What the questioner is really asking is whether or not we should blow the fuck out of poor people in other countries with overpriced tax payer subsidized weaponry. McCain says emphatically 'YES' and for a brief moment, achieves his first erection in decades.

What should we do with evil? Well, for starters, I'd give it a manicure; Then I'd poke it with a stick, after which I'd rub it on my genitals. Finally, I'd put it on a bagel with some cream cheese, but eat only half, saving the rest for breakfast tomorrow morning.

Evil is intangible. You could sooner defeat the color orange. The man asking the questions has a very small mind.

^ To add to your point, I thought this was the most inventive question he asked.

so there are only two people running for president? This will score some points with the religious.

It is somewhat a foolish question, though the way they each approached it was still interesting. Unfortunately evil is rarely, if ever, so black and white that you can make such an unflinching decision about how to handle it. McCain's answer is probably the more poignant, hence the applause, but Obama's seems more rational and realistic.

"Defeat it," said McCain.

He learned never to pass up a chance to make a good sound bite.

Evil as a concept is pretty subjective. We'd consider space aliens who came to earth and started eating us to be evil, but we don't consider ourselve evil for eating other animals.

It's nice to see these clips from that "debate" but the thought of questioning a candidates religious or spiritual views kind of turns my stomach. It smacks of pandering. It's framing our politics in a religious way, and I find that distracting.

Objectivity is not something highly valued among religious nuts.

Wow. That was a loaded question. They spent some time on the phrasing of that question.

"How do we deal with evil? Ignore? Negotiate? Contain? Defeat?" He's directing people to the question foreign policy and talking to our enemies. Yet he's putting it into the context of "dealing with evil" so that "negotiate" doesn't sound right. In that context, "Strike it down with the sword of Jesus!" is the right Christian answer, which plays right into McCain's hands.

Evil does not exist. Good does not exist either.

Actions can have relative properties, which can be evil or good, but these properties are all relative to every single individual. Evil and Good are absolutes, absolutes like these do not exist. Absolutes are for simple minds.

Make sure to take the time to see his full response, because he launched from there into "...and I'll follow Osama bin Laden to the Gates of Hell"

To which I have a nice counter: The Gates of Hell? Sure, but not into Pakistan.

>> ^gwiz665:
Evil does not exist. Good does not exist either.
Actions can have relative properties, which can be evil or good, but these properties are all relative to every single individual. Evil and Good are absolutes, absolutes like these do not exist. Absolutes are for simple minds.


So Hitler wasn't evil? Child rape isn't evil? Bullshit. I don't see any room for relativism there. People like to say absolutes don't exist because they make them feel uncomfortable.

>> ^gwiz665:
Evil does not exist. Good does not exist either.
Actions can have relative properties, which can be evil or good, but these properties are all relative to every single individual. Evil and Good are absolutes, absolutes like these do not exist. Absolutes are for simple minds.

>> ^Xax:
So Hitler wasn't evil? Child rape isn't evil? I don't see any room for relativism there.


Someone who truly believes in the superiority of the Aryan race likely sees Hitler as a hero. Likewise, someone who believes in the absolute authority of elders or someone who believes all people must fend for themselves regardless of circumstance may not think child rape is inherently evil. These viewpoints are not dominant right now, but they surely exist.

Besides, even taking a more mainstream view of morality doesn't guarantee absolute good or evil. It's possible that Hitler's holocaust killed someone that would have been even worse before they could come into their power. It's possible that someone who rapes a child gets prosecuted and incarcerated for it, making it impossible to develop into the mass murderer hiding within them only a few months down the road. These are long shots, but you cited a couple of pretty extreme cases.

People and societies seem to settle into a set of "correct" values, so we all have something to work from. Once we decide our values are absolute, however, we cut ourselves off from those people holding opposing viewpoints.

Obama: "We see evil all the time. We see evil in Darfur. We see evil, sadly, on the streets of our cities. We see evil in parents who viciously abuse their children. And I think it has to be confronted."

Fox News, 45 seconds later: "OBAMA: EVIL DOES EXIST We see it on the streets of our cities."

Talk about selective reporting. Yup, that's very fair and balanced.

>> ^EDD:
Obama: "We see evil all the time. We see evil in Darfur. We see evil, sadly, on the streets of our cities. We see evil in parents who viciously abuse their children. And I think it has to be confronted."
Fox News, 45 seconds later: "OBAMA: EVIL DOES EXIST We see it on the streets of our cities."
Talk about selective reporting. Yup, that's very fair and balanced.



Thanks for pointing that out, I didnt even catch it first time around.
God I hate fox.

>> ^Xax:
>> ^gwiz665:
Evil does not exist. Good does not exist either.
Actions can have relative properties, which can be evil or good, but these properties are all relative to every single individual. Evil and Good are absolutes, absolutes like these do not exist. Absolutes are for simple minds.

So Hitler wasn't evil? Child rape isn't evil? Bullshit. I don't see any room for relativism there. People like to say absolutes don't exist because they make them feel uncomfortable.


My point was that there exists not external forces outside of people: you can't say "I'm fighting Evil" or "I'm fighting for Good" because there is only people. People can do evil and good things, but whether their actions are good or bad depends on your point of view (relative). Hitler did good stuff too, even if his, to us, evil deeds certainly overshadowed them.

DavidRaine: Zeitgeist is the word you are dancing around in you response, and I agree completely.

"Does evil exist, and if it does, do we ignore it, do we negotiate with it, do we contain it, do we defeat it?"

That's such a simple-minded question. The word evil connotes a conflation of many separate problems that require different approaches. Most of these problems are far more complicated than simply being susceptible to McCain's brute force. You can't negotiate with an abstract staw-man, but you can negotiate with most people who have done harm. Obama gave a satisfactory answer.

Many monotheists literally mean 'Satan's work' when they say 'evil', so their reification (treating an abstraction as a concrete thing) isn't entirely accidental. I don't know which would be worse

Obama sucks at dumbing things down... really, really sucks at it.

McCain knows how to beat him; ride his popularity and comepletely ignore the complexity of the problem America faces by giving 'highfiving' answers.

oil?
"Drill in the Atlantic! high-five!"

war?
"Go get Osama! Don't lose the war! high-five!"

economy?
"... um, Tax cuts! high-five!"