excuse for the way humanity treats it's surroundings especially other humans, with such prejudice and bias.
What prejudice you ask? What bias you ask? How about the segregation of races? What about holy wars? These always seem to be happening and the fact that not so much recently, doesn't mean anything. In world war two, we made concentration camps for American citizens that where of Asian origin and they where much less than a suitable place to live, not on par with the German pow camps but horrible non the less. I am sure that if we got into a war with a random country like Australia, we would come up with some sort of discriminating term for them and treat them all poorly. Though this isn't even that bad or indicative of evil it just shows some of the minor side effects just from going to war with the general location of there origin, let alone if they where to oppose an ideal we had.
Not too long ago witches got burned at the stake because Catholics, Jews and Christians all thought that they where opposing their beliefs and burning to death is a horrible way to die, not only that but even before that activities that are pretty similar with the variable of race and religion has always been happening and they still do today, out of the simple prejudices. We will slaughter someone that we think has wronged us and that's how humanity is.

That's all putting it lightly.If you face reality there's a lot more going on then the united states or probably other government lets on. you also figure, there's gang war. theirs murders. and people like Automan Or Sacred, you guys have the guts to deny all of it? I'm sorry to say this but, you guys are covered in ignorance. Now, yes it is safe to say not all humanity is evil. a baby isn't born with evil intentions in the mind. but that's not to say that 0.0000001% of the people on this planet was not evil as automan put it would not make humanity evil, which in no reality is that true.

Quote from tekushikume

That's all putting it lightly.If you face reality there's a lot more going on then the united states or probably other government lets on. you also figure, there's gang war. theirs murders. and people like Automan Or Sacred, you guys have the guts to deny all of it? I'm sorry to say this but, you guys are covered in ignorance. Now, yes it is safe to say not all humanity is evil. a baby isn't born with evil intentions in the mind. but that's not to say that 0.0000001% of the people on this planet was not evil as automan put it would not make humanity evil, which in no reality is that true.

The problem with you is that you just deny everything. You don't even take into consideration of what everyone else is saying. Jutsu and Zed are both making very good statements. You on the other hand are just throwing out stuff like, "HUMANITY DOES THIS, AND THAT. AND YOU CANT STOP IT." Yet when someone puts up a considerable argument you completely ignore all the reasonable statements and continue to ramble on.

Oh also.

Quote from tekushikume

you also figure, there's gang war. theirs murders. and people like Automan Or Sacred, you guys have the guts to deny all of it?

You're pulling out that gang war card again. I thought you said it didn't happen often. Yet you pull it out every time you try to debate on this subject. Sounds like you're not listening to yourself.

As for Zed and Jutsu. I find your arguments well thought out. As of right now however, I'm much to tired to debate. I'll continue when I have time to make a debate.

Oh I'm sorry sacred, guess what I've put up just as many valuable points as they did,and you completely deny mine statements. Don't be a hypocrite. If you could actually read, i did comment to everything you said, just a lot of your points are flawed, so i'm sorry you can't come up with any actual valid points.

Quote from sAcReD

As for Zed and Jutsu. I find your arguments well thought out. As of right now however, I'm much to tired to debate. I'll continue when I have time to make a debate.

I am looking forward to it sir.

GET THIS IN YOUR ****ING SKULL YOU COCKSUCKING FAGGOT IDIOT/TROLL (I can't decide which):

1) You cannot say what is evil. There is no literal definition.
2) If you say evil is doing harm with ill-intent, you cannot say that EVERYBODY is like this.

Let me give an example. Let's take Martin.Luther.King as an example, you can replace him with other well-doers. Assuming he was as good as they say, then he wasn't evil. Correct? That means, humanity isn't evil. This is because to call more than one thing something, it needs ALL of the things to be the something you are trying to call it. Not doing that would be generalization, which leads to things like stereotypes, racism etc.

I was exaggerating with the 0.000001% part, I'm certain there is MUCH more of the population with no ill-intent.

Your posts seem to consist of:
"You're ignorant. YES I HAVE PROVEN HUMANITY IS EVIL. There are wars and violence, Can't you see it?! I've pointed out many points which you cant argue against!".

Now, what I want you to do, is to quote this reply, and after every paragraph I wrote, write your reply. Then we'll see if you actually take things into consideration.

Quote from Automaton

GET THIS IN YOUR ****ING SKULL YOU COCKSUCKING FAGGOT IDIOT/TROLL (I can't decide which):

1) You cannot say what is evil. There is no literal definition.
2) If you say evil is doing harm with ill-intent, you cannot say that EVERYBODY is like this.

Let me give an example. Let's take Martin.Luther.King as an example, you can replace him with other well-doers. Assuming he was as good as they say, then he wasn't evil. Correct? That means, humanity isn't evil. This is because to call more than one thing something, it needs ALL of the things to be the something you are trying to call it. Not doing that would be generalization, which leads to things like stereotypes, racism etc.

