ebmusicman84

Sorry to reopen a dead topic, but this intrigued me. There is obviously a distinction between good deeds and evil deeds. It seems the question is how many more evil deeds than good deeds does one need to commit before one is considered to be an "evil man". I submit that once a person has committed one evil deed he is indeed evil. Likewise if he commits one good deed he is good. It seems that all people (assuming that all people have committed at least one good and one evil deed in their life) are both good and evil. Degrees of evil seem to depend purely on perspective. Let's look at the man who stole the candy bar. To me, his act was malicious, morally wrong, and willful, but didn't directly (or for the most part indirectly) effect me, thus he is not so evil to me. To the store owner however he is more evil because the same act did directly effect him by causing him to lose some profit. Finally it seems that everything is a matter of perspective. For the sake of argument let's replace the candy bar with a loaf of bread. Let us then stipulate that the man is stealing this bread to feed his family. To his family this act is good, to the shopkeeper the act is evil. How then should a third party view this act? I submit that the act was in fact neutral to all not involved. The question then becomes at what point is a person detached from another person's acts? This question is where I end because I have no desire what so ever to delve into chaos theory or the butterfly effect.

This may have been pointed out, I only read about five pages of this topic, but I would like to state this: Many of the proofs I read in this thread contained the idea of limits. I would like to point out that it is because of the idea that 0.999~ = 1 that limits exist. An infinite number of nines after a decimal point is impossible to achieve. Limits communicate the idea that, were an infinite amount of nines attainable, stick a zero and a decimal in front of them and you get 1. [LIMIT(n--->infinity)0.999..repeating n times] = 1 (to borrow from shakthig) says: The limit of [0.999~n times] as n approaches infinity equals one, or the more nines you put after 0. the closer you get to one. So yes, 0.999~ = 1 because this communicates that there is an infinite amount of nines after the 0. which indeed is equal to one.