Good and Evil

The Challenge

We must improve our understanding of 'evil', because our lack of understanding gives evil vastly more power over us and the way we live, than it would if we knew more about what we were dealing with and how to deal with it. We need to know how to recognize it, realize when it's right next to us, when it's coming, when it's gathering strength, when it's sneaking something by, deceiving us, when it's building something in secret, when it's waning, when it's pretending to be something other than what it is, and a bit about what to expect from it in general.

Maybe it will be clearer if we talk about cruelty, malice, abuse, brutality, hatred, hostility, violence, madness, tyranny, domination, authoritarianism, enslavement, war, theft, murder, assassination, torture, betrayal, deception, destruction and so on, instead of talking about 'evil' which too easily lends itself to abstract moralizing about some literal outer 'devil'.  But these terms don't do the trick.  Together they make 'evil' sound commonplace and 'normal', and of course in many ways it is. 

Yet our problem remains, that a few people are in a class by themselves. They exhibit a degree of murderous animosity that staggers the imagination, throttles our sensibilities, and surpasses the typical person's ability to believe and accept that a human being could possibly behave so despicably toward others or toward life and nature itself. Then, since too many people fail to recognize these 'monsters' masquerading as human beings, and often as 'leaders' no less—we follow them! We revere and follow grossly unbalanced madmen! It's our own responsibility as sane human beings to stop respecting them, obeying them and following them. It is not their responsibility to stop preying upon our ignorance, stupidity and passivity. Their claims that we're mindless, spineless and stupid, form their self-proclaimed justifications for preying upon us as they do in the first place!

At the beginning of the 21st century, the philosophical discourse concerning good and evil seems to be subsumed into three major areas; meta-ethics which describes the nature of good and bad, normative ethics concerning how human beings ought to behave and applied ethics which attends to particular moral issues. All three of the above concepts find expression in the network television landscape, most explicitly through the Netflix' sitcom called 'The Good Place". The show dramatizes actual ethics classes and concepts on screen without dumbing down the concepts being described. In this way, it serves as an informal educational tool.

This paper explores Macbeth's free will. Since all the prophecies come true in the play, it could be considered that Macbeth was predestined to all the events he experiences. However, it can also be considered that, being only fated to be king, Macbeth makes the premonitions occur the way they occur, being his decision to kill Duncan what triggers his tragedy. To defend this idea, I carry out a throughout analysis of Macbeth's and Lady Macbeth's extreme (self-)awareness, their calculating and speculative reasonings, and their haste for the crown, taking into consideration as well the idea of potentiality of good and evil.

One of the most complex philosophical and theological issues that has always been discussed throughout history and on the other hand has been the basis of atheism for some atheists, is the issue of the existence of evil in the world. Throughout history, the issue of evil has been discussed and thought by various thinkers. And different approaches and approaches to it have been expressed.Ibn Sina considers evil to be a non-existent thing that lacks the perfections necessary for charity, and Leibniz, based on Augustine's thought, has explained evil as a minimal thing in order to achieve charity.A study and comparison of the thoughts of Ibn Sina and Leibniz on the one hand as theologians of different schools of thought and also the existence of inter-religious differences and on the other hand as philosophical differences between Islamic philosophy and Western philosophy by two famous philosophers of these two schools The axis of evil can be an explanation for expressing the similarities and differences between the school and theology of these philosophers around the axis of evil. In this article, with a descriptive-analytical method and citing reliable sources, to examine the approaches to the problem of evil, the types of evil and the solutions mentioned in order to explain the evil by Ibn Sina and Leibniz, and finally to express the similarities and differences. The philosopher's thought revolves around the axis of evil.Ibn Sina and Lab Nits did not consider evil in contradiction with the attributes of benevolence, justice and absolute divine wisdom and did not express it as a disturbance in the good system of the world and stated the existence of evil as a necessity for gaining charity

In a post-war panorama of secular humanism, morality has taken on new contours that allow Goodness to be achieved via the forgoing of the Self. This seems to be the lesson of the late Iris Murdoch, who dedicated her life to the study of philosophy in an attempt to create a unified moral code to offer guidance to (wo)mankind. Increasingly worried by the ethical road society was travelling down in the twentieth century, its lack of religious direction and consequent spiritual void, the novelist creates a moral philosophy based on the precept that one must reject one’s natural predisposition for egotism - a form of Evil. The soul must enter a path of knowledge that will allow man to see Reality and Truth. The secular redemption of the soul can only be achieved through a life dedicated to art and looking beyond oneself. Female Gothic, a tangential strain that developed out of the eighteenth century Gothic, has been used to express social anxieties concerning such issues as identity, sexuality, the fragmentation of the self and the redemption or damnation of the soul. This article explores how Iris Murdoch appropriates Female Gothic in order to explore these anxieties, as well as to propagate her own moral philosophy in an attempt to reform our spiritual world through a suggested model of Goodness.

