If good and evil do exist everybody and their actions must be considered as either good or evil. The question though is who determines a person and their actions as good or evil. Both Friedrich Nietzsche and Joseph R. Farinaccio define good and evil differently from one another in their books. Joseph R. Farinaccio tells what good and evil are from a Christian worldview and that it is God who allowed both good and evil to exist. Friedrich Nietzsche, on the other hand, tells how the meaning of the words good and evil changed over time to match the people's wills.
In Friedrich Nietzsche Beyond Good and Evil he explains that the meaning of both words is never the same because they always change over time. The example that he uses is the word good which he says has had the opposite meaning at one point in time. The reason …show more content…
For example, when a part of a church branches off from the main church and change some of the beliefs to fit their group they could also change what things that were considered bad to something that is not good so that they can do things that they couldn't at the church before.
I believe that both arguments is correct and have facts that can be proved. Since things like double standards exists it can be proven that the definition of good and evil have most likely changed. Also, since things are different in each country something that is considered good in one country might be considered bad in another country and vice verse.
In conclusion good and evil are words that can be defined but the definition will probably be different for each and every person. But since it is people who change the definition of the two words that means that it is people who decide who and what are good. This can also be different from person to person because someone might consider one person good but another person might not consider them to be
In Friedrich Nietzsche Beyond Good and Evil he explains that the meaning of both words is never the same because they always change over time. The example that he uses is the word good which he says has had the opposite meaning at one point in time. The reason …show more content…
For example, when a part of a church branches off from the main church and change some of the beliefs to fit their group they could also change what things that were considered bad to something that is not good so that they can do things that they couldn't at the church before.
I believe that both arguments is correct and have facts that can be proved. Since things like double standards exists it can be proven that the definition of good and evil have most likely changed. Also, since things are different in each country something that is considered good in one country might be considered bad in another country and vice verse.
In conclusion good and evil are words that can be defined but the definition will probably be different for each and every person. But since it is people who change the definition of the two words that means that it is people who decide who and what are good. This can also be different from person to person because someone might consider one person good but another person might not consider them to be