The Flanderization of Light & Dark?

[Fiddlers Green]

TeaDidikai

Never said that.
You didn't specify that the person eating in front of the individuals who was starving was doing so to be deliberately cruel. You merely said they were eating in front of them.

Point.
So, cruelty, if the act of cruelty is only situationally cruel, is not Evil.
Theft however is always Evil.

Are you positting varying degrees of evil, or merely a yes-no system?  

[TeaDidikai]

Fiddlers Green

Point.
So, cruelty, if the act of cruelty is only situationally cruel, is not Evil.

I haven't come to a conclusion on if cruelty can be considered evil or not, mostly because what constitutes cruelty isn't currently objective, since all it comments upon is the infliction of suffering.

Suffering is a function of individual responses to stimuli.

If instead of "cruelty", we were to address the deliberate act designed for the sole reason to generate suffering within an individual, I'd be more inclined to calling that an evil since it removes accidental suffering and personal values as to the merits (or lack) of suffering.

Quote:

Are you positting varying degrees of evil, or merely a yes-no system?

The morality involved is a yes-no. The value ascribed is commonly a scale.  

[Fiddlers Green]

Tabling the cruelty portion then.

TeaDidikai

The morality involved is a yes-no. The value ascribed is commonly a scale.

So, why is theft Evil?
Or, mayhaps, a better question is what constitutes theft?  

[TeaDidikai]

Fiddlers Green

So, why is theft Evil?
Or, mayhaps, a better question is what constitutes theft?

To paraphrase (and address further concepts) the act of depriving another of that which they own.

This is a poor attempt at translating a concept from Teaeese and it addresses a number of Evils, since it can be applied to bodily integrity, life etc.  

[Fiddlers Green]

TeaDidikai

Fiddlers Green

So, why is theft Evil?
Or, mayhaps, a better question is what constitutes theft?

To paraphrase (and address further concepts) the act of depriving another of that which they own.

This is a poor attempt at translating a concept from Teaeese and it addresses a number of Evils, since it can be applied to bodily integrity, life etc.

Right then.
I suppose the meat of the question then, would be how is ownership established?  

[TeaDidikai]

Fiddlers Green

Right then.
I suppose the meat of the question then, would be how is ownership established?

The way in which an agreed upon exchange is engaged in transferring from one to another.  

[Fiddlers Green]

TeaDidikai

The way in which an agreed upon exchange is engaged in transferring from one to another.

Agreed upon by those involved in the exchange?
Can land be owned?  

[TeaDidikai]

Fiddlers Green

Agreed upon by those involved in the exchange?

Yep.

Quote:

Can land be owned?

By those who engage in the exchanges needed to do so, yes.
At the same time, it's possible to claim false ownership, to enslave and thus create a violation.  

[Fiddlers Green]

TeaDidikai

Yep.

What if the exchange effects others?

Quote:

By those who engage in the exchanges needed to do so, yes.
At the same time, it's possible to claim false ownership, to enslave and thus create a violation.

What does it take to establish ownership where there was none before?  

[TeaDidikai]

Fiddlers Green

What if the exchange effects others?

Effects or involves?

The difference being that say- my choice to marry my husband effected other potential suitors who wanted a specific kind of relationship with me. But it ultimately involved my family and his.

Quote:

What does it take to establish ownership where there was none before?

The exchange to be present between the person and what best translates as "Natural Law".