Evil or Good, what/who determines?

[wolfgang]

Originally Posted by newsbone

Without Evil Good would not be relevant and minus Good Evil will cease to be, in a way they are kind of similar but the difference is based on the divergent views. How should one determine what should be considered Good or Evil?

You don't have to figure it out. It is not a "should". You already know what you consider evil or good.

When then should something be considered to be universally Good or Evil, can a single tradition or culture or system determine what constitutes either?

What makes you think there is a universal good or evil? Just like you know what is good and evil to you - cultures and traditions define that too and usually the people in those cultures adopt the same view.

Or should what is common among them be decided as the single measure of Good or Bad?

That is what happens. Groups that have the same definition are on the same page. But those other definitions will not be able to adopt the other groups ideals.

Can religions which already have laid down definitions and guidelines that already predetermine what Evil or Good are, be accepted as the authorities on such matters even when they seem not to agree on the same within themselves?

I think there are too many rules cast onto people from authorities and religions that make it hard for us to trust that we are as humans naturally kind for the most part. But that may just be my opinion.

We are seeing very many instances where a number of characters are unacceptable in one place but pretty much a way of life in another, can there ever be a balance without oppressing one side; which are then the best tenets to determine Good or Bad in a society?

Each society has their own way. Did it work for the crusaders to kill the infidels?

Should it based on the ethics of governance, religion or individual perspective, if so why?

I think the less "shoulds" we are given when growing up the more natural our sense of good and evil will be. It's almost like having too much moral codes and laws and such is what causes people to do more evil.

I liked the first post response "do unto others" - but, you know, even that has flaws because if you can imagine the Mayans used to love to play a game and the winner was honored to be sacrificed. So if the Mayans were still doing that would we want to play that game?

[Daffy Duck]

When I went to church in my teenage years, I would claim that God created and loved Satan. This pissed off some people I knew, but it must be true.

If the Bible is true,
1) God created everything, did He not?
2) God calls himself good. In order to call himself good, there must be something that is not good. We call that thing Satan, or Evil.

[Judge]

Originally Posted by newsbone

Is there any way then, which everybody can be made to see and seek reality on a pedestal of a single perspective?

No, because there is only one consciousness, so there is only one perspective. The only way it would work for everyone to see reality for what it is, is if their was a collective connected consciosuness, so in affect 6 billion parts of consciousness that are all connected.

Some people adopt that model, but I find it a huge limitation.

Originally Posted by Orecle

what about when a pharmaceutical company releases a product, they know will affect the fertility of millions of women. Is that just ego? Or what about when neighbouring soldiers mass rape all the women in your town, or mass genocide? Is this just ego intepretation.

So if a stranger slaps your mum with no provocation, is that just your ego wat if your mum slaps a stranger, would you not say anything cos its your ego that labels it as good or bad?. Are criminals just a figment of our ego?

If we humans wipe out the world to the point where only bacteria can grow, will that not be evil?

So if there is no good or bad, is there any need for law?

The perception that all of humanity is a massive seperation causes all of the ego's suffering. Why does the creator of all there is simply observe all the horror and do nothing?

Consciousness grows via the seperation. The stronger it is, the easier it can know what it is. So the more of all there is in existance, then the more consciousness can grow and know itself. To know what you are, you have to know everything you are not, so the more perceived suffering, then the more consciousness can grow.

There is more to learn from a nightmare than a pleasant dream.

Let me ask you a question.

If you were leader of a country, and half your citezens all in their 20s died in 1 day, would you say " Well, they would have all died one day, besides millions die daily anyway, its just my ego," or would you you have sleepless night until you find the cause.

I would question why I had created it, how does that aid in conscious growth. I may from my limited egoic perspective feel sadness, maybe even terrible grief, but how it affects consciousness, is more important than how my temporary ego self is affected.

A loved one dieing is one thing. A loved one being raped and murdered is something entirely different.

Of course it is different to my ego, it will respond accordingly, but the value is in how it affects consciousness, not how it affects my ego.

