The definitions of "good" and "evil" seem very subjective; however (although along the same lines), evil seems generally to indicate an act of a very selfish (ie, subjective) nature that is detrimental to the broader (ie, objective) consequences. Pretty much the opposite of "altruism", more than that of "good" (if one thinks of "good" and "bad" as opposites, seemingly on a much smaller scale). The posts here have eventually shifted into pitting "evil" versus "morality" rather than "good". So, my thinking here would equate "morality" with "altruism".
Altruism — the doctrine that the general welfare of society is the proper goal of an individual's actions: opposed to egoism.
Some selfish natures that ignore broader consequences have already been given:
- Spidergoat — immoral behavior (morals being universally applicable and true forever)
- Cosmictraveler — child sexual abuse
- Jeeves — a deliberate, freely chosen pattern of harmful behaviour [that] diminishes [the] chance of survival of the social unit
- Chimpkin — [going] through life using people financially, conning them, and charming them into helping him by appearing vulnerable and sweet.
- Chimpkin — to spread malicious rumors on the job, or to knowingly contract for a poor job on a contractee's house because the contractee does not know know precisely what needs done and how to specify for it, or to borrow money informally and not pay it back.
- Wellwisher — individual behavior, which if extrapolated to the entire group, would regress or destroy the group.
