|
Absolute Evil (2009)
IMDB rating: 5.80
Plot: Southern Texas. Savannah and Cooper, a young couple in love, drive through the desert in a black 70s Cadillac convertible. Unaware that they are being followed, they check into a motel at the Mexican border. When Savannah leaves to buy food, a cop sneaks into the room, pulls his gun on Cooper, accuses him of murder and tries to arrest him. But Savannah, who had become suspicious, manages to turn the tables: She surprises the cop, ties him up and frees Cooper. But just as the young lovers jump into their car, a stranger steps out of the shadows and kills Cooper at point blank… Three weeks later. Hollywood, California. In a hotel suite overlooking the Sunset Strip, a man is being water boarded by a private detective. The information he needs is: “Who killed Babyface?” When the man refuses to cooperate and shows nothing but contempt for his captor, the torture continues. Layer by layer, the truth about Cooper alias Babyface is revealed. A complex web of murder, revenge, atonement and forgiveness unfolds, culminating in the ultimate question: What is the definition of absolute evil?
|
Directors: Lommel Ulli
Actors: Carradine David,Joiner Rusty,Lommel Ulli,Kriesa Christopher,Irvingsen Mark,Behm Christian,Benefiel Matthew,Bjorlin Ulf,Burks Jason,Davenport Eric,Dias Ramos Raphael,Elkins Johnny,Drama,Thriller,
Atheists, do you believe that absolute moral laws exist?
A little detail (If you say ‘no’):
If you truly believed that there was no such thing as absolute morality then there would be no ‘right’ or ‘wrong,’ just things that you or your society happen not to like. Rape and child molestation would not be wrong, they would just become man made objections. The question then becomes: ‘If man is the measure of all things - which man? - which society? If someone with enough power happened to like rape and molestation, what right would we have to impose our morality on him? What would be wrong with the person, or society, with the power imposing their morality on you? Why do we condemn the Nazi society for following their self-imposed morals? Why did the Nazi society not have the right to break from the tradition of morality in western civilizations?
There is no question that societies have different interpretations of morality but if you examine the following sentence you will see the illogic of thinking that societies determine morality. "The majority of the people in our society participated in that evil deed." If morality was up to society, that sentence would never make sense, but we know that morality is beyond societies and such a proposition is possible.
You have denied that absolute moral laws exist but you appeal to them all the time. You say that rape IS wrong because you know that it IS wrong and not just against your personal preference
You really don’t get it do you.
Morality is subjective. It depends on your upbringing, environment and what the majority of "society" believe.
That can be different in the jungles of S.America than in the Middle of the USA or Europe.
In general people do not do things which hurt others unless they believe it is for the greater good.
There are always those in a society who will consider morality different.
Jackson P | Jan 25, 2010
There are no absolute moral laws…only societal laws, and all societies change over the years. The moral laws change with them, we no longer believe in slavery, we now believe that women have equal rights. This are all morals that have changed. Go back to the time of early christianity, morally it was ok to have many wifes, nowadays it’s not ok. So there are no moral absolutes…only what the society at the time considers to be moral.
Abc | Jan 25, 2010
I do believe there are common sense morals. Things people just KNOW are bad.
Like physically harming people or animals, killing people or animals, stealing, etc.
Nakota | Jan 25, 2010
If by absolute you mean as humans or even better yet as denizens of the planet Earth, then I believe that the answer is "yes", I do believe that there are moral absolutes.
If you mean "absolute" relative to the universe at large, then I guess there would not be. The morality that we as cognizant life forms on the Earth exercise is absolutely subjective. But it very much matters to us how we treat each other (and how we in turn are treated), and that really is good enough.
Spunky The Metaphysical | Jan 25, 2010
Morality is based on the popular opinion of what is right or wrong.
Right or wrong is based on biological processes that happen in the brain during given circumstances. The Golden rule is the basis of this, and that is based in neurology. Studies have already proven this. The outcome of the majority of the people in a population given a certain circumstance creates the societal morals of the population.
Martin (atheist) | Jan 25, 2010
how is that different than the israelites killing every man woman and child (except for untouched women they could use for sex)–and carve the fetus from the body of the pregnant women killed. This is the shining example of a biblical absolute morality you support? Use your head sir.
tylertxanreborn | Jan 25, 2010
No, and I believe that the christain relativistic morality is relatively retarded.
I mean, how can anyone think that there is nothing they can do to really oppress or endanger the existence of anyone, or all they have to do for any of their own wrongdoings is say "jesus". How can these people be entrusted with any kind of moral judgment?