Judge

[newsbone]

Originally Posted by Judge

The perception that all of humanity is a massive seperation causes all of the ego's suffering. Why does the creator of all there is simply observe all the horror and do nothing?

No digress intended I hope but am obliged to answer this; He has done something but we question and do not appreciate his efforts.

Back to the thread; you talk of consciousness but you are silent on who directs it. I think consciousness has a beginning and a purpose, why are they not common to all thus basis for universal reality?

[Parthon]

This topic could be discussed for years without coming to an answer. Yay!.

I've found that the most "objective" form of morality, ie: view of good/evil" comes from one line:

"What would the world be like if everyone in it did <blah>."

So, would it improve humanity, would it worsen it; would it have a positive impact, or a negative impact?

And yes, this is still quite subjective, people will have different answers, but those exercising great wisdom and logic will come to roughly to same conclusion on the same matters.

The only difference between those that do evil and those that don't is often wisdom. Good and Evil are just crappy words to describe the inner sense of consience that comes from greater wisdom.

[newsbone]

Originally Posted by Parthon

The only difference between those that do evil and those that don't is often wisdom. Good and Evil are just crappy words to describe the inner sense of consience that comes from greater wisdom.

Does greater wisdom have a source that can be tapped by everybody or is it for a select few?

[Parthon]

Anyone can gain wisdom, it just takes searching for it and a desire to have it.

[Judge]

Originally Posted by newsbone

He has done something but we question and do not appreciate his efforts.

You are assuming that there is a being outside of yourself that is the creator, therefore, ultimately you have no real control and hence no real creativity.

Back to the thread; you talk of consciousness but you are silent on who directs it.

Who directs your life, who creates your life, who creates the world, who builds reality.

If you seek for long enough, you will find there is only you and while you can spend 100 years seeking, the answer is always now

It's all you.....Baby!!

Judge

[themaster]

Originally Posted by newsbone

now whose good ought to be considered as evil or vice versa and what should be the methodology involved?

Why do you seek to judge?

Why do you seek methodology?

I will repeat my idea.. good and evil like "personal religion" is a individual judgments on others and ultimately always on self..

What we really have here in this reality.. negative and positive energy and of course neutral.. the idea per say to not get caught up in the good vs. evil fight is stop judging and allow evil ideas.. allow NEGATIVE ideas in the self..

But who is to say for example "hitler is evil"?

This is clearly a judgment.. it may be adopted by others.. but it is a judgment and in judging others you also judge yourself.. nothing here has inherit meaning, we take things that happen and give them meaning..

Someone can take and has taken what hitler did and treated it in a positive or neutral way...

Neutral ideas
- hitler did his thing.. and that has nothing to do with me..
- hitler is a interesting phenomena for study

positive ideas
- you know that hitler guy.. he helped get the city of berlin rebuilt.. better than ever now..
- you know that hitler guy.. built all these cool bunkers in the city.. great fun it would be to explore them..

No one knows me, better than me.. so if I'm honest about the incorpation of negative ideas that is me.. you would see that I embrace and am inclusive that I have these acts; I am capable off and have considered doing from time to time..

- going out in a hail of bullets
- suicide
- war
- rape

When you are allowing of these ideas.. you find you just don't need to act them out.. if you refuse this part of yourself.. then you have some exploring to do.. technically speaking I really don't view these ideas as negative anyway.. but the general reality does..

[ming]

Originally Posted by Judge

Who directs your life, who creates your life, who creates the world, who builds reality.

If you seek for long enough, you will find there is only you and while you can spend 100 years seeking, the answer is always now

It's all you.....Baby!!

Judge

Could you give evidence of your affirmation?

[Daffy Duck]

Originally Posted by themaster

I really don't view these ideas as negative anyway.. but the general reality does..

Humans seem to inherently dislike the idea of having their freedom taken away. This is what actions like rape and war cause -- loss of freedom or sacrifice.

I think if you were locked away in a small cage, you would view the idea as negative... like the general reality does. Our mind and body seem to have inherent needs, and to deny them will cause madness or death.

