Who is evil?

by

You shouldn’t discuss evil on a Saturday morning. Certainly not before breakfast, nor even during it. But at our kitchen table, things often turn out differently.
One morning, clever Siri asks a question that sounds rather naive: “Can nature be evil?”
“Well,” says Kb, “there’s something fascinating about evil.”
“Kindness is boring!” Selma interjects immediately, thinking of Pippi Longstocking, her heroine.
It’s obvious that evil has held an irresistible allure since time immemorial. A form of voyeurism with sadistic undertones is at work in all of us.
‘That’s why bookshops are full of crime novels.’
‘But in those, it’s the people who are the villains.’
‘Well, we’re part of nature too – aren’t we?’

Man sollte Samstagmorgens nicht über das Böse diskutieren. Schon gar nicht vorm Frühstück, auch nicht währenddessen. Aber bei uns am Küchentisch kommt es oft anders.
Die kluge Siri stellt eines Morgens die naiv klingende Frage: „Kann die Natur böse sein?“
„Tja“, sagt Kb, „das Böse hat ja was Faszinierendes.“
„Lieb ist langweilig!“, wirft Selma sofort ein und denkt an Pipi Langstrumpf, ihre Heldin.
Es ist offensichtlich, dass das Böse seit ewigen Zeiten mit unwiderstehlichem Zauber lockt. Ein Voyeurismus mit sadistischen Anteilen wirkt in jedem von uns.
“Deswegen sind die Buchhandlungen voller Krimis.”
“Aber da sind die Menschen die Bösen.”
“Na, wir sind doch auch ein Teil der Natur – oder?”


Kb, the level-headed one, says: ‘We want to see evil – but from a safe distance. That’s what makes crime fiction so fascinating. We can observe evil there without risk, whilst at the same time savouring our own moral innocence. We say: ‘How can a person do such a thing!’ Meanwhile, we’re wonderfully relieved that we’re on the right side.’
Selma: “How do we know that?”
Dina: “Perhaps evil is so fascinating precisely because it reminds us that there is no clear line between ‘the bad guys’ and ‘us’.”

Kb, der Vernünftige, meint: “Wir wollen das Böse sehen – aber aus sicherer Entfernung. Das macht die Faszination des Krimis aus. Wir können dort das Böse gefahrlos betrachten und gleichzeitig unsere eigene moralische Unschuld genießen. Wir sagen: ‘Wie kann ein Mensch nur so etwas tun!’ Währenddessen sind wir wunderbar erleichtert, dass wir auf der richtigen Seite stehen.”
Selma: “Woher wissen wir das?”
Dina: “Vielleicht ist das Böse gerade deshalb so faszinierend, weil es uns daran erinnert, dass zwischen „den Bösen“ und „uns“ keine klare Grenze verläuft.“


Dina, who’s boiling eggs, comes up with a startling idea that leaves us pondering in silence – and such silence is extremely rare for us. She says in passing: “Evil, like beauty, is maybe in the eye of the beholder.”
Oh dear, that means it’s not the fox who steals the goose in the nursery rhyme – and probably in real life too – who is evil, but the judgemental observer.
“But hang on, that means that when we see something evil, WE are the ones who are evil,” muses Siri.
“That’s complete nonsense!” exclaims Selma indignantly.
Clever Siri reflects: “Evil isn’t in the eye of the beholder, but what we recognise as evil depends on the eye of the beholder. That makes a huge difference. Otherwise, one would actually have to say: if I consider murder to be evil, I am evil because I see evil. That is – to use Selma’s favourite word – nonsense.”

Dina, die ein paar Eier kocht, kommt mit einer verblüffenden Idee, die uns schweigend nachdenken läßt – und dieses Schweigen ist äußerst selten bei uns. Sie sagt en passant: “Das Böse wie das Schöne liegt im Auge des Betrachters.”
Huch, das heißt, nicht der Fuchs, der die Gans im Kinderlied und wohl auch real stiehlt, ist böse, sondern der bewertende Betrachter.
“Aber hallo, das bedeutet doch, wenn wir etwas Böses sehen, sind WIR böse“, sinniert Siri.
“Das ist doch völliger Quatsch!” ruft Selma empört.
Die kluge Siri überlegt: “Das Böse liegt nicht im Auge des Betrachters, aber was wir als böse erkennen, hängt vom Auge des Betrachters ab. Das macht einen großen Unterschied. Denn sonst müsste man tatsächlich sagen: Wenn ich einen Mord für böse halte, bin ich böse, weil ich Böses sehe. Das ist – um Selmas Lieblingswort aufzugreifen – Quatsch. “

The first act of violence in the morning


After silently eating the breakfast egg – which could actually be regarded as an act of aggression, and therefore as evil – Kb picks up the thread of the conversation again: 
“Let’s look at evil from a different angle. Evil isn’t simply that which causes harm. Otherwise, the fox would be evil, as would the polar bear and the forest fire. That would make ‘evil’ merely a synonym for ‘unpleasant’ or ‘destructive’. Being evil presupposes a choice. One could be kind, but chooses evil instead.”
“While we’re on the subject of morality,” says Dina with a mischievous grin, “animals can’t be evil at all, as they have no choice. There’s a huge difference between biology and morality. Morality presupposes freedom, which biology does not possess. Morality begins where ‘I can’ becomes ‘I can also act differently’. Evil is not simply the capacity to cause harm, but the free decision to inflict harm on another being, even though one could act differently.”


