Seems like an easy one. Evil is evil, right? Wait, was that circular? Damn.
If we define it as a noun, instead of an adjective or adverb, it will make it easier. Is it suffering, misfortune or intentional wrongdoing? Does it count if your feelings are hurt because you interpreted what I was doing as mean? Suffering is definitively subjective and personal. I have a harder time suffering fools than broken bones. Misfortune is part of most lives, so also not important to the discussion. Your feelings are on you, not me. Baring a cosmic entity of evil, “the Devil”, we are left with intentional wrongdoing to cause harm.
Dictionaries have changed the definition over the years, but the base stays the same. Strangely, it also gets more complex over the years. our web of concern expands.
evil (noun) moral depravity; injury; affliction. (Webster Peerless Office, Home and School. 1939)
evil (noun) · evils (plural noun) (Bing online Dictionary, reference to Oxford Languages, 2024)
(1) profound immorality and wickedness, especially when regarded as a supernatural force.
Similar: wickedness, a badness, wrongdoing, sinful, ungodliness, immorality, vice, inequity, turpitude, degeneracy, vileness, baseness, perversion, corruption, depravity, villainy, nefariousness, atrocity, malevolence, devilishness, peccability. Opposite: goodness
(2) a manifestation of profound immorality and wickedness, especially in people’s actions.
Similar: abomination, atrocity, obscenity, outrage Opposite: blessing
(3) something which is harmful or undesirable.
Similar: harm, pain, hurt, misery, sorrow, suffering Opposite: benefits
I think we need to emphasize the intentional part of this. An act done with the intent of providing good service or positive outcomes, that doesn’t meet expectations is not necessarily evil. An evil act is like a premeditated crime, it is carried out with forethought and intent. There isn’t much doubt that the act is wrong and evil as a label just indicates a level of wrongdoing beyond normal expectations, heinous in nature. I like the word heinous, here. It fits well and sets edges to the discussion.
Not everything is going to qualify as evil, not many actions are inherently good or evil in and of themselves. Sex is useful as an example. For most people, sex is just a pleasant act between two people. So, lets change that. What does your religion have to say about it? Anything? What about two men or two women? Instead of two consenting adults, let’s make it one forcing and the other unwilling, rape. Is it bad? How about an adult and a child? An adult forcing a child? An adult enticing a child? That’s the spectrum from something that we barely think about to something that makes most of us a little angry.
It gets a little blurry when we start trying to apply the idea of evil to society. There are so many perspectives that knowing right and wrong becomes difficult. What one group considers good is a sin to another, like alcohol. Is the manufacture, sale and consumption of alcohol good or evil in itself? Does the type matter? Again, what does your religion tell you? Is evil, defined by religion or can it be defined in another way?
Morality is personal. It is impossible to have collective morality. That is not to say that a group cannot have an aggregate of beliefs and actions that can be classified as good or evil. So, now we have two more categories to contend with, personal and collective morality.
What fun!
The New Word Wars 