I'm writing an essay on relativism in LOTR

[Blackheart]

*Tries to imagine catfight between arwen and Eowyn*


No way. Now if Melkor had been in charge.....

[Wulažg]

So now you're saying that silliness is evilness? Uh oh, that means that ALL the really smart people (eg all of Caltech) is profoundly evil since they are the silliest people around.

[Blackheart]

I rest my case. They are some of the most evil bastards I know, and I see them at all the meetings

[Wulažg]

What about the innocently silly? I know a few (very few) of those and you cannot possibly say that those are evil people. If you do, I'll be forced to beat you over the head with the toughest thing around, another orc''s skull.

[Blackheart]

Innocent my left buttock!

It's obvious that they have chosen to sublimate their evil into sillyness, as a way of avoiding the negative social repercussions of evil behavior.

Pack of degenerates.

[Beleg Strongbow]

example given: Merry & Pippin

[Wulažg]

I'm not talking about people like Merry and Pippin, they were downright mischeivous. i'm talking about people that are silly in the right, nice way. There are a few around if you look. Back to the main topic though...

[Blackheart]

Well then, if you want to talk about the main topic, explain to me how you can have relativism in a universe with a creator?

Hmm, unless of course the creator purposefully imposes a system of relativism.

I don't see much evidence that is the case however.

[Beleg Strongbow]

could you not justify greed as evil?
and while we're at it, let's get a solid definition of 'evil' here.

[Blackheart]

Solid? or Working.

A good Working definition could be:

"In direct opposition to Eru's will."

Now all you have to do is figure out what Eru's will is and you've nailed down both Good and Evil.

[Wulažg]

Woo Hoo! Vector analysis since even Morgoth most of the time was not in exact opposition to Eru's will(I think)

[Wulažg]

Woo Hoo! Vector analysis since even Morgoth most of the time was not in exact opposition to Eru's will(I think)

[Blackheart]

Well, If you want to, but you could reduce it to a single axis, and then why bother with vectors?

[Wulažg]

But one axis is simple! It is't fun unless it involves imaginary numbers. One axis but imaginary numbers so there are really two axes. Hah!

[Blackheart]

You are one of those people who says they like salt and pepper on their salad, and then complain because there's no garlic powder on the table right?

If you want to make it more complicated than it is go ahead. I'm sure any academic facility will consider you for a position, along with all the other .... complex people.

[Wulažg]

You mean the messed up/silly/evil(by your definition) people, aka techers, engineers and physicists?

[Blackheart]

Yeaaah, them.

[Beleg Strongbow]

Please, people. The reason I asked for a definition of evil was because, without a definition, you can argue that nothing is evil.
For Example:
Melkor: NOT EVIL because everything he did was towards Eru's will.
Sauron: NOT EVIL because of above and because he was only serving.
Balrogs: NOT EVIL because they were following the philosophy (that of Melkor and Sauron) that they thought was right.
Ungoliant: NOT EVIL because she was just doing what she had to to survive.
The Witch-King: NOT EVIL as a man, because you could say that he just wanted the ring to serve his people better with, also NOT EVIL as a Ringwraith because he didn't have a choice in his actions; he was controlled by Sauron. (same argument for all Ringwraiths)
Bill Ferny: He's got to eat, doesn't he? What's to say that earning a living his way is worse than slaying innocent Orcs on a picnic?

I invite anyone to suggest names that qualify as evil.
Note: I really do think that all of the above are evil, but I'm showing how it can't be proven.

[Blackheart]

It can't be proven only because we don't have enough information about what Eru's will for his creation is.

However, if I posit, for example, that it was against Eru's will for Melkor to try and claim Arda as his own, and assume lordship, and it was Eru's will that Manwe be the rightful lord of Arda, then guess what?

Melkor is acting in an evil manner, because he is acting contrary to Eru's will.

With the rest of that list, I think you're wanting to use an epistomological argument, similar to "I didn't know it was against the law".

I don't buy that a creature has to knowingly commit an evil act, for the act to be evil. An entity can commit an evil act in ignorance.

Oh by the way, to be more accurate, it's really muddling to state that an entity is evil, when your definition of evil is based on actions. You can say that an entity consistantly acts in an evil manner, but to say that an entity is actually evil, is just a form of shorthand.

In order to actually define an entity as evil, you're going to have to come up with a different definition of evil, and it would have to be some odd idea of evil as an actual substance, which is, in my opinion, rather difficult to do in the context of Arda.

[Wulažg]

Now we're going to have to go to fate and the fact that some evil is a necessary part of Eru's plan(to make people stronger etc.)