Nachdem schweigend das Frühstücksei verspeist wurde, was eigentlich auch als Akt der Agression, also als böse betrachtet werden kann, nimmt Kb den Gesprächsfaden wieder auf:
“Lasst uns das Böse mal anders betrachten. Das Böse ist nicht einfach das, was Schaden anrichtet. Sonst wäre der Fuchs böse, der Eisbär und der Waldbrand ebenfalls. Damit wird ‘böse’ zu einem bloßen Synonym für ‘unangenehm’ oder ‘zerstörerisch’. Böse zu sein, setzt eine Wahl voraus. Man könnte lieb sein, wählt aber das Böse.“
“Wo wir jetzt schon beim Moralischen sind”, meint Dina verschmitzt grinsend, “können Tiere gar nicht böse sein, da sie keine Wahl haben. Da besteht ein riesiger Unterschied zwischen Biologie und Moral. Moral setzt Freiheit voraus, die die Biologie nicht hat. Moral beginnt vielleicht dort, wo aus ‘Ich kann’ ein ‘Ich kann auch anders’ wird. Das Böse ist nicht einfach die Fähigkeit zu schaden, sondern die freie Entscheidung, einem anderen Wesen Schaden zuzufügen, obwohl man anders handeln könnte.“

Being evil presupposes a choice.

We can all see that there’s a catch here: just how free are we, after all? When someone commits murder, we might say: ‘He could have acted differently.’ But then factors such as childhood, genes, social environment, mental illness, peer pressure, fear and a thousand other causes come into play. Perhaps that is precisely why human beings are so fascinating: because they are both creatures of nature and moral beings.

Wir sehen alle, dass die Sache einen Haken hat, nämlich wie frei sind wir denn? Wenn jemand mordet, können wir sagen: Er hätte anders handeln können. Aber dann kommen Kindheit, Gene, soziale Umgebung, psychische Erkrankungen, Gruppendruck, Angst und tausend andere Ursachen ins Spiel. Vielleicht ist der Mensch gerade deshalb so faszinierend, weil er zugleich Naturwesen und moralisches Wesen ist.


‘And what about those vicious fighting dogs?’
“Humans made them that way.”
“Now let’s not get carried away. Nature has to be aggressive, otherwise it would die out. If a polar bear doesn’t kill a seal, it dies; and falcons and marsh harriers have to prey on small birds and anything that crawls, otherwise they’ll starve. But humans don’t have to kill other living creatures to survive.”
“That’s just more of that completely idealised nonsense penned by unworldly vegetarians. The Inuit have to kill whales, seals or polar bears to survive”, says Selma, who’s really taken a shine to the word ‘nonsense’ this morning.

“Und wie ist es mit den bösen Kampfhunden?’
“Der Mensch hat sie dazu gemacht.”
“Nun lasst mal die Kirche im Dorf. Die Natur muss agressiv sein, sonst stirbt sie aus. Wenn der Eisbär keine Robbe tötet. stirbt er und Falke und die Rohrweihe müssen kleine Vögel reißen und was kreucht, sonst verhungern sie. Aber der Mensch muss keine anderen Lebewesen töten, um zu überleben.“
“Das ist doch wieder völlig idealisierender Quatsch aus der Feder weltfremder Vegetarier. Die Inuit müssen Wale, Robben oder Eisbären töten, um zu überleben“, meint Selma, die heute Morgen das Wort ‘Quatsch’ liebt.


“You lot with your moralising drivel – just look at the wise Goethe, who sees the Devil as part of that power which always wills
evil and always brings about good. So all this killing isn’t really that bad“, says Selma triumphantly, her mouth full. “When you’re evil, you’re actually doing good.” To emphasise this, she sticks her tongue out as far as it will go.
A few days ago, Siri read that, for example, ‘evil’ forest fires create biodiversity and ‘evil’ predators often only attack sick animals, thereby keeping the population healthy. When humans commit murder, of course, it’s a different matter, though we do consider euthanasia a blessing.

