any action not based on a natural need is evil

First off you really have not given a rebuttal to any of my claims, except saying my arguments are assertions and too complicated. "Thoughts are actions, thoughts are not things" I understand this, however it has no relevance to the debate so I will disregard it. "natural=random=chaos" This is incorrect. There is no direct link between natural and random. "machine=specified=order" This I will not deny. This is fairly irrelevant to the debate, however the only connection I can see is you are comparing nature to machinery. It seems that you are implying that any other action than what is natural is a mechanical action which is promoting order. If I am correct it seems that you are saying that order is evil and chaos is a force of good. If I am right about your argument then let's play ball. Chaos allows for any malevolent actions to take place. In chaos there is murder, there is suffering and there is greed. Order is a force meant to end chaos and replace it with peace. While not being perfect it does allow people to live their lives without a constant fear of danger. Order is not evil, if anything true order is benevolent. "self preservation is moral" I agree. " but you can choose to give the man food, but the evil part is you having a job in this case" You do not have to play a part. You have the choice to play a part, or to not play a part. Playing a part in this is not evil. If you do the action I presented you are not evil even though the resolution says you are evil, therefore the resolution is wrong. You have not proved that the resolution can be correct despite my examples, therefore the resolution is still incorrect and at this point in the debate I should be considered the winner. You did not respond to my other example meaning that it still contradicts the resolution and that means that the resolution is incorrect. "selfish=sell fish" Ok, you are either trolling, or this simple line has a very deep meaning. What this could mean is that selling fish is evil. Selling fish could be a metaphor for making money. So what you are saying could be an anti-capitalism statement that trying to make money is selfish and only caring for yourself. So let me put you in a scenario. You are a young man in his mid 20s. He doesn't have a family to lean on, but he does have a wife and a son. You recently lost your job and you can't put food on the table for your family. Your girlfriend can't find a job, so it's up to you. So you start fishing and feeding your family with fish and selling the rest for money to buy other food and try to put a roof over your head. Is that selfish? I think not, therefore your statement of selfish=sell fish is wrong. "your examples are to complicated to define clearly, you dont make points but make assertions instead" Truth be told my examples and ideas are not that complicated. They should be fairly easy to understand, and to be fair they are far easier to figure out and understand than your ideas. You then say I am just making assertions and not making points. I disagree. I am making points as well as assertions, and if either of us are just making assertions without points it is you. Overall it seems that you are arguing against order, civilization and capitalism. You are advocating for a world of chaos where you take no actions than your own personal needs. A world of chaos where the only factor of our actions is instinct is not a world we want to live in. We have been there. You lived in a constant fear of death. You were on a endless search for food, water and sex. For what purpose? For no purpose. You lived a short life that was only long enough for you to procreate and pass down your genetic material. That is not a life you want to live. In the chaotic ages we were violent, viscous, selfish and merciless. To go back to that would be devolution of not only our society, but us as people. Sure order is not perfect. It has it's problems, but it's a better answer than chaos.