How's this for a definition of evil?

While studying the morality of Bart Simpson I think I figured out a good definition of evil. Here it is:

Someone who does not want to do good.

Easy, right? So obvious. Maybe a little bit too obvious. Enough that you might miss what I really mean, so let me explain.

The standard measure of evil is Hitler. But maybe Hitler isn't the best example to use in these cases since there is so much emotional attachment to his figure. (see my comment) So rather than use that tired example I'll use a more fun one: James Bond villains. They generally want to take over the world. But to what end? Power? Greed? No. Not all of them. What do they want? Utopia. They want to create peace. Their methods might be a bit unorthodox, but their end goal is the same: goodness. They believe that they are doing good. In fact, EVERYONE believes that they are doing good.

This is why I don't believe in evil. Everyone thinks they are doing good. And I think it's pretty darned good evidence for the existence of God. The general "tide" or "current" in humanity is towards goodness. Over time we should gradually get to be better and better people because we all struggle towards goodness.

Unfortunately, although evil seems fairly easy to define, it seems that good is far more difficult. The struggles we have (indeed many wars were fought over this) are reconciling each others' definitions of "goodness." There are few universally accepted definitions of "good," so one of the main goals of philosophy I think is to study mankind in such a way as to discover that universal definition of "goodness" so we'll have a tried and true yardstick by which we can live and know that we are doing right.

This is why I especially like my definition of morality: free will. I think it covers all bases. Read the article for more information.

I have defined morality.

Well, I did it. For thousands of years man has searched for the meaning of morality. Well you all can stop looking. I found it. LOL

Morality is that which maximizes the sum total of free will in the world.
Not at any given time, but over the lifetime of the world.

The goal for morality is to allow maximum free will, both from within ourselves and from without. It’s important to consider everything though. You can’t just look at the immediate level of free will. A judgement call must be made. When calculating the free-will, one must consider the entire lifespan of each choice in the decision, all of its consequences, and the decisions that must come from that initial decision.

Making a decision that maximizes free will at the beginning (like taking drugs) can severely limit free will over the long run. I don't even mean getting arrested. I mean if you abuse drugs, it can affect how your brain works. That might not matter to you, but consider the people who will have to take care of you. Their level of free will has been reduced. Even if your handicap due to drug use is minor, say if your memory has been affected, other people will have to pull up the slack to make up for your diminished memory. Your selfish abuse of drugs has caused (over the long run) other people to focus on you when they could be doing other more productive things.

I truly believe that all of life's decisions can be distilled to free will. If you consider the long term affect on the global level of free will, then that should help to make the decision better. When you do make a decision though, always be optimistic. If your loved one is on life support and you are considering taking them off, don't let "the odds" sway you. Odds are contrary to God. Miracles can happen, but not if you don't allow for them. Watch the movie "Creator." Mediocre plot. Bad acting. But it's a sweet gem of a movie and it illustrates the miracle and power of faith and love beautifully. If that movie doesn't make you tear up, you are a robot.