TO READ THE PREVIEW SCROLL DOWN TO READ THE PREVIEW SCROLL DOWN

A great American psychologist summarizes one of the most difficult of subjects--the nature of dreaming--after decades of lifting matters out of the morass of Freudianism. The result nonetheless is a thin gruel that misses the main thing about dreams: their unworldly imaginative power. But he is not the only one. Who defends the psyche in modern science? Who knows what it is, where it resides, and how it controls the brain? The true theory of dreaming will emerge only by facing and answering these questions, which can be said to have baffled ancient, medieval, and modern investigators alike. At present materialism stands confused, pathetically benighted in its own shadow.

Readers are now advised that a new approach to the true theory of dreaming, as well as the first mechanistic explanation of Night Terrors in scientific history, is contained in the reviewer's illustrated essay on this page called 'The Last Day.' Both this late 2017 review and the new 2020 essay concern the same foundational ideas within idealism and can be said to blend smoothly together to produce an increasingly coherent view of the phenomenology as well as the fundamental nature of dreaming, the achievement of which depends on isolating and identifying the cosmic generator of dreams.

See also 'Sartre on Dreaming' (2022) and 'On the Materialization of Being' (2022) for deeper insights into the nature of dreaming according to idealism and in the context of the embodiment of the psyche, which reaches far deeper inwardly than the farthest galaxies are from the Solar System.

Good and evil have always been walking hand in hand across the planet. They both are essential for our understanding of the world, as without evil, we would never know what good is. All mankind shares most general perceptions about evil – basically that behaviour is listed in the Ten Commandments. But there are other things which vary from culture to culture, and some deeds may shock us if we are not prepared and the views of our own culture are different.
Mythology is the foundation that shaped social norms, taboos, religious beliefs and the worldview of a people as a whole. Native American mythology is very diverse and provides many examples of what is considered good or bad by different tribes. Studying those examples is very important as it helps to understand the motifs and reasons for certain actions, as well as Native Americans themselves and their world outlook.
We will summarize the most prevailing perceptions of different tribes as reflected in their myths and will attempt to derive common criteria of good and evil for the indigenous people of North America.

Din felsefesinde en çok tartışılan konulardan biri olan kötülük problemini ele almamızın sebebi, bu probleme mutlak manada bir çözüm getirmek değil –kötülük mefhumu bir problemden öte problematik olarak karşımızda durarak sınırlarımızı aştığından– bu konu hakkında din felsefesi nezdinde ne gibi yaklaşımların bulunduğu, kötülük problemi ile kast edilen sorunun ne olduğu ile ilgili özet bir şekilde bilgi vererek muhatabın bu konu hakkında aşağı yukarı zihninde bir tablo oluşturmaktır. Bu amacı güttüğümüz için giriş ile birinci bölümü bu çerçevede oluşturduk.

İkinci bölümde ise Said Nursi’nin kötülük problemine olan yaklaşımını ele aldık. Her ne kadar Said Nursi’nin kelamcı kimliği ve bugün bir kısım insanların zihninde siyasi gerekçeler sebebiyle olumsuz izlenim bırakan Nurculuk hareketinin kurucusu olması hasebiyle din felsefesi açısından kötülük problemine olan yaklaşımını ele almanın çok da yerinde bir çalışma olmayacağı şeklinde görüşler olsa da biz buna katılmamaktayız. Çünkü bugün gerek ulusal gerek uluslararası arenada Müellif adına birçok yüksek lisans ve doktora tezleri yazılmakta ve adına kürsüler kurulmaktadır. Ayrıca küçümsenmeyecek derecede hem yetkinlik hem de kemiyet açısından birçok konuyu –özellikle iman meselelerini– ele alan yaklaşık 6000 sayfalık bir külliyata sahiptir. Bunun yanı sıra kötülük problemine yaklaşımında sadece kelamcı kimliğiyle ya da Kuran’ı referans alarak çözüm getirme yoluna başvurmamış, felsefî diyebileceğimiz çözümleri de probleme olan itirazlara karşı öne sürmüştür.

İkinci bölüm Müellifin yaklaşımı üzerine kurulu olduğu için külliyattan alıntılar ile düşüncelerini vermeye çalıştık. Fakat külliyat dili bugünün Türkçesi ile anlaşılamamaktadır. Hatta külliyat içindeki eserler arasında bile dil farkı bulunmaktadır. Mesela, Muhakemat, 1911 Osmanlı Türkçesi ile yazılmışken Lem’alar, 1934 Osmanlı Türkçesi ile yazılmıştır ki bu yıllar arasında dilde büyük ölçüde bir değişim olmuştur. Bu sebeple yapılan alıntılarda bazen sırf pasajı bugünün Türkçesine çevirmekle yetindik, bazen verilmek istenilen mana pasajdan anlaşılamayacağından pasajdan çıkan anlamı yansıtmaya gayret gösterdik. Bu yöntem bütünüyle manayı aksettirmek üzere kurulduğundan bazı yerlerde kendi cümle ya da kelimelerimiz için parantez kullanmak mümkün olmamıştır. Fakat çok nadir de olsa bütünüyle manayı aksettirme ihtiyacı hissetmediğimiz pasajlarda parantez ile eklemelerimizi belirttik.

