I think that between the two, evil is the stronger.

Evil can take over the weak.
Evil can corrupt the good to evil.

In fact, I think that individual people have to have a stronger will and fortitude in order to choose good.

Or is it that good and evil are equally strong, but evil is more seductive?

Discuss.

Evil:
Money, drugs, clucking, money, satanic worship, industry, McDonalds, sweat shops, Nazis, money, rapery, wars, Hitler, money, porn, pollution, alcohol, MONEY.

Good:
Non-satanic worship, penguins.



Guess who wins?

Thats a good question well in this world now a days evil will win.

Evil: Cannot break easily, can come over all, will suffer greatly at the end

Good: Can change evil sometimes, fight for what is right, appear to have weak armies.

Better yet, how do you DEFINE good and evil.

It is something biased, a bit.

Also, you have to realize that good cannot exist without evil, so one prevailing as "better" than the other ends up trivial.

I do not condone the existence of a good or an evil. Things just are, and they can exist in a state unsatisfying but to call anything evil seems pretentious. The prospect of an existing 'good' as well seems overly ostentatious and I believe only exists for human rapture.
Things just Are.

But in the definition of good and evil of course this is a Much more difficult question...Fay raises a good point on the bias of good or evil, and this in essence defines good or evil.

In most every case and facet of humanity: The side we advocate is good, and the side opposing us is evil. And even when you find those who wish to advocate evil: in their eyes evil is good so you still come to the fact that evil and good are equivalent to what we want/like and what we hate/reject. Do you think Hitler's troops went into war thinking they were evil? No, they prayed to the same god the French prayed to. They cried out in death to their lord in the same hysteria everyone else did. We're just humans and humans just want what they want, and good is always what we want. But good, of course, varies with the individual. Just as evil does.

and from a more geeky point of view - think about star wars. the emperor got everyone to fight for him because he was the good guy and the jedi were the bad guys and they had to be eliminated. others of course thought that the jedi were good and the emperor was bad, but it all really depends on your point of view. XD

Already been stated.

Good and evil is subjective to the eyes of the person observing.

I think after trying to kill a whole race would justify that answer to them. But very true good cannot exist without evil, Imagine if the world didn't have any evil in it. Keep that dream in your thoughts then think about what would someone do if they found out about murder, death, rape, and violence.

I still think of Good and Evil as Equal but opposite in "power."

The question of which is stronger applies only to individual acts of good people / evil people (or groups of people). Then it comes down to which of these actions two is more powerful, and the question has transcended Beyond Good and Evil.

Good and Evil are not forces. They are adjectives.

Neither is stronger than the other.

The real question arises when it is hard to tell the difference...

Peace.

To say that a person, or an act, or whatever else is good or evil, you have to acknowledge that there is both a good and an evil. If we lived in a world with just one of those things (good/evil), then all you would really be able to say is, instead of a person or thing being good or evil, that the person thing act or whatever else simply is.

To say that good can't exist without evil is acknowledging that the two words are comparisons to eachother, and thus, evil cannot exist without good either. But if one is really stronger than the other, the other will eventually have no representation and render the comparison useless.

Thus, as long as we acknowledge that there is characteristics of "good" and characteristics of "evil", neither will ever cease to be, and thus neither can possibly be stronger. One can, however, be more seductive as said in earlier posts.



Yupyup..

First off...this is a subject not really relevant, but I guess I'll pursue it anyway: Hitler was so instrumental in his encompassment over his domain in part because he did not tell his countrymen what they were doing. The ones that went off to fight the front lines were being fed propaganda about how the outside world brought this upon themselves or whatever else he could use to justify. There were (obviously) soldiers he did put in charge of the extermination, but for the most part they went to war blindly. The only ones that knew were the ones committing the atrocities. Even the jews didn't think they were off to death camps. While they may have had suspicions or eventually factual evidence of an imminent demise coming for them, but they were ignorant of their fates which were initiating all around and above their heads. The soldiers coming to carry them off: thought they were to be taken to prison camps, not death camps. So Hitler dominated the way many dictators take and maintain control: Lies & Deceit. But his men fighting in the war had every reason to believe they were under God's wing, and thus, based a believer's association of God with good, he was fighting the good fight.

-------
*reads over posts*...hmmm...I should think it obvious that if good and evil are subjective-then they are of course adjectives. But now its been said.

------
Now because I got thinking here's a hypothetical postulate on how Good & Evil could exist as forces:

As I have stated and others have advocated: Good & Evil don't really exist. But if Good & Evil do exist as forces...it most certainly would not end there. That would be because the ability to be finite is not contained by either, and many realms of between would have to exist. Then you could say that they exist as forces: just rarely in a pure state. Like any elements on the Periodic Table, rarely does an element exist in it's pure form. MOST must swap or share electrons to fill the outer rings, which are compounds. But as there are those stable few elements (the Noble Gases) there could exist within this paradigm a stable few good and evil's. Thus preserving the RPG mindset of there being good and evil. Its just a rarity.