“Ihr mit eurem Moralgequatsche seht doch den weisen Goethe, der den Teufel als Teil von jener Macht sieht, die stets das Böse will und stets das Gute schafft. Also ist das alles, das Töten, gar nicht so schlimm“, meint Selma triumphierend mit vollem Mund. “Wenn man böse ist, tut man eigentlich Gutes.” Um das zu unterstreichen, steckt sie noch weit ihre Zunge heraus.
Siri las vor ein paar Tagen, dass zum Beispiel die “bösen” Waldbrände Biodiversität schaffen und die “bösen” Raubtiere greifen oft
nur kranke Tiere an und halten so den Bestand gesund. Wenn Menschen morden, sieht das freilich anders aus, allerdings finden wir Sterbehilfe ein Segen.

Red-tailed buzzard

Kb draws his conclusion, like a schoolmaster: “Nature can be cruel, destructive, beautiful, generous and terrifying – but it only becomes ‘evil’ when we attribute a moral intent to it. Humans, on the other hand, are both nature and morality. That is precisely where the problem begins. For humans are the only beings capable of doing something evil and then discussing over breakfast whether it was evil.“

Kb zieht wie der Oberlehrer den Schlussstrich: “Die Natur kann grausam, zerstörerisch, wunderschön, großzügig und erschreckend sein – aber „böse“ wird sie erst, wenn wir ihr eine moralische Absicht zuschreiben. Der Mensch hingegen ist Natur und Moral. Genau da beginnt das Problem. Denn der Mensch ist das einzige Wesen, das etwas Böses tun und anschließend beim Frühstück darüber diskutieren kann, ob es böse war.“

We need to give this some more thought. So, see you next time. Meanwhile we’d love to hear your thoughts on evil.

Darüber müssen wir noch weiter denken. Also bis nächstes Mal. Wir würden uns freuen, wenn ihr uns eure Meinung zum Bösen mitteilen würdet.

The Fab Four of Cley
🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂

.

.

© text and illustrations, Hanne Siebers & Klausbernd Vollmar, Cley next the Sea 2026

129 thoughts

  1. I never think of anything in nature as evil. Animals kill to survive, not for pleasure. Some humans kill for pleasure, so perhaps those who find pleasure in killing or torturing animals (or other humans) are truly evil. An interesting discussion to have over your boiled eggs, accompanied by simply superb photographs!

    Love from Beetley, Pete. X

    Liked by 3 people

    Reply

    • Dear Pete

      Well, cats kill for pleasure as well as foxes. We quite often idealize nature. That’s the zeitgeist.

      It’s a complicated question if nature can be evil. Unfortunately we know not enough of animal behaviour to give a clear answer. But we hope that some of our visitors here know more.
      We like to write a post about something we are interested in but not necessarily know all about it. We hope that during the discussions here we learn to see clearer.

      Thanks, dear Pete. Have a happy week
      The Fab Four of Cley
      🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂

      Liked by 2 people

    • Oh derar, John

      Now there is the question who or what is Satan. Is it a philosophical or theological principle or what?

      Thanks for liking Dina’s pictures and for commenting
      The Fab Four of Cley
      🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂

      Liked by 1 person

  3. I think that evil is apparent in nature, and not just in human beings. There is a viciousness that exists in some animals. Cats, for example, often kill birds and other small creatures for pleasure, not food.

    It’s ultimately a tricky philosophical question, but good for discussion.

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

    • Thanks, dear Richard 🙏 🙏

      Indeed, it’s a tricky question. We don’t have an answer, but we find it interesting to think about it. Kb as a rationalist asked what’s the function of evil? Siri, our intellectual, questioned that characteristic we use for humans can be used for animals as well. Does morals apply to nature? On the other hand people are nature as well. Selma asks if it helps to know if nature can be evil or not and Dina tries to answer that question iconographic.

      All the best
      The Fab Four of Cley
      🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂

      Liked by 2 people

  4. Ihr Lieben in Cley, zu eurem wunderschönen und stimulierenden Bericht bezüglich das Böse gefällt mir folgender Satz ganz speziell “der weise Goethe, der den Teufel als Teil von jener Macht sieht, die stets das Böse will und stets das Gute schafft.” Habt vielen Dank:)

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

  5. What a fascinating discussion to have around your breakfast table. I would define evil as intentional acts of cruelty, injustice, and malice committed by people who get enjoyment out of seeing others in distress. But then you need to consider whether an act is truly evil or just extremely unkind.

    Liked by 5 people

    Reply

    • Thank you very much, dear Jude.
      We suppose people are often evil for getting an advantage.
      And as you wrote, the problem is where starts and ends ‘intentional’. Intentionality presupposes freedom, and who is truly free from their socialisation?

      Thanks a lot
      The Fab Four of Cley
      🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂

      Liked by 1 person

  8. What a fantastic discussion around the kitchen table!
    Dina’s quote about evil being in the eye of the beholder and the discussion about free will are absolutely fascinating.
    Thank you for sharing this brilliant philosophical insight.
    PS: the images are wonderful!