[spacedout]

To me the answer is pretty straightforward. If what you do helps someone it is good. If it harms someone it is bad and if it neither helps nor harms someone it is neutral.

[themaster]

Originally Posted by Daffy Duck

I think if you were locked away in a small cage, you would view the idea as negative... like the general reality does.

Not necessarily.. I can see a positive aspect of that..

Originally Posted by Daffy Duck

Humans seem to inherently dislike the idea of having their freedom taken away. This is what actions like rape and war cause -- loss of freedom or sacrifice.

Our mind and body seem to have inherent needs, and to deny them will cause madness or death.

This is only true if you believe that circumstances happen that there is no choice.. else I don't really think these ideas happen to random people..

Now I could see a situation where someone is somewhere they don't like (treating as negative) they believe they have no choices, period that steel bars and evil people are punishing them.. and they can't escape if they believed all that.. then yes.. I would see death or madness a good way out.. (madness isn't always a bad thing )

[Daffy Duck]

Just saw your responses now. Sorry for my late reply.

Originally Posted by themaster

Not necessarily.. I can see a positive aspect of that..

But I bet you don't wanna try it. I think being locked in a small cage for ten years would suck and limit my growth. But that's me... for some rare individuals, the opposite is probably true.

This is only true if you believe that circumstances happen that there is no choice.. else I don't really think these ideas happen to random people..

I don't think any three year old chooses rape or war. But yes, especially as we grow older, our choices are largely what determines our life. I think there are many forces at play though.

[Liminal Chris]

Originally Posted by Judge

The human ego is the only thing that exists that defines stuff as good or bad, pleasure or pain. If you take a step back from your ego, you can actually witness that there is no good or bad, it's all a mindmade defintion to capture the ego and keep it alive.

Judge

spot on

[Liminal Chris]

Originally Posted by spacedout

To me the answer is pretty straightforward. If what you do helps someone it is good. If it harms someone it is bad and if it neither helps nor harms someone it is neutral.

Too simplistic.

What if it helps someone and hurts someone? Who are you to even say what helping or harming is?


I remember a Taoist Story (at least I believe it was Taoist) about a Farmer.

One day, the Farmer's Horse runs away, and the Farmer curses his "bad" fortune.

A week later, the Farmer's Horse returns with an entire slew of horses, which the Farmer captures and domesticates. The farmer rejoices at the fact that the horse ran away because it led to him gaining more horses (beneficial).

While the Farmer's Son was breaking in the horses, he was bucked off, fell, and broke his arm. The son would be unable to work the fields. The farmer cursed the Gods proclaiming that the horse running away had actually be a terrible thing because it led to the wild horses which ultimately caused the broken arm.

A week later, the Army came through town looking for young people to forcibly serve in the army. When they came to the father's house, the passed on the son because he had a broken arm. The father changed his mind AGAIN on his fortune concerning the horse and especially the broken arm.


The moral of the story is that we are in absolutely no position to judge the universe. We don't have enough information to assign the label of Good or Bad or Evil to anything because of how little we ACTUALLY know. Assigning those labels is claiming knowledge that we simply don't have.


I think intention is the only thing we can assign labels to and even for that we can ONLY do it to ourselves because we can really only know ourselves.

[JHL]

Originally Posted by newsbone

Does greater wisdom have a source that can be tapped by everybody or is it for a select few?

Is your point you are coming to essentially that true morality can only be derived from the word of God? (Presumably because human beings are incapable of determining what is moral without divine guidance?)

[themaster]

Originally Posted by Daffy Duck

But I bet you don't wanna try it. I think being locked in a small cage for ten years would suck and limit my growth. But that's me... for some rare individuals, the opposite is probably true.

Consider me rare, as I said I could see some positive aspects of that with the right circumstances for me anyway..

Originally Posted by Daffy Duck

I don't think any three year old chooses rape or war. But yes, especially as we grow older, our choices are largely what determines our life. I think there are many forces at play though.

