On esteem of the world

[Glumix]

God alone can absolve at the moment of repentance; he is the searcher of hearts; but men can judge only by actions; and no one, after having lost the esteem of the world, has a right to complain of diffidence, which makes this loss so difficult to be repaired.

I would have you think above all, my dear young friend, that to lose this esteem, it is sometimes enough to seem to set little value upon it, and do not tax this severity with injustice; for as the world has a right to think that no one renounces this precious jewel, who has good pretensions to it, whoever is not restrained by this consideration, is on the brink of danger.

-- Dangerous Liaisons, letter 32

If someone, by judging his/her actions, seems not to worry about losing the esteem of the world or your esteem of him/her then you will know that he/she is most probably here for evil.

 

[SeymourCake]

If someone, by judging his/her actions, seems not to worry about losing the esteem of the world or your esteem of him/her then you will know that he/she is most probably here for evil.

Which is why this man wasn't evil.

 

[Glumix]

Which is why this man wasn't evil.

You didn't get it at all...

It's not about his perception of not losing his esteem of the world. Obviously mass murderers are not worried about that.
It's about your perception of him not being afraid of losing his esteem of the world. It's about qualifying him/her.

 

[SeymourCake]

You didn't get it at all...

It's not about his perception of not losing his esteem of the world. Obviously mass murderers are not worried about that.
It's about your perception of him not being afraid of losing his esteem of the world. It's about qualifying him/her.

What do you mean by that?

 

[yuppee]

if a thing or person is against reality and the long term advancement of humankind, that thing or person is evil, by definition.

 

[Asmodeus]

if a thing or person is against reality and the long term advancement of humankind, that thing or person is evil, by definition.

Depends on how you define advancement of humankind. Could altruism and pity be evil then? Helping those who are weak only provides resources to the weak and inferior at the expense of the strong. Then the weak are evil and we should execute them wholesale because their inferiority weakens the entire human race. Eugenics gave that argument.
Just saying...
Evil is an artificial construct, an arbitrary system of qualification. It is not quantifiable, it is relative, and based upon a complex system of morals which themselves are arbitrary.

 

[Tictac]

Evil is an artificial construct, an arbitrary system of qualification. It is not quantifiable, it is relative, and based upon a complex system of morals which themselves are arbitrary.

I'm reasonably comfortable that Adolf Hitler makes the list. There are others.

 

[Glumix]

Seems that on SS the number of posts before Godwin's Law is resolved is 1 as soon as somebody is reading about history.

But Nazis were not the subject of this thread.

World = your world
Evil = your ex, your boss, your wifey
Esteem = your definition of esteem
Dignity = your definition of dignity

It's as pointless as mainstream to try to make people judge history and reality with the same level of hate or love.

 

[yuppee]

we all know that there's generic and there's individual definitions. Society itself is based upon that knowledge.