    Liked by 3 people

    Reply

  10. What an extraordinary amount of philosophy to encounter before the breakfast eggs have even gone cold! What stayed with me most was the distinction between destruction and evil. Nature can certainly be cruel and destructive, but does evil require intention. The knowledge that we could choose differently and nevertheless choose to cause harm. And then, of course, Klausbernd complicates that beautifully by asking how free our choices really are.

    As you know, I’m reading Faust so I was very pleased when Selma brought Goethe and Faust to the breakfast table. Mephistopheles describes himself as:

    “Ein Teil von jener Kraft,
    Die stets das Böse will und stets das Gute schafft.”

    “Part of that power which eternally wills evil and eternally works good.”

    And there Goethe leaves us with yet another complication. Even the relationship between good and evil may not unfold quite as we expect. Maybe some questions are not meant to be settled over breakfast or even in a lifetime. Wonderful food for thought from The brilliant Fab Four of Cley!

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

    • Dear Rebecca

      Kb thinks that free choice is an illusion. There are too many factors that determine our choices. It’s more, Kb thinks, a question of how much free and how much determined we are in our choices. It’s a question of proportion.

      There may be no definitive answers to questions like these. But it is nevertheless important to ask such questions and to engage with them – and it keeps our brain mobile.

      Thank you very much, dear Rebecca. With lots of love from the small village next to the big sea
      The Fab Four of Cley
      🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂

      Like

    • Dear Klausbernd, what wonderful serendipity! Sarah and I had a conversation this past weekend about the illusion of free choice, and we found ourselves travelling very much in the same direction. How much of a choice is free and how much is shaped by everything that has brought us to that moment. Our experiences, circumstances, relationships and countless other influences are already there when we make the choice. I agree with you that there are questions for which we will never have definitive answers, but asking them keeps us curious!!!!

      Liked by 1 person

    • Dear Rebecca
      If we want it or not, the media influence us more than we are usually aware of. And we seem not to mind, so people are proud of being influencers (although these are the ones whose power to influence is small).
      One could say that manipulation starts with every kind of education. Our parents and the teachers are the first one to influence our thinking and judging things. Therefore sang Pink Floyd “We don’t need no education, we don’t need no thought control”. But the problem is, we need it.
      Anyway, however you look at it freedom is an ideal, but ideals are aims but not reality.
      Love 😘
      The Fab Four of Cley
      🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂

      Liked by 1 person

    • Good morning, dear Mary

      Thank you very much for your comment.
      Yes, the attraction of evil could be an interesting topic for a new blog.

      All the best
      The Fab Four of Cley
      🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂

      Liked by 1 person

  16. While I very much enjoyed catching a glimpse into your family’s intriguing philosophical discussions, what actually caught my attention were all the wonderful animal and bird photos included in the post – they are truly superb. My regards to the talented photographer. Thanks for sharing, and have a good day 🙂 Aiva xx

    Liked by 3 people

    Reply

    • Good morning, dear Aiva

      You made Hanne-Dina’s day. She is our photographer.
      In the beginning we had problems to find ideas how to illustrate this post. That’s always a problem with rather abstract topics. This time we started with the text what’s more of a challenge for illustrating than starting with the pictures.

      Thank you very much
      The Fab Four of Cley
      🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂

      Like

  17. A fascinating morning read, in my case before my own breakfast! Looking at somewhat a quick pace into the first thoughts emanating from my own brain I think I most agree with Jude and her perception of ‘intentional acts of cruelty’ and the pleasure and satisfaction some people get from this. One thing for very certain . . . the world into which each morning is currently full of it . . . Wonderful, absolutely wonderful photos to soften each statement . . .

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

    • Thank you very much, dear Eha.

      If the world is cruel or not, if aggression rules our world or not is a question of your standpoint – in every respect, how you see the world and where you live.

      Great that you like Dina’s photography
      The Fab Four of Cley
      🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂

      Liked by 1 person

    • Hi Tanja

      These are the interesting questions that can’t be answered quick and easy. And maybe they can’t be answered but it’s important to ask them.

      The Fab Four of Cley
      🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂

      Liked by 1 person

  19. Goodness, that was quite the discussion before breakfast was eaten. I think it is important to recognise that evil does exist, that is cannot be apologised away, excused, by those who view life though rose-tinted glasses. Your discussion has brought to mind a chat with my son about a month ago. In his work as a pharmacist he regularly administers and supervises prescribed drugs for recovering addicts. Over the years he has come to know some of these people quite well and he made a very heartfelt comment that is was only the very slightest twists of fate, of circumstances in life, that had him in a safe and comfortable life and others not so well off. There is evil but it is sensible to seek the good.

    Liked by 3 people

    Reply

    • Dear Paddy

      We are quite lucky that we ended up on the ‘right’ side. It’s actually quite easy to become evil. And it’s not only our doing. It depends on where we are born, country and family f.e. We all could easily be evil as we all have the possibility to become evil in ourselves. And well, a little bit evil makes one interesting. If you are like a saint without any evil side you are boring, aren’t you?
      And quite often evil is done with the intention of doing good.

