Digging up a 3 month old thread. MY BAD! I just somehow got here from the piracy thead and wanted to say that I think I know what realMakc was getting at. DISCLAIMER: I in no way endorse his views, I'm just trying to explain what I think he meant.

A lot of you were thinking of "good" and "bad" in terms of "good = right" and "bad = wrong". realMakc wasn't saying that right and wrong were relative, but that good and bad were.

For instance, let's take a serial killer who kills 20 women after raping all of them. Clearly we would all say that his actions are "bad". However, the killer would say his actions were "good" because they made him feel good. He got off on them or whatever. So, to him, they were good.

Here's where the disconnect comes for me and everyone else realMakc (if you're still here).

I think you're trying to separate "good & bad" from "right & wrong" when they are actually somewhat intertwined. If something is inherently wrong, it can't be "good". Whether or not someone thinks it's good, it's not. If a man rapes a girl, it's "wrong" and it's "bad". It doesn't matter what the man thinks about it. It doesn't matter if the man THINKS it's "good", it's "bad".

Anyway, probably not adding anything new to the discussion...