Free access to scriptures religious leaders try to censor
let’s make a little bit more politically correct. my questions are:
1. can we quantify/qualify evilness?
2. can we categorize them?
3. should we add human intentions in the equations or just judge from the results/consequences of evil actions?
4. if evil is quantifiable, are we permitted to commit a lesser one to avoid a larger evil?
5. how subjective is evil?
6. who pays?
1. Market distortion 2. Market->good. Oppose market ->bad. 3. On positive, biz works or not, judge on result. On negative, I don’t know. It’s too easy to pretend not to do things deliberately. I would say 80 percent on result 20 intent. 4. Yes. Wealth redistribution is evil. But I like that more than killing each other to decide who get the most wealth redistribution. When humans are poor, we need to punish the guilty. When we’re all richer, rewarding the not guilty makes more sense. 5. Something is evil if it deviates people’s interest from productivity. How evil? How big the deviation is. 6. Who pays? Who else can? Capitalists. However, capitalists will shop for the one charging the least and provide opportunities to make the most profit. Countries will compete with each other to provide highest security with the lowest tax. The market will take care the rest.
Alt answer for 5: Evil is always subjective and relative in proportion to zero sum aspects of live. Good means good for you and quite often it means bad for others. It also means things are not evil enough. A country with 5% tax is good if all the rest charge 40%. If world is perfectly zero sum, then there is no objective morality whatsoever. Good for me will always be bad for others. Some aspects of life with too much zero sum aspect is sex. Free sex -> Good for Ariel. Less than absolute free sex -> Good for the rest. Polygamy ->Good for politically powerful. Prostitution -> Good for capitalists. Sex outside marriage -> Good for charming liberals that want to breed without paying. Monogamy -> Stalemate.