Şunu da özellikle belirtmek isterim ki bir şahsiyeti beğenmek veya o şahsiyetin düşüncelerinden istifade etmek veya merak insiyakıyla o şahsiyetin belli bir konu hakkında ne gibi düşüncelere sahip olduğunu araştırmak, o şahsiyete nispet edilen bir ekol, akım, mezhep, tarikat veya harekete mensup olmayı gerektirmez. Nitekim Whitehead hakkında yapılan bir çalışma o kişiyi bir Süreç Teolojisi taraftarı, Mevlâna Celalettin Rumî’yi araştırmak ya da düşüncelerinin taraftarı olmak o kişiyi Mevlevî tarikatı mensubu yapmayacağı gibi Said Nursî’yi araştırmak ve düşüncelerinden yararlanmak da o kişiyi Nurcu yapmaması gerekir. Fakat ülkemizde böyle bir ön yargı oluşmuştur. Bunun kırılmasını temenni ederiz.

Herkesin az veya çok, önceden, şimdi veya daha sonra evrende kötülüğün neden var olduğu ile ilgili birtakım soruları olmuş, oluyor ve olacaktır. Bu açıdan, bu çalışmamızın ufak da olsa bir fayda vermesi bizi gerçekten mutlu edecektir.

Kısa bir süre zarfında ve birçok meşguliyet ile birlikte yürütülmesi sebebiyle çalışmamızın içinde barındırdığı eksiklikler ve hatalardan dolayı okuyucularımızın bunu mazur görmesini talep ederiz.

Risaleleri daha iyi anlamada benden sonsuz yardımlarını esirgemeyen babam Bahaeddin Sağlam’a teşekkür ederim.

While reading Toni Morrison's Sula, one becomes familiar with the community of Bottom and its locals. However, the title of the novel suggests that the true focus is one person: Sula Peace. The relationship between her and her best friend Nel, as well as that between them and the rest of the town are examined, with inevitable questions arising, due to Sula's unconventional behaviour: to what extent is Sula considered to be evil, and in what ways is Nel dragged to the same conclusions? In a representation of two profoundly opposite characters, which at times seem to act like one self, these questions are fundamental and yet remain unanswered until the end of the novel when it emerges that in fact, rather than being evil, Sula lacks ambition but refuses social norms.

Dualism is defined as "two conceptually distinctive ideas that share no middle ground because the fluidity of the elements will threaten the existence of the dualism." (qtd in McDonald 1) And yet, the Victorian society seems to be built up relying on it. As is proposed by Robert Louis Stevenson people are driven to lead a dual life and forced to hide a part of their self which would be considered "wild" in the eyes of the society. This repression is doomed to sneak out at one point in our lives as reflections of ourselves or to show the society the "dual nature" of it which it so discreetly seeks to hide from, as perhaps a mirror. This paper aims to analyze how the dualism and the idea of the split identity in Robert Louis Stevenson's The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde and Oscar Wilde's The Picture of Dorian Gray works in order to depict the true "dual nature" of man and reflections of it in the hypocritical society of Victorian Era.

Barth responds to the modern lack of language for talking of evil by developing the concept of das Nichtige (CD III/3, §50). 'Das Nichtige'for which 'nothingness' is an insufficient translation-encompasses not only sin, but also the demonic dimension of evil, as well as physical suffering and death, without reducing it to a harmartiocentric perspective. Compared with traditional concepts, this leads to an almost unbearable incrimination on the idea of God. But it is only in this incrimination that the importance Barth places on the self-justification of God in Jesus Christ is made visible. Barth's Christological 'theodicy' provokes critical questions: for instance, whether his view that, ultimately, God alone can judge which suffering in our life is truly evil really takes our experiences seriously. But his 'theodicy' is, in any case, a valid alternative to the free will defense. Barth's concept of das Nichtige is still well worth considering, especially in times of pandemics and natural disasters.

