Too true. its all based on your perspective

Vehk is as evil as you want to percieve him. Evil is merely a perception.

Than what is the means to harm others?

The means to harm others is only evil when it's used agianst the people you don't think it should be used on.

But don't people who appear to be good often turn out to be bad, and vice versa?

That doesn't change the way people assess the evilness of harming others. If their really a wolf in sheep's clothing, then a person may move them into the okay to harm category. Or they may not, depends on how broad the range of people they don't think should be harmed is.

But someone said that harming others is only evil if and only if that person does not deserve to be harmed, my point was that how can we really know and have the place to harm others if we can not properly distinguish between those who are good and evil (and sometimes mentally ill people seem evil, but they are just sick)

IF your talking about post 79, then your missing my point. The question of who deserves to be harmed is ENTIRELY subjective. Whether or not harming a person is evil is based on whether you think they should or shouldn't be harmed.

Although this can make for a very interesting discussion, I don't think we should spam this thread by discussing it.

As others have said, Vivec only seems evil compared to our own cultural expectations. Compared to the Velothi culture he sprang up from, he was a saint and a crusader of morality and charity. The times in his life where he committed lies and murder are simply the times which he most conservatively adhered to Velothi values and to the personality traits of his Anticipation, Mephala. The "good" deeds Vivec committed by Imperial standards would be considered controversial or downright un-Dunmer by some.

I'm not a moral relativist by any means. I think there's probably a form of more or less objective good for the greatest number of people, whether or not it's based on religious or entirely scientific and philosophical principles. I'm simply saying that among his very own people, there's nothing particularly deviant or unprecedented about betrayal or murder.

There may be spoilers in my post.

Vivec was good in the end, or at least he had good intentions. That's one reason he weak compared to Dagoth Ur. Vivec choose to work against the hearts evil ways. And did he kill his friend.... yeah he almost certanly did, but that shouldn't take away many good deeds he did over the millennium .

And I must say that its strange you think he's the evil one. I recently replayed Morrowind and came out with the opposite reaction. If anyone is evil it's Azura. She got rid of the Tribunal knowing what that would do to the the Ministry of Truth and she didn't stop it. That's evil imho.

To his people I think they veiw him as a saintly character in public, but in private and in their minds they know he is more than good.
I think this sums most Dunmer you put your loyalties in order of Race, house then yourself and family, but these are flexible in the extreme.
Vivec was a charming rogue king of legend, but also a hedonistic worshiper of Mephala which implies a link to assassins, murder and secrets, so I think its really up to you to decide.