Agreed. The problem with a mission statement like “do no evil” is that in today’s pluralistic world (especially in the west), there’s no generally agreed-upon definition of evil.
Philosophically, defining “evil” requires defining “good” first, and a definition of “good” depends entirely on one’s notions of origin, meaning, morality, and destiny — one’s worldview.
In google’s case, it’s probably better business to simply remove the motto than to risk offending large groups of people in the quest for philosophical rigor.
> there’s no generally agreed-upon definition of evil.
Philosophically, yes. But moral relativity does not hold well due to the existence of culture. For western countries, no one can defend the morality of slavery or genocide. While those are pretty extreme, we have also collectively (democratically) decided that screwing over customers for your own profit is also not moral and should not be allowed. That's why antitrust law exists.
Philosophically, defining “evil” requires defining “good” first, and a definition of “good” depends entirely on one’s notions of origin, meaning, morality, and destiny — one’s worldview.
In google’s case, it’s probably better business to simply remove the motto than to risk offending large groups of people in the quest for philosophical rigor.