      Thanks
      The Fab Four of Cley
      🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂

      Liked by 1 person

  21. Dear friends,
    you have served food for thought for a long dinner. Love the photos you have chosen to illustrate the discussion, Hanne! – Nature is not actually malicious or cruel; it is completely indifferent. The brutality we see is just a byproduct of life needing energy to survive.

    I watched an interesting Nietzsche documentary recently focusing on a person’s ability to act beyond good and evil, iow when you stop using rigid, traditional moral labels to judge life (and nature), stop blaming outside rules, society, or fate for your life.

    By the way, I have started reading “Helm” by Sarah Hall, thank you for the recommendation, Fab Four. Loved the fact that you met her and could learn more about the background for Helm.

    Wishing you rain!
    Kram
    Annalena x

    Liked by 3 people

    Reply

    • Dear Annalena

      This breakfast-scenario was like in the olden times when we were students living in a group together and couldn’t stop discussing. These were the times. We’ve managed to preserve some of that, because those were times that had the greatest impact on Kb and Hanne-Dina. And Siri and Selma like this lifestyle as well.

      Unfortunately, we haven’t researched what Nietzsche wrote about evil yet. Maybe you know?

      We desperately need rain, but there is no sign of rain within the next time. And it’s too sunny and hot for us here. If it goes on like this, we’ll move back to Sweden becoming your neighbours.

      With lots of love
      The Fab Four of Cley
      🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂

      Like

    • Dear Per Magnus

      ‘Food comes first, then morality‘ Bert Brecht (Three Penny Opera)
      ‘Evil’ is a brain-racking subject.

      We envy you up north. We hope you are well
      The Fab Four of Cley
      🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂

      Liked by 1 person

  27. If this is your discussion over breakfast, I wonder what where the conversation goes by supper. You gave great insights into the many sides of evil, that I will continue to ponder today. But maybe I’ll skip the crime drama tonight. Maggie

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

  28. Interesting discussion paired with beautiful pictures, love both. Evil is something which (probably) is part of most human beings if not all. What we call civilized society or good people or normal people are the ones able to keep evil under control and prevent him from acting.

    We had some terriffic murders and sometimes people are susprised and comment the killer was known as a very good man.

    I should think more about this stimulating question but where I live, Italy it is so hot and dry, with drought related problems that my old brain finds difficult to think too much! Perhaps next time I boil some eggs 🙂

    Again, beautiful photos 🙂

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

    • Hi Robert

      We agree, everyone has that evil side. Fortunately in most people it’s not triggered that much that they can’t control it. Most people express their malice through small, spiteful acts, such as insults.
      It’s quite often a question of your socialisation how much you can control your evil drive.

      Goldings ‘Lord of the Flies’ is the classic about how this evil is easily set free.

      It’s too hot here as well.
      Thanks you very much for your comment
      The Fab Four of Cley
      🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂

      Liked by 1 person

    • Ha ha, we don’t like ‘devilled eggs’, too much mayonnaise. But you are right, the right food for special discussions helps.

      Thanks for commenting
      The Fab Four of Cley
      🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂

      Like

  30. A most interesting breakfast discussion. I agree that evil is in the eye of the beholder from the perspective that if a persons moral compass is skewed due to nature or nurture, they will not see evil the same way as most people. I also think evil can be a choice that people justify. Propaganda and vilification are two tools used to justify evil in the minds of perpetrators.

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

    • Dear Roberta

      Thank you very much for making the point that propaganda is an often used tool to set evil free. In ancient Rome they had ‘panem et circensis‘, in fascist Germany and Austria it were the Jews and we have the refugees today as ideal objects for vilification. The extreme right groups know quite well how to set the evil free that is living in us all.

      The Fab Four of Cley
      🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂

      Liked by 1 person

    • Hi Terry

      ‘Man does not live by bread alone’. We need those discussions. We had them already when we, Dina & Kb, were children.

      Thanks for liking Dina’s photography 🙏 🙏

      The Fab Four of Cley
      🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂

      Liked by 1 person

    • Hi Linda

      Thanks a lot for remind ing us of Blake’s poem about the lamb and tyger, the both sides of human beings. Kb once heard Allen Ginsberg singing it. Ginsberg wrote a lot about this poem.

      The role of evil is such a basic question.
      Nietzsche wrote in ‘Thus Spoke Zarathustra’ “Man is evil”. For him evil and good is an aristocratic way of valuating people. Good is strong and healthy and evil is weak and unhealthy. This is the point where the fascist tried to make Nietzsche one of their philosophers.

      Keep well
      The Fab Four of Cley
      🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂

      Liked by 1 person

  34. Interesting discussion. I think in the animal kingdom there is no evil only survival. Evil is more when it is thought about it and one does awful things on purpose.