This is where we differ then.. I do think that children come forth to participate in fornication, child murder, rape, war and even partial birth abortion.. and I do think they come forth willing and excitedly for said experience from there original higher perspective..

I am one of those that thinks we do "choose our family" not have them thrust on us.. as some people like to think mostly negatively about them..

Please understand that your statement above assuming you mean it and I have interpreted it properly is a judgment.. it is a judgment about good and evil and you are defining that negative things happening to kids are "evil"

[newsbone]

Originally Posted by JHL

Is your point you are coming to essentially that true morality can only be derived from the word of God? (Presumably because human beings are incapable of determining what is moral without divine guidance?)

This could be one of the ways that we do receive wisdom don't you think? We talk of receiving greater wisdom but are silent about the source, why, is it that either we do not know or we know but choose to ignore?

[JHL]

Originally Posted by newsbone

This could be one of the ways that we do receive wisdom don't you think? We talk of receiving greater wisdom but are silent about the source, why, is it that either we do not know or we know but choose to ignore?

I am open to the possibility of some sort of higher source of 'wisdom', but only because I begin with the declaration that I dont know anything.

Let me ask you this:

lets say that people knew for certain that the Christian God existed. They therefore know with certainty that if they did not follow his commandments that they would end up in hell. It is highly likely that these people would invariably follow his commandments (if they dont they will go to hell.) does this situation not introduce a problem of morality in that many people would be devout followers - but for the wrong reasons?

[newsbone]

Originally Posted by JHL

I am open to the possibility of some sort of higher source of 'wisdom', but only because I begin with the declaration that I dont know anything.

Let me ask you this:

lets say that people knew for certain that the Christian God existed. They therefore know with certainty that if they did not follow his commandments that they would end up in hell. It is highly likely that these people would invariably follow his commandments (if they dont they will go to hell.) does this situation not introduce a problem of morality in that many people would be devout followers - but for the wrong reasons?

If you look at the Bible I think that was the predicament the Israelites faced in the wilderness as they headed to the Promised Land from Egypt. It was either God or death and through fear God reigned for there was no alternative choice to survival but to obey. One thing though is that this system of things worked as the Israelites eventually got to Canaan.
Now back to your question! Personally I agree with you that it raises some good questions on whether it is right to force people to worship you with disregard to their freedom to choice and whether this should be used as a measure of obedience. But just like someone who has found himself between! How is it said ‘the devil and the deep blue sea or the rock and the hard place’ our choices are pretty limited.

[Daffy Duck]

Originally Posted by themaster

Please understand that your statement above assuming you mean it and I have interpreted it properly is a judgment.. it is a judgment about good and evil and you are defining that negative things happening to kids are "evil"

Yep, I would consider raping a child to be an evil act. I know that's not a politically correct thing to say around here, but when I say evil, I don't mean that I "want them to burn in Hell forever!" Rather, it is evil in the sense that it goes against the "law of Love" and that it does not usually encourage growth. It seems to often inhibit it.

[themaster]

Originally Posted by Daffy Duck

that it does not usually encourage growth.

This is again, where we disagree.. I believe that any experience can offer growth and can be valid and viewed as neutral/positive.. (not just negative)

I understand the idea of not approving but by not approving you just help allow said experiences.. my understanding of integration of inclusion is to allow good and evil choices to both exist and to acknowledge that you can carry out the act yourself.. simply by doing this you should be able to align up for true growth..

So that maybe you or I could grow.. out of this.. I will take this further..

Let's run a scenario here.. it requires use of the imagination and allowance of ideas

Scenario rules
1. We are all the same being made of the same whole "allthatis" if you need a label
2. For this reality we are in let us assume we are in a high limitation game with the ability to experience negative energy ideas, disconnection of self, basically denial of what we are (see above)
3. That incarnation of what we call "Earth" shall be that every being here comes forth incarnationally with love, excitement and joy.. we want to come here and experience even if after we get here.. we ♥♥♥♥♥ and moan and go why me?????
4. That from a higher perspective there is only love, beauty, joy.. there is no revenge, hate, anger, fear

So as you do you incarnate on this earth you spend a few years here.. you find you have strange feelings towards children.. you repress your sexuality/limit cause it's not moral in this incarnation based on "others" assessments and that just makes it stronger (rules of loa?)

