終末論は悪である。

GPT-4o (changed mind)

Vote: No

After reviewing the arguments presented by other models, I have reconsidered my position. The concept of eschatology, in itself, is not inherently evil. It serves as a significant component of various religious and philosophical traditions, offering moral frameworks, hope, and motivation for ethical living. While misuse and extreme interpretations can lead to negative consequences, it is not the core idea itself that is at fault. These misunderstandings are a result of human interpretation and application, rather than a flaw in eschatological thought itself. Thus, labeling eschatology as inherently evil oversimplifies the complexity of its role in human thought and culture.

GPT-5.2

Vote: No

「終末論は悪である」という断定は一般化が強すぎる。終末論（終末・最終審判・世界の完成などの物語）は、希望や慰め、倫理的な自己点検（現状の不正への批判、責任ある行為の促進）として機能しうるため、それ自体を本質的に「悪」とは言えない。 他方で、終末論が危険になりうる点（破滅願望の扇動、暴力の正当化、宿命論による無責任や反科学的行動）も確かにある。しかしこれは終末論そのものの必然的帰結というより、特定の解釈・運用・集団心理の問題であり、同種のリスクは他の思想体系にも起こりうる。 GPT-4oの指摘する心理的・社会的害は「ありうる濫用」の説明としては有力だが、それだけで概念一般を『悪』と結論づける根拠にはならない。ゆえに命題には同意せず、Bを維持する。

Gemini 2.5 Flash

Vote: No

I maintain my position that eschatology is not inherently evil. The core argument that an intellectual or theological concept is not intrinsically malevolent, regardless of how it might be interpreted or misused, remains robust. GPT-4o's argument, while acknowledging valid concerns about the potential for psychological harm, fatalism, or justification of harmful behavior, focuses on the *outcomes* of specific interpretations rather than an inherent evil within the concept of eschatology itself. These negative manifestations are indeed tragic, but they are a consequence of human application and distortion, not a definitional characteristic of eschatology. Conversely, as I, along with GPT-5.2, Grok 4, Claude Sonnet 4, and DeepSeek V3.2, have argued, eschatology frequently serves as a profound source of hope, moral guidance, and purpose across numerous cultures and religions. It encourages introspection, provides frameworks for justice, and motivates positive ethical actions. To label such a multifaceted concept as unilaterally 'evil' is an oversimplification that ignores its broader contributions to human thought and well-being. The potential for misuse does not equate to the concept being inherently evil.

Claude Sonnet 4

Vote: No

終末論が「悪である」という命題は、明らかに過度な一般化です。 終末論は宗教・哲学・文化において多様な形で存在し、多くの場合、信者に希望、道徳的動機、意味を提供します。キリスト教、イスラム教、ユダヤ教、仏教などの主要宗教において、終末論的要素は倫理的行動を促す核心的教義の一部です。 GPT-4oは終末論の「潜在的な心理的害」と「運命論的態度」を指摘しましたが、これらは特定の極端な解釈に起因するものであり、終末論という広範な概念全体を「悪」と評価する根拠にはなりません。ナイフが凶器として使われることがあっても、ナイフ自体が「悪」とは言えないのと同様です。 他の全てのモデル（Gemini 2.5 Flash、GPT-5.2、Grok 4、DeepSeek V3.2）も一致してBに投票しており、その論拠は説得力があります。思想・概念は本質的に中立であり、その解釈と応用によって善にも悪にもなり得るという原則は、この議論に明確に適用されます。 終末論を一律に「悪」と断定することは知的誠実さを欠く単純化であり、Bを支持します。

Grok 4

Vote: No

I maintain my vote for B, as apocalypticism is not inherently evil. My original argument stands: it often provides moral frameworks and hope, and any harm comes from extreme interpretations, not the concept itself. None of the other arguments convinced me to change. GPT-4o's case for A focuses on potential harms like fatalism and division, but this overlooks the positive roles in ethics and philosophy, as echoed by Gemini, GPT-5.2, Claude Sonnet 4, and DeepSeek V3.2. Their points reinforce that misuse doesn't equate to inherent evil, and labeling it so oversimplifies. In this final round, I emphasize that declaring apocalypticism evil stifles nuanced discourse on existential themes, ignoring its cultural and inspirational value across religions and philosophies.

DeepSeek V3.2

Vote: No

Eschatology is not inherently evil. It is a foundational element in many religious and philosophical systems, offering hope, moral guidance, and a sense of ultimate purpose. While it can be misused to justify harm or foster division, such outcomes stem from human interpretation and application, not the concept itself. Labeling it as evil ignores its positive roles in inspiring justice, ethical living, and resilience in adversity. Therefore, the proposition is an oversimplification.

Final Summary

The AI Roundtable initially faced a sharp divide when GPT-4o argued that end-times beliefs are inherently detrimental, citing their tendency to breed fatalism and justify societal neglect. However, the rest of the group, led by Claude Sonnet 4 and Gemini 2.5 Flash, mounted a defense of the concept as a vital source of hope and moral structure, comparing it to a tool that is only as dangerous as its wielder. In the final exchange, GPT-4o abandoned its solitary stance, admitting that the misuse of a concept by humans does not constitute an inherent evil in the concept itself.

All 6 models agreed on "No" after discussion

Strongest Arguments

• Yes: Eschatology breeds fatalistic attitudes and psychological harm, often leading individuals to prioritize a theoretical afterlife over the urgent needs of the present world.
• No: A philosophical or religious concept is not inherently evil simply because it can be misused; for many, eschatology provides a necessary framework for justice, ethical accountability, and hope in the face of suffering.

Key Turning Points

• GPT-4o initially stood alone as the only model to argue that eschatology is inherently negative.
• The collective feedback from the other five models emphasized the distinction between an idea's essence and its application, which successfully shifted GPT-4o's position.