    Love the seal pictures on the post.

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

    • Dear Vicki

      Thanks a lot for liking Dina’s photos 🙏 🙏

      Why won’t you think or comment on the ‘evil’ bit?

      Be that as it may.
      Wishing you a happy weekend
      The Fab Four of Cley
      🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂

      Liked by 1 person

  36. Evil is definitely a difficult subject. With respect to leadership, I subscribe to the definition that Dr. Barbara Kellerman from Harvard University presented in her book Bad Leadership. Evil leadership is “the leader and at least some followers commit atrocities. They use pain as an instrument of power. The harm done to men, women, and children is severe rather than slight. The harm can be physical, psychological, or both.”

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

    • Hi Edward

      That’s one way to define evil. We would agree but evil takes place beyond leadership of course. There is everyday life evil f.e. in families.

      Wishing you a happy weekend
      The Fab Four of Cley
      🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂

      Like

  37. Hello!

    Habe tagelang im Geiste Kommentare zu eurem Blogpost formuliert…wahrlich, das müsst ihr nicht alles durchlesen, weil ich es gar nicht aufschreibe…

    Gleich am ersten Morgen, noch im Dämmerzustand, “sah” ich eine Waage. Sie “zeigte”: legt man in die Schale der “guten Seite” viel hinein, kommt die andere Seite nach oben…dieses Bild zeigte mir wahrscheinlich mein ” Geist”, weil ich ein bissel darüber nachdachte, warum ich das Gefühl habe, dass ein “normales” Leben zur Zeit gefühlt erschwert bis nicht mehr möglich ist…das “Böse” hat irgendwie überhand genommen, es ist vieles in meinen Augen nicht mehr in der Balance…

    Kann es sein, dass wenn “das Böse das Gute” erschaffte, dies nur stimmig wäre, wenn es (das Böse und Gute) auch bewusst erkannt werden würde?

    Bei der Frage “Who is evil”?, also ich würde das ? eher weglassen wollen und fragen who is who…?!

    Ohne das Ei aufzuschlagen, kommst du ja nicht an den Dotter…oh Otter…

    Habe euch lieb und grüße euch von Herzen

    Euer Pialein

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

    • Danke, liebes Pialein

      ach, weißt du zu jeder Zeit dachten viele Menschen, dass das Böse überhand nimmt. Wir glauben, unsere Zeiten sind nicht schlechter als andere. Brecht schrieb von etwa 90 Jahren

      “Ein guter Mensch wer wäre das nicht gern
      Doch leider sind auf unserem Stern
      Die Mittel kärglich und die Menschen roh.
      Wer möchte nicht in Fried und Eintrfach leben
      Doch die Verhältnisse sie sind nicht so.”

      Ja, so fühlte sich so mancher vor 90 Jahren und nicht nur dann sondern die gesamte Geschichte hindurch. Und wir haben es immer überlebt und, ehrlich gesagt, nicht schlecht.

      Da mach’s mal gut. Wir senden dir ganz viele Umarmungen und alles Liebe
      The Fab Four of Cley
      🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂

      Liked by 1 person

    • Naja, liebes Pialein, es gab stets Leute in der Geschichte der Menschheit, denen es gut ging und, wir denken, es wird auch weiterhin so sein. Heute versuchen die Rechten den Leuten einzureden, dass es ihnen nicht gut geht, was wir sehr böse finden, früher waren es die Kirchen, die versuchten, dass jeder sich sündig fühlte. Immer ging es um Machtausübung. Uns geht es u.a. auch deswegen gut, weil wir es uns nicht einreden lassen, dass es uns schlecht geht.
      Also lass es dir weiterhin gut gehen
      The Fab Four of Cley
      🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂

      Liked by 1 person

    • Guten Morgen, aus politischen Themen halte ich mich meist heraus…habe da einfach zu wenig Insiderwissen, um wirklich mitreden zu können…

      Seit vielen Jahren gehe ich immer wieder die Liste meiner “Schandtaten” durch, schaue mir an, wie ich mich wo, wann, wie anderen gegenüber und mir gegenüber verhalten habe…da plagt mich manchmal mein Gewissen….da erkenne ich oft, wie ich mich hätte anders verhalten können, sollen, müssen…

      1989/90 übte ich mich im Ballett an der Waganowa Schule….KGB ganz ofiizell im Büro der Schule. Die Menschen hatten nicht genug zu essen, das kostenlose Waser kam teils als Rinnsal aus der Dusche, kein Waschmittel da, nix zu kaufen in den Geschäften (außer bei Berioska mit Dollars). Telefon kostenlos, funktionierte meist nicht. Der normale Russe durfte nicht ins Schwimmbad oder gar in Theater. Bei “verbotenen” Kunstausstellungen, zu denen ich verbotener Weise fuhr, gab es manchmal eine Installation von Helmen mit Stacheldraht zu sehen…wow…richtig wichtig zu verbieten…

      Am meisten vielen mir die dunklen Wagenkolonnen auf, die durch die breiten Straßen rauschten…und die ekelhaften fetten Männer mit den leichten Mädchen, die sich den Kaviar mit dem Löffel reinschaufelten in den Hotelrestaurants…

      Undifferenziert, oberflächlich und/oder mit verallgemeinerten Aussagen von rechts oder links, von oben, unten, außerhalb, der Mitte oder sonst wo her, kann man sich mit mir nicht zusammen- bzw. auseinandersetzen.