And maybe kharma could come into play. Positive currents emitted from your body, of course, being good and negative being evil. That would be good and evil as a force, but since we all emitt both it comes back to the combination of forces in Most cases. So Good and Evil could exist as forces, just a matter of altering our schemas as to what they really are.

------
And, now that I have a hypothetical situation in which I can consider Ix's initial question, good and evil would be left the strengths of the individual aligned to good or evil. So one can't really be stronger than the other anyway...but there are limits on (the generic) good (i.e. chivalry, morals). And of course failings of resolve in (the generic) evil (i.e. lack of courage, loyalty, trust).

But My point is entirely moot-and random. And as such I digress.

Good:
Good was here first.
Good will prevail in the end.

Evil:
Evil is a distorted, twisted and perverted from of what was once good.
Evil is all around us now.
Evil will be vanquished in the end.

Nope. Try reading the other replys. Nobody said ANYTHING about Star Wars.



Ok, but what constitues "Good" and what constitues "Evil" then, Universally?
Or maybe a bit more clearly put - what characteristics are "Good" in every single case and what characteristics are "Evil" in every case? Are material objects "Good" and "Evil"?

The point originally made by Rodak still stands that "Good" and "Evil" are merely adjectives. They describe things that we agree or disagree with.

I'd have to say evil is better. I have always liked the villains from games more than the heroes. You can tell since my name is darklinkomega. For example: I like DarkLink and Ganon more than Link from Zelda, Dark Samus more than Samus from Metroid, Andross more than Fox from StarFox, and Darth Vader more than Luke(Had to say that 'cause you guys mentioned Star Wars ).

P.S. Join the Dark Side! We have cookies!

Well, the only way we can distinguish between what is good and what is evil is listening to the third "force" which we all have. Everyone has an interior barometer that measures what is right and what is wrong. "Good" being what is right and "evil" being what is wrong. C.S. Lewis has a great section on this very topic in one of his books.

Having to describe "every case" is a daunting task, but as a general rule, that which is wrong is evil and that which is right is good.

For example:
Lord Z put "money" in the category of what is evil. (and penguins as being good ) He didn't write money once, he kept repeating it and repeating it. I thought that was right on, for it isn't money that is evil. We all need money. Having money isn't evil either. However, when we begin to put money above everything else, and it becomes like a god to us, then it's the LOVE of money that becomes evil. For when this happens, people start to trample on others and manipulate situations and lie and cheat and steal to make themselves temporarily happy. The results of the love of money are things we can all agree are wrong (evil).

Hope all you guys have a great weekend.

but Right and Wrong are also adjectives. You still have not defined the terms with descriptions that are always true.

To those who lie, cheat and steal to get money to make themselves happy, they way they are being may seem "good" to them. This person may think things like "I need it more than they do", to them it might be "wrong" to give away money or whatever object they are obsessing over because it would be self-deprivation which in their mind is an "Evil" thing to do.
Good and Evil, in regards to actions or objects or characteristics, are in the eye of the beholder thus a definition that involes a object like money or an action like lying cheating or stealing is not a true definition. It does not apply for every case. Thus you cannot define Good and Evil based on your own views. They need to be defined based on every possible point of view.

As a start -
Good is what the individual can do without bearing conscience to his or her actions, or what he or she agrees with doing/being and Evil is what the individual cannot do, or feels bad about doing, or what he or she disagrees with doing/being.

something like that? you guys work on it...


ps. As a side quest...

but considering this is the actual topic in here.
despite good and evil, i think Want is a strong force to factor in there... someone can want something they feel bad about/know is evil and have repercussions about doing it but if they want it badly enough they will do it anyway. If someone wants something they feel is good then they will do it easily but if they want something they think is wrong they have a struggle over whether to do it or not. When this stuggle occurs then they either want to live up to their morals more than they want whatever it is, or they want whatever it is more than they want to live up to their morals >__>

Hmmmm.......It is a most interesting topic, and one consisting of most interesting responses, but as is the topic is entirely to subjective (as are the terms). I don't see discussing individual psychological thought-trains is very effective. It seems that the same point has been listed several times as we all reach the same conclusion with different words. (Pagerron, Rodak, Me, Lone, Goth etc.)

Since we've worn the individual out I think we should drop the psychological aspects of Good & Evil, and perhaps continue with the Sociological aspects of Good & Evil. In terms of the public psychology becomes drowned in generalizations-but society is important.

Society, as a whole, has defined MOST explicitly for us (the mindless drones) what is GOOD and what is EVIL. But clearly the psychological aspects (as described by previous posts) interferes and undermines the whole process. I could spend hours rambling on the topic of society, but my thoughts make no never-mind to me...what would you say on Good & Evil in society? How does society handle it? How should society handle it? Anything really.

lol - from what i can see Society handles things by either A) Panicking or B) Crime or C) All of the above.

Like in the Katrina New Orleans thing there were tons of people robbing other people for blankets and food and all kinds of stuff.

Don't forget tvs and electronics.

Hail hitler.