Why is good so weak compared to evil in real life?

It's simple.

We live in a evil world. Humankind is evil, you're right.

The best we can do is ignore it or fight it, and live according to ourselves.

 

Those who do evil, trample on others, and get strong to crush, are maiming and brutalizing their own souls. They will look back on their lives and weep with regret, and the meanwhile, they are not truly happy. A person cannot be truly happy doing evil. I know it myself - I've lived a life of meaningless pleasure before, excess, criticism, putting others down, creating discord. Doing whatever I want. Yet there was always a deep, deep emptiness.

These are broken and wounded people, as I was. Consider children for example: naturally loving, joyful, caring, and trusting. We all start out whole, and through the wounds of the world, through the wounds of those close to us, and sometimes by our mistakes and choices, we become twisted and distorted. I believe human nature is fundamentally good, but we all lose sight of it, some more than others.

Being good therefore is becoming our most natural and best selves; it may not be what is most pleasurable, but it is what's most joyful. A life we can look back on and love. Likewise though it may be painful, all the while I can be satisfied that I am doing my best floating in an ocean of misery.

Evil has no boundaries, no morals, no emotions, no empathy, no limits. Yet love has no boundaries, no limits either. Love is the antidote to evil, because it sees with clarity the natural goodness hidden deep down in every person, and sees with clarity the twists and turns which ruin their character and turn their life into misery. Through love, time, and forgiveness, these twists may be straightened again into wholeness. It's a blessing if we ever see this in action in our lives, doubly so if it happens in us. To me, one blessed moment in love, clarity, and wholeness is worth it even if the rest of my life is misery. I understand everyone might not have the same calculus.

I hear your despair and I pray you will soon experience the light which is good, which puts all misery into the perspective we need.

 

If the world was truly evil we would have anarchy and you would fight for your food everyday. I think the most people are good. I don't see anything wrong with competition though (if you imply that everyone who is rich or getting there is evil and got there by defeating the good).

 

The most people are good? Government not caring about poor people and bad environments, porn existing and destroying people's lives and the government not doing shit about it, afghanistan being governed by murderers, pedophilia existing, monsters who rape existing, monsters who kill existing, Africa being the poorest continent in the world with majority of the countries in it being below the 140 ranked positions of GDP per capita, people dying in the ocean trying to enter other countries, ethnic and religious people in some parts of the world being persecuted, discrimation of any kind, wether racial, of sexual orientation, religious or of someone's aspect happening, and there are people who actually struggle to eat, many of them in the poorest countries in the world die of hunger.

 

We live in a fucked up world, the only thing you can do is live your life in peace ignoring most of the shit happening in the world while always keeping an eye to important things and hope that the world will change one day...

 

You have so much food and options that you can eat yourself to death, you have technology levels at it's highest and rapidly increasing, you have all the knowledge in the world combined at your home and whenever you like it ... I can keep going. Whats your point you just collect some arbitrary amount of negative points.

 

And what is your point? All of the food and tecnhology, yet all of the negative aspects I stated before are happening. The world is fucked up and hopefully it will change one day, until then, this world will never be a fair and good one.

 

My point is that you have no point... I mean appreciate how good we have it for once. How stable society has become. How little wars there are in comparisson to last century. How good medicine has become and how many lifes can be saved through it and stop whining about generic global problems you can't point your finger at.

 

cuz misery loves company, you get what you give and humans love to be miserable. We in 1st world countries whine about small things like types of cars, free range eggs or that rude guy in line, meanwhile people in the world starve to death. We humans love misery.

 

I am less suffering when compared to 20 years ago when I was a porn addict.
I do better things now, love myself more and able to love and respect others.

Don't let the evil conquer over you but conquer the evil by doing good.
It's spiritual warfare we all are in.

In the end love will win.
Evil has an end but only love is eternal.

As a Christian I believe there is a savior.

 

Problems in the world will never let me be good with the state of the world. But I can't live with thinking about world problems everyday, that's why I live my life ignoring most of the problems while keeping an eye on the most important ones. I know we have food and tecnhology but my point still stands, the world remains fucked up for all the things I stated before.

 

I think that is a wise attitude.
What I've learned is:
Let me care about my things
Let the other care about their things
Let God care about the rest.

To sum it up: I only can care about my own things, not about others or the worldly things.

 

OP: Why is good so weak compared to evil?
​

This is a philosophical question that could help us figure some things out. There are some thoughtful answers in the responses, but also a lot of assumptions being made. @FirefromAbove says the world is inherently evil, @virtuscb says it's inherently good, @HelperX seems to think governments should be good but aren't, @Roady frames it in a definitive religious and spiritual context, @FrequencyLimbos thinks humanity is inherently perverse (does things to harm itself, different from perversion. Sometimes). @jn812 has the most elaborate and well written response. If I could condense and risk over simplifying his argument, it is that evil is naturally perverse, where good is not. If this is true, given enough time, evil cannot possibly win because it will always undermine itself.

I know philosophy can be irritating, but we have to define terms if we're going to talk with one another instead of at one another, and we have to start small. Before we can answer why good is weak compared to evil, we have to establish whether this is even true and that seems to be in dispute. But even before that, we have to define good and evil. Some of us seem to be approaching this from a Christian angle, others from a Marxist angle, still more from a vague spiritual sense, but I don't think we're so far apart that we have to disagree about this basic idea.

So, who wants to float some simple definitions for good and evil? Ones both Christians and Marxists can agree on?

 

Good is having morals, doing things that help you and other people do better in life, helping people in difficulty.

Evil is having no morals, no empathy and doing evil things.

 

Who said that?

 

That's a thoughtful answer and a useful start. This is getting somewhere, but this definition can be refined.


We can agree that a code of justice, or morals, is useful for defining good. At minimum it will help us be consistent when our personal biases come into play. Does the specific code matter, though? I think it does. I think you could have evil morals. The Nazis had morals, they just didn’t include Jews, homosexuals, or autistic people as under the protection of their morality. The Soviets had morals, they just figured loyalty to the State was more important than truth, or competence, or individual rights. If a few innocent people had to go to the gulag to keep Stalin in power, well, so be it. I hope we can agree, "good" isn't just "having morals," it has to be having the right kind of morals.

Helping yourself and other people do better in life is also a useful statement, and I think we probably agree on what that means, but it is vague so can we clarify? Help us do what? Do better how? A Marxist might say we need to equally distribute wealth, so no one is richer than another. According to him, doing better in life is achieving an equal system. A Capitalist might say we need to acquire more wealth, so each person can have what they want within the means they deserve. A Christian might say we need to get as many people as possible into Heaven.

Under this definition of "good," there's still a lot of room to argue and find differences. I'm hoping to find where we reach common ground.


As for the definition of evil, you say "doing evil things," which is a tautological argument. You can't use a word to define itself, so "evil is doing evil" doesn't work. The other parts you provide are useful, though. Evil requires action without empathy, and is opportunistic. This is an acceptable truth claim, although that looks to me more like amorality than immorality. Couldn't I do something that benefits me, without empathy, that accidentally benefits you? Under your definition that would still be evil.

 

yes ; being evil means torturing your own soul

 

We live in an inherently evil world, the valley of the shadow of death, but deep in our hearts there is a small spark waiting to burn, a promise of light. You don't give up the fight because it isn't easy.