This extended essay for the IB program evaluates the extent in which we can perceive Lord Voldemort as the misunderstood tragic hero of the Harry Potter series, rather than as the villainous archetype he is famously portrayed to be. To accomplish this, I at first establish the cultural particularity of Western morals the book is based in through analysis of its historical and axiological origins to introduce the lack of absoluteness and complexity when depicting Lord Voldemort as ‘bad guy’, as well as to introduce the underlining presence of Ancient Greek thought in the series.
This further helps establish the second argument that presents classic Aristotelian tragedy, as seen in Greek plays, in order to demonstrate the numerous resemblances Voldemort possesses with many of these iconic fallen heroes. Such supports the justification that he is further misunderstood when the reader does not realize such. This is notably done by recurrently running parallels between him and Lucifer from Paradise Lost.
Finally, with the help of scholarly articles analyzing and criticizing stereotypes found in popular literary media, I further evaluate the dynamic between the hero, Harry Potter, and the villain, Lord Voldemort, in order to demonstrate the manner relationships such as these reinforce the reader’s perception of villainy in Voldemort, while overlooking key factors that illustrate the depth of the character and tragedy of his actions.
Through the use of these three arguments, and the wide range of different moral and cultural perspectives analyzed while investigating the subject, I am able to come to the conclusion that Lord Voldemort is undoubtedly a fallen hero who is mistaken for a villain, adding to the tragedy of his striking character.

En las clases anteriores hemos concluido que una mirada contemplativa sobre el mundo nos lleva a descubrir su riqueza-y, sobre todo, la de las personas-y que, a partir de esa riqueza, es inevitable llegar racionalmente a la existencia de un Dios creador. La clave de toda prueba de la existencia de Dios (como, por ejemplo, las famosas "cinco vías" de Sto. Tomás de Aquino) radica no tanto en el proceso racional de las pruebasque es muy sencillo-, cuanto en la aceptación del punto de partida. De aquí que no haga falta ser un filósofo profesional para recorrer ese camino racional hacia Dios. Toda persona con una auténtica fe lo ha hecho, al menos implícitamente, en la medida en que su mirada haya sido verdaderamente receptiva, cuanto más sencilla mejor. Pero este itinerario racional hacia Dios tiene un obstáculo. Y esa dificultad teórica es, también, el mayor desafío práctico o existencial de nuestras vidas. Se trata del problema del mal. Que es EL problema. En el Catecismo de la Iglesia Católica se afirma que "no hay rasgo del mensaje cristiano que no sea en parte una respuesta a la cuestión del mal" (Nº 309). Pero aquí debemos afrontar filosóficamente este gran misterio. Se trata de un indispensable-¡el más importante!-paso previo a la fe. El planteo de Epicuro Se ha dicho que debemos al filósofo Epicuro, que vivió entre los siglos IV y III a. C., una de las primeras formulaciones precisas de este problema:

Foot argues that there are certain things that all human beings - perhaps all rational agents - need.  This gives a sense in which certain values and disvalues can be called 'objective'.  I suggest that, with certain relatively minor adjustments, her argument can be made cogent but that it cannot be used to show that there are objective answers to questions about what one should do when values conflict.  If Foot's own virtue ethics, utilitarianism, Kantian ethics or any other first-order moral system were to be established as objectively valid, this would require some completely different form of argumentation. 


Almost sixty years ago Philippa Foot published an article that began: To many people it seems that the most notable advance in moral philosophy during the past fifty years or so has been the refutation of naturalism; and they are a little shocked that at this late date such an issue should be reopened. It is easy to understand their attitude: given certain apparently unquestionable assumptions, it would be about as sensible to try to reintroduce naturalism as to try to square the circle. Those who see it like this have satisfied themselves that they know in advance that any naturalistic theory must have a catch in it somewhere, and are put out at having to waste more time exposing an old fallacy. This paper is an attempt to persuade them to look critically at the premises on which their arguments are based. 1 The paper in question was one of a number written by Foot around the time that were highly successful in reopening the issue of naturalism in ethics. Nowadays no one can just take it for granted that naturalism has been refuted, that there is a sharp distinction (or indeed any clear distinction) between fact and value or that it is impossible to derive an 'ought' from an 'is'. This is not to say that the naturalists have been completely victorious, of course; only that naturalism is today a live option. I shall argue that Foot's paper contains an important insight and an equally important mistake; and that the insight and the mistake are linked. I believe that the thinking behind it has influenced the subsequent course of moral philosophy to a quite remarkable extent and that this has been in some ways beneficial and in some ways harmful – not surprisingly, if I am right in seeing it as containing both truth and error. I do not want to exaggerate the influence of this one paper 2 but I do not know of any other that so neatly encapsulates the coupled insight and mistake. The anti-naturalism that Foot is attacking she characterises as follows: It would not be an exaggeration to say that the whole of moral philosophy, as it is now widely taught, rests on a contrast between statements of fact and evaluations, which runs something like this: The truth or falsity of statements of fact is shewn by means of evidence; and what counts as evidence is laid down in the meaning of the expressions occurring in the statement of fact … It follows that no two people can make the same statement and count completely different things as evidence; in the end one at least of them could be convicted of linguistic ignorance. It also follows that if a man is given good evidence for a factual conclusion he cannot just refuse to accept the conclusion on the ground that in his scheme of things this evidence is not evidence at all. 3 But, on the view she is criticising, [w]ith evaluations, however, it is different. An evaluation is not connected logically with the factual statements on which it is based. One man may say that a thing is good because of some fact about it, and another may refuse to take that fact as any evidence, for nothing is laid down in the meaning of 'good' which connects it with one piece of 'evidence' rather than another. It follows that a moral eccentric could argue to moral conclusions from quite idiosyncratic premises; he could say, for instance, that a man was a good man because he clasped and unclasped his hands and never turned NNE after

