It is their behavior, words, or thoughts that evil people. If "the means of final proof is reasonable", is this more acceptable? Even if you tell a lie, there is no harm on anyone. So then why are you killing people to save those who are considered bad people? The morals of action are totally based on the results. So, if the result is of good nature, whatever you do, whatever you need to achieve the desired result is considered "normal".
In William ยท Shakespeare 's play "Othello" there is a kind of evil spanning the darkness of the devil, which is in the opponent' Iago '. Just because Iago was not an arbitrator, Othello was promoted through Iago and he vowed to retaliate and destroy everything the wetlands and Othello take care. Through this, Iago played judges, juries and executors, but the justice of Iaco was justified, or his justice went far beyond his justice point. When you cross that line, it will be a no return. All obstacles that may be present are broken.
Through Shakespearean plays, Othello and Iago, he showed many features synonymous with evil personality. One of the characteristics of Iago is that he lies to many people throughout the game. Most of the lies of Iago were missing, and he did not tell the truth a word. In Iago, everyone in this way lies to Othello like this. I saw Othello that he was supporting all of Oslo's mistake. One incident occurred at Rido Rigo in Irago's assembly and joined Othello's hatred. Rodrigo hates Othello because he wants to go with Dead Mona. The most important incident about Iago's lie is that Othello gave Tsumunda's handkerchief. When Othel discovered that Michael Cassio had a handkerchief, Iago ignored Osello 's mention that he was the main driving force behind Cassio' s handkerchief.