Meet Ram-knee, Corp. Pimp-Hoar | Jan 25, 2010
I believe in the pre 4E D&D alignment system with two axes of alignment, good-neutral-evil, and lawful-neutral-chaotic
Yellowchopsticks | Jan 25, 2010
rule of law comes first, then our individual morals. whether you get them from religion, instinct, or just plain common sense.
Luke | Jan 25, 2010
No, I don’t. I guess I’ll read the rest of your question now.
Well, right off the bat you’re coming up with crazy conclusions. Of course there’s "right" and "wrong", it just isn’t objective. Rape and child molestation are wrong because they violate our societal values.
The Nazis violated people’s morals, laws, values, ethics, etc. and those people responded to stop them. I don’t know why that’s hard to grasp.
In your example of "The majority of the people in our society participated in that evil deed" you seem to be assuming that people are incapable of acting in opposition to their own values which is, of course, ridiculous.
Finally, I don’t say that rape is wrong because I have some a priori knowledge of good and evil instilled in my very soul by an omnipotent deity. I say that rape is wrong because I have accepted and internalized the values of my society. I understand that rape runs counter to those values and so I reject it. This isn’t rocket surgery.
serf | Jan 25, 2010
You are very stupid and lack common sense. Atheist and Agnostic do have a sense of absolute morality. Ours is based on the need of civilization for survival. In order to survive we need moral codes to tell us not to kill and commit other crimes. This is pure common sense that does not need supersticious crap.
princejohn | Jan 25, 2010
No, I do not feel universal moral laws exist. If they did, as they are universal, animals would endeavor to follow them [As they would be a natural law.] Seeing as how rape is VERY common in the animal world, there is no universal law regarding that, obviously.
Morality is up to the society. To say so ids ignorant of history, and culture. Many things you find okay now, were once morally reprehensible to your ancestors; and I am not talking about shocking things at all. For example, wearing polyester.
The reason most of us say rape is wrong is because it influences another in a way they do not wish to be influenced.
Take this example. A person asks their friend to have a friend they don’t know break into their home and rape them. In a universal morality this rape would be wrong because it is rape. However, the person [Literally] asked for this to occur [And because you wanted rape as an example, do not bore me with trivialities such as marriage, etc.]
The defining point for me is what people wish to occur, and what they will themselves submit to.
Squishy | Jan 25, 2010
What I understand of morality is this. When asked moral questions while having their brains scanned, a certain region of the brain lit up when people were struggling with moral dilemmas–which differentiated from the normal cost-benefit analysis sector of the brain. Sociopaths interestingly never had that part lit up.
Society.. your family.. your religion.. can fill that part of your brain with anything. A muslim seeing a woman without a veil, or a cartoon of Mohammad will elicit the same sense of moral indignity or outrage as a woman catching her husband with another woman. And it’s hard to understand why they can have something like that register that sort of moral indignity. But it’s true, that’s just what they have connected to that.. ‘conscience’ section of their brain, and you have a bunch of things there too that someone from the far east would find laughable.
No.. I believe the only objective morality is that we need to have some sort of moral cohesiveness for a society to function. It’s a group survival mechanism.
Where'd I park my TARDIS? | Jan 25, 2010
I am not sure exactly what one even means by absolute moral laws. I tend to think the use of the term "absolute moral law" is simply an attempt to obfuscate the fact we have a shared evolution which provides us with a common sense of empathy.
This argument is less an argument and more of an attack based on the fallacy of multiple vague definitions.
The attack typically goes something like this: Do you believe in an "absolute" morality? No? So you don’t believe in morality. You must be evil.
drmultiverse | Jan 25, 2010
shades of grey. note how it is society that judges on a whole.
absolutes dont work in a world where morals are but shades of grey. is it ok to steal bread to feed your starving children? yes for me. is it okay to steal a car so you can have drug/gambling money? not so much for me.
slavery = ok, tis cool. or slavery = OMFG ITS VIOLATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS!
homosexuality = ok, tis cool. or homosexuality = OMFG STONE THE ABOMINATION.
absolutes dont work so well when culture and society dictate right and wrong.
ie. circumscision. = jews accept it as normal, spartans would ****ing kill you if you mutilated one of their men like that
dunking babies into win = jews would kill you for abusing the babies. spartans accept it as normal.
see how morality and judging changes depending on the overall attitudes of the people?
rape is wrong, because currently society perceives it as wrong and i as a part also perceive it as wrong. some perceive it as right but the overall tone is that it is wrong.
let me try something else.
looting is wrong as it destroys property, and stealing isnt that good. looting right now in a developed nation = wrong.
looting is right if you are starving and your survival and life is valued above that of a window and someone else’s bottles of water. here comes human compassion to help dictate something as wrong to become right.
there is right and wrong, but only as people perceive them to be.