      Ich bekomme Herzklopfen, Schweißausbrüche, Klosgefühl im Hals und Augenpipi beim Schreiben…

      Dann trenne ich wieder Zeit vom Raum, nehme Bewusstsein rechts und links neben mich und entspanne mich in der Mitte….bis Nüchternheit einkehrt und ich anders denken kann, andere Gedanken wahrnehmen kann….

      Happy Sunday

      Euer Pialein

      …muss meine Kindertagespflegestelle “Bunter Leuchtvogel” sauber machen, zur Zeit betreue ich kurdische Brüder, habe mich ein wenig mit den Jesiden beschäftigt. weiß aber gar nicht, ob die Familie damit etwas zu tun hat…sie hat eine Brautkleider Schneiderei……noch liebe ich mein Leben…es lehrt mich vieles….

      Liked by 1 person

    • Liebes Pialein
      Ich war sehr of (jedes Wochenende) als Tourist in St. Petersburg als es noch Leningrad war. Ich fand es gar nicht bedrohlich dort, aber ich musste dort auch nicht leben. Ich war zum Vergnügen dort wie viele Finnen.
      Obwohl ich nichts mit dem Christentum zu tun habe, wenn wir vom Bösen reden, fällt mir sofort das Christentum ein, habe ich jedoch einen jesuitischen Freund, der eine Art Abt in einer jesuitischen Gemeinschaft ist, die ich oft besuchte.
      So haben wir unsere Erfahrungen gemacht. Übrigens bin ich der Ansicht, unpolitisch geht nicht. Wie die alten Griechen schon den Menschen als ein Zoon Politikon sahen, und die sich von der Politik fern hielten, nannten sie die Idiotes. Ich halte es einfach für eine Illusion unpolitisch zu sein, denn das ist eine gefährliche politische Haltung.
      Klausbernd 🙂

      Liked by 1 person

    • Danke , ja mich aus oberflächlichen politischen Debatten heraushalten zu wünschen, besagt nicht, dass ich nicht politisch bin…oder politisch uninteressiert wäre….ich höre allen zu und mache mir meine Gedanken…

      Das liegt auch daran, dass ich ab meinem 9. Geburtstag öfter auf Kanzler Kohls Schoss saß, hatte als Oggersheimer Solofunkenmariechen irgendwie Vip-Status..

      Unterrichtete später alle Töchter und Enkelkinder der Oberbürgermeister und Oberbürgermeisterinnen etc. sämtlicher Couleurs in der Kunst des Tanzes.

      Jesidisch…schrieb ich…..nicht jesuitisch…oder war das gar nicht in diesem Zusammenhang erwähnt?

      Liebdrücker…gleich ist alles sauber, juhu!!!

      …habe viel Nachfrage, es spricht sich herum, dass ich viele schöne kreative Dinge mit den Kindern mache und wir viel draußen sind und es guuuutes Essen gibt….

      Liked by 1 person

  38. We are who we are and it is what it is 🙂

    Faulous pix and a fascinating subject for a BF discussion,.

    Curious to know more about the plate to the right of the 4 headless eggs. Is it some sort of a flatbread on it?

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

  39. As always an interesting discussion beautifully paired with (as always) amazing images. As for the subject, I suppose I believe there is such a thing as pure evil, but I don’t believe at least among humans, none are born that way. Even the most evil throughout history have terribly sad back stories where they’d been tortured either physically or mentally – or at the very least THOUGHT they’d been tortured. Rather an odd topic this time but as always Dina’s images are extraordinary.

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

    • Dear Tina
      The question of evil is complex, which is why it is of interest to us for a blog. According to Nietzsche, this concerns the traditional, largely Christian-influenced morality that is hostile to life. Good and evil, as rigid systems, are human inventions.
      We are not quite sure, on one hand evil is a question of morals and a judgement, on the other hand we think that we are all born with good and evil traits.
      Thank you very much for your comment
      The Fab Four of Cley
      🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂

      Like

  40. Excellent reflection, y’all 4. (Your images are extraordinary BTW)

    Evil… evil. (I’m actually currently reading Nietzche’s Beyond Good and Evil. Lots of food for thought there.)

    Two thought:

    1. Evil is certainly raising its ugly head…
    2. I respectfully submit that humans always have a choice. (I don’t really buy into Nature and Culture (circumstances).

