Which is better at judging a person s good or evil in terms of behavior or motivation?

Although the motive is good, but he actually did something bad, which is caused by stupidity, and he cannot be blamed. There will be bad retribution in the future. The motives are not good, but they actually do good things. Although the result is good, because the motive is not good, the future retribution is a mixture of good and evil.

It is impossible for a good man to be without a little fault, and it is impossible for a wicked person not to have done a good deed. If we only look at the good side of sentient beings and do not look at the mistakes and mistakes of sentient beings, then all sentient beings are Buddhas and Bodhisattvas. It's enough to think of everyone as Amitabha, so why cling to each other?

Of course, it is behavior, and motivation does not necessarily translate into behavior. Thank you.

Motive is the essence of a person, and people with sinister motives are more likely to do cruel things and cause bad consequences. And a person who behaves viciously can sometimes be impulsive or excessive, or he may do bad things for the sake of revenge.

Behavior and motivation are two different realms. One is the heart, the other is the practice. The kind of person in front of him can't be seen on the surface, and he doesn't know his heart when he knows people. The latter kind of person can see through his actions whether it is a good deed or an evil deed.

Behavior and motivation can judge a person's good or evil depending on what the consequences are. Good results are good, and bad consequences are evil.

Behavior can better judge a person's good and evil motives, that is, the original purpose does not explain anything, then the behavior can be seen, as the saying goes, don't take the good as small and do it, don't take the evil small and do it.

This proposition is a false proposition, and behavior must be the criterion for judgment, but the behavior without motive is complementary to each other, and the law is also based on behavior.

Those who do good deeds are good, and those who do bad deeds are evil.

You can't understand a person without going deeper, and it's an image for the first time.

First of all, from the perspective of the criterion for distinguishing good and evil behaviors, the theory tells us that all behaviors that are conducive to social progress are good deeds, and vice deeds are vice deeds, which is itself a result judgment, so there is no doubt that the result is the criterion for evaluating good and evil behaviors.

Second, from the essential difference between outcome and motivation, we know that the outcome is certain. When the motivation is inconsistent with the subjective intention of the actor, it has deviated from the object of our evaluation - behavior, so how can the motivation be used as a standard at this time? And when it is consistent with the actor's intention to act, the motive still cannot be used as a criterion for evaluation.

Because there are many objective constraints from motives to behaviors, there are behaviors of both good and evil natures due to different practices for the same motive, just as we often see that good intentions do bad things, and bad intentions do good things. So it turns out that the results can be used as the criterion for evaluation.

Thirdly, from the perspective of the plurality of results, we say that the results are not singular, the results are like a bunch of grapes, and each grape is its constituent element. Just like the social effect of the behavior, the degree of harm to others, and so on, are all elements that constitute this result.

Today, we combine these elements to analyze behavior comprehensively. In order to give it an objective, fair and rational evaluation.

So to sum up, I think that the criterion for evaluating good and evil behavior is the result.

The criterion for evaluating good and evil actions is effect, not motivation.

Reason: Good and evil are in the realm of morality, not in terms of legal criteria. The so-called "goodness" is the behavior that is manifested in the relationship between people and people to others, to the society, to slow down and frustrate, and to frustrate the bad and beneficial; "Evil" is an act that is harmful to others and society.

It can be seen from the quotation that the "beneficial" and "harmful" mentioned in the article are undoubtedly judged by the effect of the behavior. Whereas, "motivation" is a subjective state with implicit characteristics, and motivation always needs to be expressed through behavior. It can be seen that motivation alone cannot evaluate behavior at all.

The same motive can give rise to a variety of different behaviors. For example, when trying to get a video camera, this motivation can lead to the following behaviors:

First, work hard, get more wages, and save money to buy; Second, save money to buy money. It can be seen that both of these actions can be said to be good in terms of reason and reason; However, if you want to rely on crooked ways and use ill-gotten gains to buy, this kind of behavior is undoubtedly evil. Both good and evil behaviors are caused by the same motive, and if the effect is not produced by the behavior, how can the good or evil of the behavior be evaluated by relying on the motive alone?

Legitimate motives can also lead to unreasonable or even wrong behavior. For example, parents "stick education" children, from the parents' motivation, undoubtedly want their children to become talents, is a good motive, is a good motive.

Thank you, Chairman, judges, audience members, and friends of the opposing party: Good evening, everyone! Let's start by looking at the fact that good and evil are moral issues, and everyone has their own understanding of this pair of concepts.

An act that seems good to you, but it seems to me that it may not be. We can't expect everyone to judge a behavior uniformly by its effect or motivation. Again, effect refers to the outcome and impact of an action; Motivation is the idea that motivates a person to engage in a certain behavior.

Modern Chinese Dictionary p327) Today, our view is that the criterion for judging good or evil is effect, not motive. First of all, it is operable to judge good and evil by effect, but motive is not operable. The effects of an action can be clearly seen by people, and when people see the effect of a certain action, they can make a judgment.

On the other hand, motivation is not operable. Motivation exists in people's hearts, and it is certainly invisible or touchable to others, and even if the actor tells you what his motivation is, it is not necessarily real. In addition, there are even some actions that have no motive in themselves, so how can such actions be judged as good or evil?

For example, if a person drives drunk and causes a traffic accident, the drunk person may not be conscious at the time, and his behavior is not motive, so from the point of view of the opponent's defense friend, is there no good or evil in the behavior of drunk driving? This is clearly counterintuitive. Therefore, at the factual level, it is feasible to judge by effect, but it is impossible to implement it by motivation.

Second, the evaluation of good and evil by effect is comprehensive. Let's discuss how to judge good and evil by effect. As we mentioned earlier, the effect includes both the result and the impact.

The result is a direct consequence of the behavior, and the impact includes social impact, personal impact, and so on. When judging the good and evil of an action, the judge always sees the result of the action on the one hand and considers the social impact of the action on the other. When people combine the two to comprehensively consider the good and evil of behavior, it is the exact meaning of our use of effect as a criterion.

Finally, at the value level, it is advocacy to judge good and evil by effect. Today, we sincerely hope that all people can do things with good motives, but motives are often used by actors to excuse their mistakes. Think about it, do we often say "I didn't mean it this way" to excuse ourselves when we fail?

Are we getting caught up in such excuses and not being willing to accept the consequences of our actions? Today we say that we should judge good and evil actions by their effects, just like the motto of West Point, "No excuses", which calls on everyone to bravely take responsibility for their actions. Therefore, we believe that the criterion for judging good or evil actions is effect, not motivation.

The core of good and evil is nothing more than profit. And this interest can be divided into three levels.

The first is the human being's time of existence. Doing: The more we can prolong the existence of human beings, the better; The shorter the human being, the more evil it becomes.

The second is the world (including things and outsiders). Doing: The more beneficial to the world, the better; The more harmful it is to the world, the more evil it is.

Finally, there is the ego. What you do: the more beneficial you are, the better you are; The more harmful it is to oneself, the more evil it becomes.

Of course, the above is about good and evil, but the heart of good and evil is different.

If evil deeds are done with good intentions (i.e., evil deeds with good intentions), then things are evil and hearts are good; If one does a good deed out of malice (such as seeking something in return), then the deed is good and the heart is evil.

In addition, good and evil also involve personal abilities: the more you try to do good, or try to reduce evil, the better your heart will be; The more recklessly we do evil, or the more we intend to do good, the more evil our hearts become.