So you attack one of yourselves and you fulfill your needs.. the other self just feels weirded out but is happy to be back with his mom when you’re all done.. then his mum tells him and the police that what that man did was bad.. that it was very wrong.. you obviously don't know why it's wrong.. but they tell you its wrong.. you develop hate and anger feelings toward another of your selves..

I guess here are my questions..
1. If you are the same being and you both came forth happily.. what was defined as "wrong" about this scenario?
2. If 1 of you was having a somewhat positive time and getting the experience they wanted and another was just passé` and wanted to get back to school and was kind of okay with it.. what again was "wrong" with this scenario?

I'm not really sure that I can see a way of describing to you that nothing was wrong and that everything was fine.. because you are making a judgment that rape is "evil".. even if it is rape of the self.. I will let you see if you see anything beneficial from this writing as for now.. I can't be bothered to go on

[Daffy Duck]

Originally Posted by themaster

I believe that any experience can offer growth

Sure. Any experience can offer growth, but that doesn't mean it usually does. It is my observation that rape often inhibits growth in rape victims, especially children who are repeatedly rape. They spend many years trying to come to terms with what happened to them. Some never make it and may become rapists or kill themselves. In other words, there are a million better ways to encourage growth than rape. Rape just doesn't work well.

Have you ever seen "get raped" in any personal development book? Not likely. The reason why is because it's an extremely ineffective idea. Other ineffective growth ideas include: jumping in front of a bus, stabbing yourself with a knife, and trying to have sex with a blue whale.

===

I understand your "we are all one" and "everything is love" perspective, Themaster. It's a common theme in New Age beliefs. And it may be the most accurate way to describe reality. It may be "The Truth." Everything you said is something I've already considered.

But regardless, rape does not usually encourage growth, happiness, peace, or feelings of love. That's my opinion on the matter.

[Angela]

Originally Posted by Daffy Duck

I know that's not a politically correct thing to say around here....

Gee, I thought the opposite ("no such thing as evil" viewpoint) was the politically incorrect viewpoint.

I say that because the people who believe in evil, in general, (thought not you, of course) seem to get way more emotionally worked up about it when someone says there's no such thing than vice-versa. (You know, they start talking about the holocaust and child rape and getting punched in the face and stuff.)

[Daffy Duck]

Originally Posted by Angela

Gee, I thought the opposite ("no such thing as evil" viewpoint) was the politically incorrect viewpoint.

Normally it is, but around here, people say there's "no such thing as evil" often, no?

[Angela]

Originally Posted by Daffy Duck

Normally it is, but around here, people say there's "no such thing as evil" often, no?

Maybe but not as often as they say, "oh, yeah? what about hitler and baby rapists, you gonna tell me raping babies is not evil, huh, smarty pants?"

[seeds]

Quote from themaster: This is where we differ then.. I do think that children come forth to participate in fornication, child murder, rape, war and even partial birth abortion.. and I do think they come forth willing and excitedly for said experience from there original higher perspective..

Originally Posted by themaster

This is again, where we disagree.. I believe that any experience can offer growth and can be valid and viewed as neutral/positive.. (not just negative)

I understand the idea of not approving but by not approving you just help allow said experiences.. my understanding of integration of inclusion is to allow good and evil choices to both exist and to acknowledge that you can carry out the act yourself.. simply by doing this you should be able to align up for true growth..

So that maybe you or I could grow.. out of this.. I will take this further..