    You guys take care and stay aways from evil.

    🙏🏻

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

    • Thank you very much for your comment.
      Yes, Nietzsche has a lot to say about it. But we have to read it again. It’s too long ago that we read it the last time.
      All the best
      The Fab Four of Cley
      🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂

      Liked by 1 person

    • I was sure you’d read him before. And most likely in German.
      I’ve tried Heidegger in a bilingual German-English edition but gave up. Now I’m reading Nietzche by bits. I put the book on a ledge in a corridor. I pass by. Read a few paragraphs. Close the book. Come back. Read the same words again. Move on. Fun.
      Cheers to all.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Heidegger is quite a challenge, even for me as a native speaker of German. I have my problems with Heidegger’s style but with his attitude as well. Nietzsche is much easier to understand and has a much better style.

      Liked by 1 person

    • I think part of my dropping Heidegger half way is… precisely his attitude. But it’s all right, I have been known to pick a book back up after 10 or 20 years…
      Have oyu read Kant in German? The French translations I read had eternal, endless sentences…
      And yes, Nietzsche has a good style, with dense propositions. When I finish Good and evil, I’ll move Zarathustra back to the TBR shelf. 😉

      Liked by 1 person

    • I had a look at Nietzsche’s ‘Beyond Good and Evil’ again. He writes, what we believe as well, we must set aside our conventional moral values, which are shaped by Christianity and are hostile to life. Evil is a human invention.

      Liked by 1 person

    • All right. So you did have a copy at hand.
      Yes, he is very interesting in… breaking down “conventions” I might say? Force you to look at anything from different angles.
      Now one might argue (which I wouldn’t with you.) that such “invention” is precisely what makes Evil “human” (sadly). So one might also argue whether Evil is an “invention” or a “convention”? 😉
      Stay safe my friend.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Yes, I read Kant in German. Indeed, he writes never-ending sentences. He was still influenced by the Latin language in his style. It’s the opposite to English that is just straight foreward.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Why am I not surprised. I had not thought about Latin, but it does make a lot of sense. His “page-long” sentences did pull me away…
      And yes, English is much shorter. Even now when I compare it to French, English structure is unbeatable. Though too short maybe, but that’s another story.
      Cheers

      Liked by 2 people

    • The English sentence structure is one reason that positivism was the philosophy of the English speaking world. Dialectics is the German philosophy. You can say something and put it into perspective in the same sentence.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Very true. (Positively!) I wonder how much Nietsche’s “Beyond good and evil” has been transformed by translating into English…
      While we’re at languages, Spanish has an interesting quirk. The subject is very often omitted. In everyday speech, or in political discourse. The problem is that without a subject, no-one is ever responsible of anything… 😉

      Liked by 2 people

    • A German friend of mine once told me that while Romance languages tend to start talking and talking, and see where the sentence led, German forced to think the whole sentence through first, since often the verb was put at the end.
      (Language structures definitely have an impact on the way of thinking.)

      Liked by 1 person

  42. A fine post with Dina’s wonderful photographs supporting the breakfast table discussion so well. I noticed that “nonsense” is “Quatsch” in German – how cool, I love the sound of it. It reminds me of the beloved mythical beast of the Pacific Northwest, Sasquatch.

    The video in the comments caught my eye – lucky you, to have seen and heard that! It’s a beautiful thing, seeing Ginsberg in his element like that.

    I love his last statement about poking a hole in the ozone, how timely. He stopped by with Orlovsky one day at the bakery run by the Zen Community of New York (where I lived for several years in the 1980s). They were there to discuss who-knows-what with Sensei Bernie Glassman, ZCNY’s teacher. Ginsburg was disheveled looking – the very opposite of the Japanese Zen temple aesthetic and a fun contrast to see. It was a privilege to see him up close, if only for a moment.

    I’m with you on evil requiring the attribution of moral intent – but what about the question, “Does eveil exist?” That one is a puzzler.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

    • Thank you very much, dear Lynn.

      All the time I saw Ginsberg I was impressed. He was one of my heroes during my hippy times.

      I suppose something like evil exists. In a polarised world view, which I accept, evil is necessary to maintain balance if good is to exist. Life needs tension and this is produced by polarity like Yin and Yang, male and female etc.

      Wishing you a wonderful weekend
      Klausbernd 🙂

      Liked by 1 person

  43. Interesting point and urgent, dear Klaus. I’m writing an article about Saint Francis and Vladimir Lenin now where I raise a question about the limit of evil. Well… I guess that we must accept the fact that evil and good are opposite sides of the same paradigm. This approach makes us comprehend it better. Too much good leads to laziness, too much evil to growth and development. So, their balance is the best.

    Best wishes from Paris!
    And Happy autumn!🍁🍁🍁🙂🙂🙂

    Like

    Reply

Leave a comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.