As @I like sushi just outlined the terms used lack a proper definition. I strive not to judge any human for what they’ve done or how they behave because I’m convinced that everyone tries to make the best out of their situation within their capabilities.

Their capabilities depend on both, nature and nurture: You’re born with a set of features that is then forged by experience. I like the image of a high dimensional vector space where every dimension represents different feature and you start with a certain vector. This vector is altered by experience but some dimensions are more likely to change than others. Thus, we’re wandering through this space as life advances. If you’re lucky you manage to stay in an area that is compatible with the culture in which you live, if not, well…

Since this space is so vast I’m sure there’s a way for any initial vector to be shaped to a “social compatible” one, even if it’s prone to lead to psychopathy or else. Of cause this way is easier for some than for others and might be close to impossible when the environment is already destructive.

I dislike using the terms “good” and “bad” or “evil” as they are judgemental and I don’t dare to judge most things. I’ve been looking for alternative terms for a while now and consider “constructive” and “destructive” in a global sense. By thinking of it, would these terms meet the requirements for a definition of “good” and “evil”?