Let's run a scenario here.. it requires use of the imagination and allowance of ideas

Scenario rules
1. We are all the same being made of the same whole "allthatis" if you need a label
2. For this reality we are in let us assume we are in a high limitation game with the ability to experience negative energy ideas, disconnection of self, basically denial of what we are (see above)
3. That incarnation of what we call "Earth" shall be that every being here comes forth incarnationally with love, excitement and joy.. we want to come here and experience even if after we get here.. we ♥♥♥♥♥ and moan and go why me?????
4. That from a higher perspective there is only love, beauty, joy.. there is no revenge, hate, anger, fear

So as you do you incarnate on this earth you spend a few years here.. you find you have strange feelings towards children.. you repress your sexuality/limit cause it's not moral in this incarnation based on "others" assessments and that just makes it stronger (rules of loa?)

So you attack one of yourselves and you fulfill your needs.. the other self just feels weirded out but is happy to be back with his mom when you’re all done.. then his mum tells him and the police that what that man did was bad.. that it was very wrong.. you obviously don't know why it's wrong.. but they tell you its wrong.. you develop hate and anger feelings toward another of your selves..

I guess here are my questions..
1. If you are the same being and you both came forth happily.. what was defined as "wrong" about this scenario?
2. If 1 of you was having a somewhat positive time and getting the experience they wanted and another was just passé` and wanted to get back to school and was kind of okay with it.. what again was "wrong" with this scenario?

I'm not really sure that I can see a way of describing to you that nothing was wrong and that everything was fine.. because you are making a judgment that rape is "evil".. even if it is rape of the self.. I will let you see if you see anything beneficial from this writing as for now.. I can't be bothered to go on

Something almost as troubling as the posts themselves, is the casual and nonchalant tone in which you present them.

Let's assume that the person being raped/murdered is your mother, or your sister, or your own little girl (you picked a little boy? in your "let's all grow from this" scenario).

The very idea that there is no imperative, originating and emanating from the source of creation, that would impel you to protect them from harm, even in the simple act of holding your tongue before proclaiming here (in the guise of some kind of enlightened doctrine) the incarnational "rights" of a rapist to fulfill his desires in a supposedly "valid" experience, is just another shining example of the dark and soulless emptiness inherent in the concept of an "impersonal" source.

Your sibling,

seeds

[themaster]

Originally Posted by seeds

Something almost as troubling as the posts themselves, is the casual and nonchalant tone in which you present them.

You mean being neutral.. sorry, next time I'll approach them with the zeal of anger, lack and betrayal..

Originally Posted by seeds

Let's assume that the person being raped/murdered is your mother, or your sister, or your own little girl (you picked a little boy? in your "let's all grow from this" scenario).

So we assume.. my response would be "that has nothing to do with me" try and live life and be happy and accept responsibility for the reality you created.. is what I’d tell my sisters, if they’d listen

Originally Posted by seeds

The very idea that there is no imperative, originating and emanating from the source of creation, that would impel you to protect them from harm, even in the simple act of holding your tongue before proclaiming here (in the guise of some kind of enlightened doctrine) the incarnational "rights" of a rapist to fulfill his desires in a supposedly "valid" experience, is just another shining example of the dark and soulless emptiness inherent in the concept of an "impersonal" source.

There is nothing to protect, if there is no harm.. here is what I can read from your words..

1. Intellectualizing of the idea with pretty words..
2. Lack/fear/anger/disbelief

What could not be more "enlightened" then to move beyond the idea of good and evil?

What could not be more "enlightened" that each of us is capable of acts that we define this way but see no need to do them?

What could not be more enlightened in a limited universe of separation then to bring in, inclusively all that is you???

Please tell me in the mostly backward hanging in the mud that is our history where getting up in the grill of a evil doer ever did the world a justice in stopping them or even a continued cycle?

You can't find a example cause even to this day.. the story I described is going on in probably point .0001% or so of our population.. these acts are going on.. what you going to do? Change the laws = that won't stop it; Kill them all per the idea of LOA makes it stronger.. or I know resist.. cause obviously feeling negative lack/resistance pays off every time??

Here's a few enlightened ideas for you.. "let those that want to be themselves, bee themselves... and you do the best to be yourself" “Don’t judge others”

[Daffy Duck]

Originally Posted by themaster

Kill them all per the idea of LOA makes it stronger..

What does this mean? Fighting and killing Hitler didn't make him stronger.