: So can't the Dark be evil even if they're justified in
: their attacks?
The Dark is wrong because their justification is faulty, just as the Light's is, because neither of them knows the complete truth, and neither can be objective because in the end it just comes down to "us vs them," and of course everyone is always going to choose "us" over "them" if that's all it amounts to.
But they're not evil, because it's not like they came here from another world with the sole purpose of destroying our entire existance "just because". They're trying to undo the harm that was done unto them, so their motive is right, and based on the information they have, they are justified. But they can't be objective, and neither can the Light.
: By the way, I'd argue you are justified in killing an
: innocent to save your own life, merely because the
: expectation that you would be obliged to die makes no
: sense to me.
I put a gun to your head and say "Kill that random pregnant mother or I'll blow your brains out!" Are you saying it's OK to kill her just to save your own life? If you refuse, and die for it, the harm stops at you; if you kill the pregnant woman, then you are doing more harm in response to someone else's harm toward you, so the net result is even more harm, and therefore the action is wrong.
Now if you were to kill someone who was trying to kill you, and you had no other choice, then that's justified. But if you were some sort of magical being that could either teleport out or zap the gunman with a bolt of lightning, and you did the lightning thing when you could have prevented harm to yourself without causing harm to another, then that would be evil.
Of course, in these examples I'm neglecting the fact that the gunman could later go on to kill someone else, and if killing him was the only way to stop him from doing so, then in the end that results in more good than harm and would not be evil.