MrDucky [Atheist] LOL | Jan 25, 2010
Your logic is so flawed that i’m still trying to pick my jaw up off the floor.
Society determines morality, not religion. As it has been shown time and time again, the Church changes it’s moral laws in deference to overwhelming pressure from society. Any argument the Church then tries to form on morality is base and flawed.
Rape and child molestation are categorized as "wrong" because of society, not in spite of it.
For instance, the Church had a major role to play in the crusades, which led to the slaughter of 100s of thousands of muslims and christians alike. I don’t remember the church complaining too much about that at the time.
My friend, it is your logic that is flawed. I’m tempted to think you’re actually a little brain damaged, but that might be doing the mentally handicapped an injustice.
Laconic Bunny | Jan 25, 2010
Its interesting how incredibly stupidyou are. You saying all christians know morality?
Pickles | Jan 25, 2010
No, absolute moral laws don’t exist. People, collectively and individually are responsible for deciding what is right and wrong.
"If someone with enough power happened to like rape and molestation, what right would we have to impose our morality on him?"
The right to act, same as in any other situation.
"What would be wrong with the person, or society, with the power imposing their morality on you?"
Nothing. It actually happens right now and I deal with it.
"Why do we condemn the Nazi society for following their self-imposed morals?"
Because we don’t like their morals.
"Why did the Nazi society not have the right to break from the tradition of morality in western civilizations?"
They did have the right. They just didn’t have the power.
Can’t make sense of the next bit :S
And rape is wrong because I say it’s wrong. It’s my personal preference, it just happens that many, many people agree with me on this issue. If it were absolutely wrong though, it wouldn’t happen at all, but it does, so it’s just relatively wrong. Someone somewhere either thinks it’s right, or can justify it in some other way. And their opinion matters just as much as yours or mine, unfortunately.
This is Not My Account | Jan 25, 2010
no, why would they be absolute?
The god in the bible had no problem with rape and murder when it was done in his name. Don’t rape isn’t one of the 10 commandments and christians have no problem breaking don’t kill when it comes to executions or war.
What’s that proverb about motes and planks?
purple_kathryn_ni | Jan 25, 2010
what i "believe" about morality is irrelevant, what IS is whats important
and there is no such thing as an absolute moral
al the things you mention are perfectly normal an dnatural in the wild
they are not acceptable to us NOW in our ‘civilised soceity’
and seing as morals change regularly, i think it speaks for itself as an answer
Frou Frou | Jan 25, 2010
I don’t think it is possible for anything to be absolute and certainly not morality. How can you even define morality to be just one thing or the other, it is impossible to agree on many aspects of morality. Morality may be solely a primarily based on human nature, but a lot of people still base it on religious faith, and there are quite a lot of different religions.
Keithzworld | Jan 25, 2010
I do agree with most of what you said, but still there is no absolute morality.
And I disagree, that without absolute morality there would be no right and wrong. *)
Morals are man made, and you are right, that they vary from man to man, culture and societies.
Also, animals have their morals, they follow them, and they dont even know why - but surely not because of god, they never heard of any god.
example for right or wrong:
In general, we accept, that lying is wrong. The story is this : a man comes to your house and ask you to help him. He needs to hide from another man, who wants to kill him. You let him in, you want to do a right and good thing.
Minutes later the other man is at your house, and asks you if you have seen that man he is looking for.
You say "no", in order to protect and help the man you are hiding.
You lied. Was that right or wrong ?
Thats why there is no absolute moral, because it always depends. Life is not just black and white, its most of the time just gray.
Mojack | Jan 25, 2010
No, there are no absolute moral laws. Just look at the examples you give; rape and child molestation. Just for fun, let’s throw murder, extortion, robbery, and arson into the mix. I believe these actions are wrong. I’m sure 99.9% of the world would agree (to throw out a random statistic). But there are people who do NOT believe these actions are wrong and actively engage in pursuing these actions. If there were such a thing as absolute moral laws, the mere concept of these actions would not even exist as no one would have ever committed these acts nor would have the ability to do so.
The examples and arguments you give prove absolute moral laws don’t exist. I think your problem is you are trying to argue they SHOULD exist. They are two separate arguments.
Kevin | Jan 28, 2010
Anything that causes harm IS WRONG. Anything that promotes kindness and love is right. This is not a preference, just a simple understanding of the human experience.
No God is necessary to reward the good and punish the bad. A simple understanding of what others will endure if we hurt them or help them is the most simple form of morality.
educator | Jan 28, 2010
I don’t believe absolute moral law exists. There are certain acts I find wrong, such as killing, but not everything is black and white.
khard | Jan 29, 2010
