Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
The former kind of method of analysis is called "descriptive", because it attempts to describe what people actually view as good or evil; while the latter is called "normative", because it tries to actively prohibit evils and cherish goods. These descriptive and normative approaches can be complementary.
Psychologist Dr. Scott Lyons says that word toxic literally means “harmful or poisonous,” “so when you’re talking about a toxic personality, it’s a trait or behavior that can cause harm ...
Endless possibility can be overwhelming, leading man to grasp at anything, distracting and busying himself, in order to not have to make a real, committed choice. The second stage of evil is 'wickedness,' when caprice is embraced as a deformed substitute for genuine will and becomes characteristic." [3] Wickedness connotes blameworthiness. [4]
The distinction of evil from 'bad' is complex. Evil is more than simply 'negative' or 'bad' (i.e. undesired or inhibiting good) as evil is on its own, and without reference to any other event, morally incorrect. The validity of 'moral evil' as a term, therefore, rests on the validity of morals in ethics.
Since the moral character of a person is an intrinsic psychological characteristic and cannot be measured directly, [9] some scholars and statutes have used the phrase "behaved as a person of good moral character". [10] People must have good moral character determined as a fact of law in predominately two contexts – (1) state-issued licensure ...
Under his first pattern of analysis an ethical statement has two parts: a declaration of the speaker's attitude and an imperative to mirror it, so "'This is good' means I approve of this; do so as well." [30] The first half of the sentence is a proposition, but the imperative half is not, so Stevenson's translation of an ethical sentence ...
When people judge efficient means and legitimate ends at the same time, both can be considered as good. However, when ends are judged separately from means, it may result in a conflict: what works may not be right; what is right may not work. Separating the criteria contaminates reasoning about the good.
There’s no one method or formula to determine if a movie is good or bad — we’re left to rely on accolades and box office numbers to measure a film’s impact on culture.