A general overview of the schemes by which the negative aliens manipulate and control our consciousness through interfacing with our Unconsciousness Mind has been presented. It is explicated that with the avaricious need to siphon our personal and planetary energetics, they primarily commonly incite self-destructive impulses in us through the imposition of holographic inserts in our planetary logos as well as our morphogenetic structure through genetic implants that act as frequency fences. These primarily negate our innate traits of consciousness expansion and experiencing multidimensional consciousness, as well as impose genetic mutations and miasma that lead to our ageing and eventual physical death. Then, they proceed with their soul capture technology to recycle our souls through their Astral Plane after blank slating (mind wiping) our fruitful consciousness memories, as well as either implanting painful fake memories, or selectively allowing us to retain those devastating memories attained during Galactic wars and holocaust incidences, that suit their parasitic energetic harvesting and usage by a way of introducing artificial timelines of reality for us.  Then during futile reincarnations within these artificial timelines of blended reality, through a variety of mind control and mind sliding programming that use egoic filters, as well as self-defeating negative emotional impulses or triggers, and by a way of promoting derailed belief systems that lead to provoke self-destructive behaviors, they manage to bring down our natural frequency-light quotient of consciousness, leading us to produce the much needed congealed low consciousness energies of loosh for them that is suitable for their parasitic-vampiric energetic harvesting and consumption as bottom feeders. Although the details of the type of genetic implants used as frequency fences together with the particular accounts of and genetic mutation and genetic hybridization deployed are left to companion papers, the case of “2/4 Split” implant is briefly discussed with a particular reference to the so-called ‘Alien Love Bite Scenario’ so appropriate during this time of Pres-Ascension that seems to occupy the mind of many individuals in this fake so-called “New Age of Spirituality.” Accordingly, it is elucidated that this, in essence, is a result of a ‘Shadow Body’ that as an AI-generated imposter spirit attaches itself to the morphogenetic system of certain people bringing much mayhem and chaos in their energetic field with these individuals being under the impression that they are highly attracted or bonded at their level of 4D Astral Heart or their 2D instinctual sexual chakric layer to such imposter spirts, presuming them to be their so-called “Twin Flames.” As for the detailed description of the mind controlling and mind sliding techniques, as well as the type of egoic filters, as well as self-defeating negative emotional impulses or triggers that promote derailed belief systems inciting self-destructive behaviors in humans, these are also covered in separate companion manuscripts. Finally, a brief discussion of the fib of “Duality” promoted by the negative aliens, in which they presume this to be a symbiotic aspect of Cosmic Creation, is presented that defies and rebuts the contention that good and evil must coexist together and that they are dual polar aspects of each other by necessity, or that the negative aliens and us as organic living beings have a mutual symbiotic relation together, with us providing the much needed energies for these fallen entitles to be able to prolong their futile existence.

In today’s modern and supposedly rational society, mention of the biblical concept of the “Fall of Man” could seem incongruous and even irrelevant. How can such an archaic concept, requiring complete denial of Darwin’s theory of evolution as the beginning of the human race, stand alongside modernity? Regardless of one's personal religious views, the story of Adam and Eve's fall from grace is loaded with symbolism and ideas regarding our humanity which cannot, and should not, be overlooked.

I articulate and defend a conception of evil action. Many philosophers who ruminate about evil suppose that some particular concept should be foundational in a theory of evil, such that other related concepts can be derived from it. On one popular view, evil action is foundational such that all other related concepts--say, the concept of evil personhood--must be derived from it. In this paper, I argue that there is no good reason to suppose that evil action must play this foundational role. Second, I argue that it is not possible to derive evil personhood from evil action--roughly, any adequate account of evil personhood must explicate what it is to have an evil character, and no account of evil action itself can do this. Finally, I propose and defend my favored conception of evil action that is derived from my favored conception of evil personhood. The consequence of this argument is that evil personhood, not evil action, is foundational in a theory of evil.

(Note: this draft is a seriously revised version of my "Evil Action and the Priority of Evil Personhood.")

King Lear is one of the most famous tragedies by the great Elizabethan playwright William Shakespeare. Perhaps this is the most exceptional play by Shakespeare not only for its protagonist’s being an old-aged man who is nearly at the end of his life, but also for its artistic blending of good and evil forces through the whole action-line of the play. Here, as the protagonist is an old king, it is expected that he should have possessed some worldly wisdom being experienced by his lifetime achievements in this world. But unfortunately, the actual happening is the other way round – King Lear, the old king, is trapped by the devilish activities of the evil forces. And this very play, King Lear, is often criticized for its contents of too much exaggeration of the evil forces and their frequent victory over the good ones rejecting the traditional ‘poetic justice’.