I was exaggerating with the 0.000001% part, I'm certain there is MUCH more of the population with no ill-intent.

Your posts seem to consist of:
"You're ignorant. YES I HAVE PROVEN HUMANITY IS EVIL. There are wars and violence, Can't you see it?! I've pointed out many points which you cant argue against!".

Now, what I want you to do, is to quote this reply, and after every paragraph I wrote, write your reply. Then we'll see if you actually take things into consideration.

You don't get it either do you Auto, just a few people wont make a difference, people don't change there attitudes, or thoughts on what people say, and your the prime example. just because a few people are not evil, doesn't mean the WHOLE world is not evil. By your logic if one person is not evil, then humanity is not evil, but also works the other way if there are more people who are evil then humanity is automatically evil. I'm just working by YOUR logic.

Quote from Automaton

Let me give an example. Let's take Martin.Luther.King as an example, you can replace him with other well-doers. Assuming he was as good as they say, then he wasn't evil. Correct? That means, humanity isn't evil. This is because to call more than one thing something, it needs ALL of the things to be the something you are trying to call it. Not doing that would be generalization, which leads to things like stereotypes, racism etc.

I was exaggerating with the 0.000001% part, I'm certain there is MUCH more of the population with no ill-intent.

Oh I'm sorry I was unaware that he didn't get murdered by a prejudice and racist man. Humanity isn't good. This is because to call more than one thing something, it needs ALL of the things to be the something you are trying to call it. Not doing that would be generalization, which leads to things like donations, kind acts etc.

See it can be turned around just as easily, saying such a think is horribly one sided and I recommend that you refrain from using such a one sided point of view to prove your point. Like zed said a utilitarianism point of view would be much better, because other wise you just have to out weigh the amount of opinions for your side than for his side, it's unfair. Especially when all you have to do is try and use your own definition of something.
If you mix booze with a spritzer it's still called booze.
Just because humanity has evil or good parts doesn't mean that you can't refer to it as humanity like I said if humanity is the general representation of mankind and you pick several people off the street to represent us the majority of them will be selfish greedy assholes.
I highly recommend you read the posts from zed and I. Top of this page and the last of the page before.

Haha, oh dear I got ninja'd by tekushikume. Oh well I have better word play.

Quote from tekushikume

You don't get it either do you Auto, just a few people wont make a difference, people don't change there attitudes, or thoughts on what people say, and your the prime example. just because a few people are not evil, doesn't mean the WHOLE world is not evil. By your logic if one person is not evil, then humanity is not evil, but also works the other way if there are more people who are evil then humanity is automatically evil. I'm just working by YOUR logic.

No. You're not working by his logic you moron.

By his logic Humanity is not evil. At what point in time did he say Humanity is Nice? He is simply stating that because there is that one person that is not evil then Humanity as a whole is not entirely evil.

You on the other hand say that because there is that one person that is evil then Humanity is evil, and then pretending that you are using his logic, which you aren't

Also, You're the "Grammer Nazi"? lol.

Though the same logic can be applied to say humanity isn't good which is why it's flawed.

Quote from tekushikume

You don't get it either do you Auto, just a few people wont make a difference, people don't change there attitudes, or thoughts on what people say, and your the prime example. just because a few people are not evil, doesn't mean the WHOLE world is not evil. By your logic if one person is not evil, then humanity is not evil, but also works the other way if there are more people who are evil then humanity is automatically evil. I'm just working by YOUR logic.

No. If a few people aren't evil, humanity cannot be classed as evil because there would be odd ones that don't fit the generalization, that much we agreed on there (what I was saying). However, if a few people are evil, it doesn't make humanity evil. Why is this? FOR THE SAME REASON. No matter how many are evil/not evil, as long as there is variety it cannot be defined as one thing. You can't go to a school with 250 white people and 20 black people and say "this is a white school", just in the same way that you can't say "this is a black school".

Quote from Jutsu

Just because humanity has evil or good parts doesn't mean that you can't refer to it as humanity like I said if humanity is the general representation of mankind and you pick several people off the street to represent us the majority of them will be selfish greedy assholes.
I highly recommend you read the posts from zed and I. Top of this page and the last of the page before.

Haha, oh dear I got ninja'd by tekushikume. Oh well I have better word play.

Well, I disagree with all of that. The point I'm arguing against is that humanity is evil. Not that most of humanity is evil. The literal definition of "humanity" is "the human race", not "the human race in general". Read my above comment about the school.

The second thing I disagree on is the extent to which you 2 seem to think the world is "evil". I don't think there are any figures to prove either side on this, but you can continue believing more than 80% of the world is evil, and I will continue believing a MUCH smaller amount is evil.

Also, there is one thing nobody seems to be picking up on. We all have different definitions of what is good and bad, and therefore saying most of humanity is evil is entirely your opinion. We're using our own views on what is good to define a majority, and not the whole thing.

Reply.