Leaderboard

To my understanding, "good" and "evil" are moral judgments based on intent. As such, they have a built in implication of consciousness rather than mere instinct. A lion or bear that eats you is not "evil", it is merely hungry and acting on instinct, same as a venomous spider or snake that bites you in self defense. Harmful, absolutely, evil, absolutely not. (Note: I recognize that some particularly narcissistic people consider anything not submitting to their will to be "evil." That's not what we're talking about I hope.) Basically, I consider the question itself invalid so either answer to be nonsense unless you build in the assumption that bigfoots are self-aware with a sense of right and wrong and occasionally deliberately choose to do "wrong." It is probably more productive to couch the question in more objective, less subjective, terms. Risk. Costs. Tangible outcomes. Something that most "camps" can agree on rather than building the value system of one camp or another into the discussion and forcing the others to accept it or not participate. MIB