Tüm sistemlere karşı bir filozof olan Nietzsche, ahlak kuramına da karşıdır. Ahlak konusunu sert bir şekilde eleştirmiştir. Ki zaten Nietzsche'nin felsefesindeki asıl sorunsalının hakikat ve ahlak kuramının varlığı veya yokluğu meselesi olduğu söylenebilir. O, değerleri yeniden değerlendiren bir filozof olarak ahlak konusunu da ele almaktan geri durmamıştır.

Only five figurative capitals of Romanesque style still exist in Chartres Cathedral – all in its North-West-Tower, probably sculptured in the late 1130ies. Overshadowed by the splendor of Gothic architecture and art at Chartres, they have not received the attention they deserve by their artistic qualities. Three of them show intriguing scenes of combat, in dynamic composition but of doubtful meaning. Do they illustrate established narrations, possibly from antique mythology retold in medieval times? If not: Do they echo visual models of the time, e.g. from Vézelay? And/or do they reflect a spirit of mind common to the Romanesque époque, in which all this-worldly phenomena are sensed against the background of the eternal combat between Good and Evil? Their placement at a lateral, now internal double entrance to the tower is also revealing as to the building history of what is now the West front of Chartres with its famous Portail Royal. - See also the "Post Scriptum 2022" (second file). - French translation: „Fantaisie savante“. Chapiteaux historiés, tour nord de la cathédrale de Chartres, in: Cahier de la Société Archéologique d’Eure-et-Loir, Nr. 3/2017, pgs. 153–184, also on Academia.

There is a permanent need for asking what is evil, whether is exists or not and how can human beings handle with it. This study argues that evil have a real content (somethingsomeone)
and that it can be defined around the following elements: excess and extreme intensity, suffering, false and tricky knowledge (trickster is called also the devil) , and cruel
intention. We can speak on objective (destructive) evil when there is quantitative or qualitative excess and on moral evil when there is an excessive suffering than can be hardly
understood.
As to origin, evil (as chaos, violence and conflict) is previous to mankind, as it is shown in the unnecessary and excessive cruelty that takes place among animals or at the universe.
Therefore if we accept the existence of God it must be also accepted that such a God includes evil and not only goodness. The opposite only can be supported in terms of a
psychological need of human beings but not in terms of requirements of divine essence.
This conclusion derives from the study of the Bible (Genesis, Book of Job, Revelation), Enoch and Qumran, Hesiod, Zoroaster, Ugarit, Enuma Elish and mysticism. For those
non-believers the term God can translated by “a mysterious and ambivalent reality that constitutes a complex and ordered system”. In fact, human being, God, reality, and
therefore also evil, are characterized by ambivalence.
Therefore, human beings must accept evil’s existence and renounce to justify it as a precondition
to face it. Some of the arms-tools to fight against evil (i.e. Hope) are also ambivalent, and even evil can use against evil with some conditions. Nevertheless, the main
tool to fight evil in such a context is a new kind of amplified reason applied to a relating and integrating approach to wisdom-knowledge where religion, philosophy, psychology
and science can work together. This approach can be more successful when we take the branches of knowledge that combine deepening with experimenting.

The paper focuses on two graphic novels from Mike Mignola, namely Hellboy: Seed of Destruction and Hellboy: Wake the Devil. It analyses the notions of good and evil, their relationship and the way they are portrayed, both visually as well as verbally. The theoretical part of the work is centered around the comics medium, specifically focusing on the graphic novel plus the depiction of good and evil. The second part then shows how this theory relates to the analysis of the two above-mentioned works.

ABSTRACT: Concepts of “good” and “evil” are concepts that cannot be evaluated independent of one another but that most of the time cannot be separated from one another with certain lines. The concepts of “bad” and “evil”, which express matters that harm people themselves or their environment, have always led to attempts to avoid these and the seeking of goodness. Humanity, which is contained within the efforts to avoiding evil and reaching goodness whose sources are sought after in many places, reflects the perceptions and acceptances belonging to evil, the feelings and attitudes that it developed against that based on its own lives, feelings, thoughts, beliefs, ideals, and dreams towards the verbal narratives that it brought about. The first texts that emerged from the battle between “good and evil” within verbal narratives are mythical texts. Legends that are a continuation of these have become texts in which this battle rages on throughout the ages over different characters. Especially new religious assumptions that deeply affect the life of society cause various perceptions and acceptances in the narratives of Turks who had accepted Islam and caused the emergence of new motifs that perform different functions. In one Turkish legend after the conversion to Islam the Legend of the Battal Ghazi (Battalnâme), while the hero, who has no purpose other than the effect of Islam and the spread of this religion, symbolizes good, his battles with various fantastic- mythical entities that symbolize evil are witnessed, apart from the non-Islamic soldiers with whom he fights. These entities have not only added extraordinary significance to epic texts but have created examples of the battle between good and evil reflected in verbal products after the mythical texts.

