The word evil is often associated with the profound immorality of being malevolent and vile. Society has adopted their own version of protection against evil by creating laws and regulations for their citizens to live in, with the goal of a perfect community. Philosophically, evil falls under the idea of a necessary step in the march of history and the moral categorization of the natural world. The general morale of what we decided is evil can be traced back to the Bible, whose standard of ethics has contributed to law system of the government. In her book “Evil in modern thought”, American philosopher Susan Neiman, then distinctly separates moral evil versus natural evil. By understanding this difference we are able to learn what it truly
…show more content…
This moral standard is characterized by both indirect and direct peer pressure. Notably, this standard is entirely dependent upon the social environment in which the person is in. A middle class white male individual raised in a predominantly racist community such as Birmingham, Alabama is likely to adopt racist customs. This would include owning multiple slaves and or having hatred towards African Americans. Although those practices are presently immoral, the individual in that era would not be aware of the flaw with the problem because he been raised with those ethics. Despite not being aware of his wrongdoing, the individual continues to remain at fault for performing sinful acts, and is therefore …show more content…
Neiman examines two different historical case studies: the Lisbon earthquake of 1755 and the Nazi holocaust. The cases present the separation of natural from moral evil. This distinction relies amidst intention, which we are held responsible, and consequences, in which we might not be. She states a common mistake is accepting the word evil and referring it to acts of inhumanity and occurrences of human suffering. The Lisbon earthquake and other similar natural events are examples of human tragedies, in which nature can not be blamed for. In contrast to the holocaust where there are multitude of individuals performing evil
This moral standard is characterized by both indirect and direct peer pressure. Notably, this standard is entirely dependent upon the social environment in which the person is in. A middle class white male individual raised in a predominantly racist community such as Birmingham, Alabama is likely to adopt racist customs. This would include owning multiple slaves and or having hatred towards African Americans. Although those practices are presently immoral, the individual in that era would not be aware of the flaw with the problem because he been raised with those ethics. Despite not being aware of his wrongdoing, the individual continues to remain at fault for performing sinful acts, and is therefore …show more content…
Neiman examines two different historical case studies: the Lisbon earthquake of 1755 and the Nazi holocaust. The cases present the separation of natural from moral evil. This distinction relies amidst intention, which we are held responsible, and consequences, in which we might not be. She states a common mistake is accepting the word evil and referring it to acts of inhumanity and occurrences of human suffering. The Lisbon earthquake and other similar natural events are examples of human tragedies, in which nature can not be blamed for. In contrast to the holocaust where there are multitude of individuals performing evil