Evil

Evil, in a general context, is taken as the absence or complete opposite of that which is ascribed as being good. Often, evil is used to denote profound immorality. In certain religious contexts, evil has been described as a supernatural force. Definitions of evil vary, as does the analysis of its root motives and causes. In cultures with Manichaean and Abrahamic religious influence, evil is usually perceived as the dualistic antagonistic opposite of good, in which good should prevail and evil should be defeated.

In the context of computing, evil simply describes that which is harmful to accomplishing goals that are considered important. A virus could be considered evil, for example, for destroying data. Microsoft could be considered evil because of the downsides of proprietary software whose adoption becomes so widespread that it is difficult to avoid using, and having to obey the licensing terms of.

Sex offenders are sometimes described as evil either because their thoughts are sinful (religious perspective), or their actions are harmful to others (utilitarian perspective) or contrary to the individual organism's purpose of survival and reproduction (e.g. in the case of a paraphilia).

Civil libertarians might view government restrictions on consensual sex as evil, on the other hand. See axis of evil. In modern times, it is assumed that the state is on the side of good. Ludwig von Mises wrote:

“

The political conflicts are no longer seen as struggles between groups of men. They are considered a war between two principles, the good and the bad. The good is embodied in the great god State, the materialization of the eternal idea of morality, and the bad in the "rugged individualism" of selfish men. In this antagonism the State is always right and the individual always wrong. The State is the representative of the commonweal, of justice, civilization, and superior wisdom. The individual is a poor wretch, a vicious fool.

”

Donna Hall writes:

“

An alternate view of responsibility is the idea that only an unreasonable person would repeatedly engage in or resort to predatory or otherwise undesirable behavior to meet their needs and wants because society provides other acceptable means of attaining those needs and wants. An extrapolation is the idea that only those who cannot otherwise help themselves would do what the rest of society considers abhorrent or extreme, and therefore, that behavior is not truly chosen by free will. The danger in viewing undesirable behavior in this light is the possibility that other less extreme, but still outlying, choices will be seen as an indication of mental illness. This perspective also ignores the possibility that some individuals may engage in socially undesirable behaviors because they have found more personally expedient means of attaining their needs and wants, and there is the additional possibility that society does not truly provide accessible and accepted means of attaining ends.

”