ÖZ: “İyi” ve “kötü” kavramları, birbirinden bağımsız olarak değerlendirilemeyen ancak çoğu zaman da kesin çizgilerle birbirinden ayrılamayan kavramlardır. İnsanın kendisine ve çevresine zarar veren hususları ifade eden “kötü” ve “kötülük” kavramları, onun her zaman bundan kaçınmaya çalışmasına ve iyiliği aramasına neden olmuştur. Kaynağı pek çok farklı yerde aranan kötülük karşısında kaçınma ve iyiliğe ulaşma çabası içerisinde olan insanoğlu, kötülüğe dair algı ve kabullerini, ona karşı beslediği duygu ve tutumlarını, kendi hayatlarından, duygularından, düşüncelerinden, inançlarından, ideallerinden ve hayallerinden yola çıkarak meydana getirdiği sözlü anlatılara da yansıtmıştır. Sözlü anlatılar içerisinde “iyi-kötü” çatışmasından doğan ilk metinler, mitik metinlerdir. Onların bir devamı niteliğinde olan destanlar da bu mücadelenin farklı karakterler üzerinden çağlar boyunca işlendiği metinler olmuştur. Özellikle toplum hayatını derinden etkileyen yeni din kabulleri, İslamiyet’i kabul eden Türklerin anlatılarında da çeşitli algı ve kabullerin değişmesine veya farklı fonksiyonlar icra eden yeni motiflerin doğmasına neden olmuştur. İslamiyet’ten sonraki Türk destanlarından birisi olan Battal Gazi Destanı’nda (Battalnâme’de) da İslamiyet’in etkisi ile bu dini yayma gayesinden başka hiçbir amacı olmayan kahramanın, iyiliği sembolize ederken, karşısında savaştığı kâfir askerleri dışında, kötülüğü simgeleyen çeşitli fantastik-masalsı varlıklarla da mücadelelerine şahit olunur. Bu varlıklar, destan metnine sadece olağanüstülük katmakla kalmamış, aynı zamanda mitik metinlerden itibaren sözlü ürünlere yansıyan iyi-kötü çatışmasının örneklerini de oluşturmuşlardır.

Good and evil run as threads through society in varying forms, from the moral issues of one society to the taboo nature of what is believed to be on the wrong side of the law in another. Many people make judgements about good and evil based on expectations of human culture and conscience. But the real issue is whether people consider good and evil to be dynamic forces or simply the 'must do-mustn't do' preferences that human lives are ruled by. The author of this paper intends to outline the nature of good and evil as forces that reside within the human experience rather than external protagonists, as in reality anything in creation can ultimately be deemed destructive except from a short-term viewpoint. Negative effects are not possible in a creative universe; otherwise creation would not have occurred. Good and evil are polar concepts that provide psychological tools to respond to the chaotic nature of life experience, yet they make it impossible to reflect on the longer-term implications of individual actions.

Question: Have you noticed how the Galaxy in Star Wars is always in revolving around two different phases? Either it is in a state of peace in the form of a single hegemonic galactic government (such as the Galactic Republic or Galactic Empire), or it is in a state of civil war, anarchy, and chaos. What is the explanation for this?

A reader may find the prospect of comparing Dracula and the Pied Piper rather odd. The paper concerns Vlad the Impaler, not the legend of Dracula as expounded by Bram Stoker. Vlad Dracula was a historical figure while the Pied Piper is shrouded in the grey zone of legends that seem to have a historical core. However, there are areas where a discussion of the two figures merge. Both provoke  discussions on profound issues such as the validity of the words :good and evil."

Od zarania dziejów refleksji filozoficznej mamy do czynienia z ciekawością człowieka, który nie tylko chce poznawać granice tego, co właśnie poznawczo – pod wieloma względami – jest dostępne, ale pragnie sięgać dalej – poza. Niejednokrotnie okazywało się, że wydumane spekulacje na temat świata, człowieka czy ciał niebieskich okazywały się dalekie od tego „jak się rzeczy mają”. Homo sapiens nigdy się jednak nie poddał i nadal szuka wszelkich możliwych sposobów intelektualnego i naukowego okiełznania nie tylko otaczającego go (wszech)świata, ale i siebie samego. Liczne problemy, mimo wytężonej pracy pokoleń badaczy, wciąż pozostają nierozwiązane i nie zanosi się, aby ten stan rzeczy uległ zmianie w najbliższym czasie, by wspomnieć tylko problem psychofizyczny czy pytanie o to, jakie jeszcze tajemnice skrywają czarne dziury.

Mając nadzieję, że prezentowany zbiór przyczyni się do owocnego i pogłębionego namysłu nad rzeczywistością, w ramach (…) wprowadzenia do lektury studiów, pozwolę sobie (…) przytoczyć słowa Hartmanna: „problemy metafizyczne kryją się wszędzie na zapleczu poszczególnych działów filozofii. W każdym z nich wyłaniają się za pytaniami od razu uchwytnymi. Ograniczają w ten sposób cały obszar problematyki filozoficznej, okazują się ograniczającym wszystkie problemy horyzontem, w którym każdy kierunek ma inną zupełnie treść i inną wagę. Całokształt treści aporii zawartych w tym horyzoncie składa się na naturalną metafizykę problemów, których nie można uchylić”[1].

[1] N. Hartmann, Systematyczna autoprezentacja, dz. cyt., s. 127-128.

Our experience of evil is complex and profound. Scientific and theological attempts to provide a rational explanation for evil fall short of providing an exhaustive explanation. Three attempts to explain evil are examined here: (1) Ernest Becker's Science of Man; (2) the account offered by sociobiology and evolutionary psychology to explain the violence of Homo sapiens by appeal to the Selfish Gene; and (3) theological attempts to resolve the theodicy problem. We will give special attention to the evil of science in World War Two, referring to the role of Social Darwinism in the Holocaust and the role of physics in developing the atomic bomb. The thesis is this: we understand much more about evil than we can explain.

The problem of Good and Evil which is considered in the philosophical literature of Azerbaijan, as I will show in my article, is an example of a typical theology. The problem of good and evil in our philosophical literature is explained only on religious grounds and classical traditional logical conditions. From this point of view, İn my articles which titled of the Evil Ontology, I tried to look at a different way the viewpoint of the problem, especially in the form of the 20th century European philosophy - the existence of evil as a social being.

Dans ces pages,  je mets en relation le concept du mal, dont j’expose les deux  conceptions fondamentales, avec le concept de la mémoire tant individuelle que collective. Je pars de la définition augustinienne de la mémoire comme force de l’âme et démonter, à l’aide de documents et d’exemples tirés de mes dix années de travail sur le film Shoah, pourquoi une « mémoire du mal » au sens propre est impossible sur le plan individuel, et un problème non négligeable sur le plan collectif.

Double-Effect Reasoning (DER) implies the coexistence of good and evil in certain affairs; for a good outcome to appear, the possible evil side effects in its company or deviating from it are foreseen-but-not-intended. In Paradise Lost, God's creation serves His eternal plan, which is in essence good. The evil that follows, through Satan's rebellion, Adam and Eve's disobedience, ecological deterioration , and the Son of God's sacrifice, also happen under God's plan. These evil happenings, as paradoxes within good ends, follow the ethical principle of DER. Hence Milton's paradoxes in justifying God's ways in creation and His prelapsarian plan for the perfection of humankind through the Fall. The ambiguities of God's plan, in bringing good out of evil, can thus be explained through DER as an inevitable theological issue, which tries to explain the archetypal symbiosis between contradictions.

Como es sabido, el cristianismo nació de la prédica del judío Jesús de Nazaret, cuyas enseñanzas corresponden principalmente a un judaísmo fariseo impregnado de algunos elementos esenios. Gran parte de las doctrinas que muchos consideran como contribución moral del cristianismo provienen, en realidad, de enseñanzas judías previas. No obstante, queda abierto el interrogante de acerca de si la Iglesia es esencialmente judía, o si se trata de un fenómeno religioso nuevo y esencialmente diferente. En este ensayo nos referiremos a esta problemática subrayando algunas diferencias importantes entre el catolicismo y el judaísmo ortodoxo más estricto. Queda implícito, sin embargo, que entre el catolicismo y el judaísmo conservador (masortí) no existen diferencias morales esenciales. Existen dos judaísmos: uno que es casi católico y otro que es muy diferente. Y ambos judaísmos tienen raíces judías.

A common trait of the exhaustive modern interpretation history of the paradise story in Gen 2–3 is a disregard for the role of aesthetics and in particular the senses.It seems that after gripping the fruit of knowledge, as induced by the senses, the trust in the use of the senses for acquiring knowledge of good and bad is lost.
I invert the common reading: tasting the attractive fruits in the creation myth is not the origin of sin but the origin of the senses and hence the origin of the capability of humans to grasp the good (and eventually the bad). In order to make this argument, I shall examine the Hebrew concept of “good” ( ) טוב as an aesthetical and ethical concept in Gen 2–3. Indeed a paradox seems to be that knowledge is gained through disobedience. I shall focus on the role of the sensory perception as a means to acquiring ethical perception in this narrative and other wisdom literature in the Hebrew Bible, mainly the book of Proverbs