The Advantage of Evil

[Zen Pig]

24 minutes ago, rideforever said:

Humans are higher than chimpanzees, if that's what you mean.
And chimpanzees higher than starfish.

wow. how do you know this? in the old days, (and even today),  I have no idea how to determine if anything or anyone is "higher or lower", (what ever that means) then anything else.  puzzled.

[Zen Pig]

4 minutes ago, dawei said:

philosophy is a bad basis to talk about good and evil.  That's just a mind construct

yes, i like this. or like the old saying goes, "I cannot tell you what good or evil is, but I know it when I see it".  

[rideforever]

13 minutes ago, Zen Pig said:

wow. how do you know this? in the old days, (and even today),  I have no idea how to determine if anything or anyone is "higher or lower", (what ever that means) then anything else.  puzzled.

 

If you can't tell that you are higher than a starfish then you have problems.
There is a time to not treat philosophy as an entertainment of words.

[Zen Pig]

1 hour ago, rideforever said:

If you can't tell that you are higher than a starfish then you have problems.
There is a time to not treat philosophy as an entertainment of words.

well. never said that i did not have problems.  LOL.  but i still like to dance.  

[Stosh]

I dont know why I am higher than a starfish... but I know it when I see it

[ilumairen]

On 12/21/2018 at 7:15 PM, Stosh said:

I dont know why I am higher than a starfish... but I know it when I see it

 

I don't know about this higher thing.. I'm relatively certain I don't have the ability to regenerate a limb should I lose one. 

[Lost in Translation]

Bump!

 

Evil is a thing. It exists, and not every conscious being who acts in an evil fashion does so out of ignorance or necessity. Some actually choose evil. It's a conversation still worth having.

 

What is evil? Why does evil frighten you? Is it the part within you that resonates with evil? Are you afraid that if you accept your own capacity for evil that you will lose yourself and be unable to recover? Or are you afraid that if you allow yourself to embrace evil that you will really, really like it, and what does that say about your precious image of self?

[Cheshire Cat]

Isn't  "evil action" the definition of a good action seen from an opposite perspective? 

[Lost in Translation]

5 minutes ago, Cheshire Cat said:

Isn't  "evil action" the definition of a good action seen from an opposite perspective? 

 

I don't think it's that simple. For example, it may be good for me to have a million dollars, but that does not mean I can murder someone and take a million dollars from them. Killing in such a manner is evil, regardless of whether I personally will benefit.

[Stosh]

19 minutes ago, Cheshire Cat said:

Isn't  "evil action" the definition of a good action seen from an opposite perspective? 

No , because an action may be seen as problematic all the way around, or it may be seen neutrally ,without judgement of any kind , indicating that it has no inherent character of its own. The adjective is imbued.

[thelerner]

Evil can act quickly, rashly, destructively.. while good generally takes time to ponder the consequences of its action.  Still in the long run evil tends to be self destructive.  In that good can trust good, but evil knows evil and doesn't play well with others.. not in the long run. 

[Lost in Translation]

28 minutes ago, thelerner said:

good can trust good, but evil knows evil and doesn't play well with others

 

Good point! I don't think this was mentioned before.

 

Edited July 5, 2019 by Lost in Translation

[Stosh]

Cooperation, defection and resistance in Nazi Germany

 

Author

Listed:

Geerling, Wayne

Magee, Gary B.

Brooks, Robert

 

This article uses the court records of a sample of individuals, aged between 15 and 62, tried for high treason in Nazi Germany to analyze a rare, real-world prisoner's-dilemma-like scenario that resisters faced once taken into custody: keep quiet and protect their collaborators or turn informant in the hope of obtaining leniency? We find that, although self-interest and defection to the authorities was the norm for most, significant rates of cooperation remained. We also find evidence that the size of the stake, age, education, beliefs, affiliations, and sense of community could play roles in facilitating cooperative behavior.

[Cheshire Cat]

1 hour ago, Lost in Translation said:

 

I don't think it's that simple. For example, it may be good for me to have a million dollars, but that does not mean I can murder someone and take a million dollars from them. Killing in such a manner is evil, regardless of whether I personally will benefit.

 

I think that if you benefit from something, it's good by definition. 

 

51 minutes ago, Stosh said:

No , because an action may be seen as problematic all the way around, or it may be seen neutrally ,without judgement of any kind , indicating that it has no inherent character of its own. The adjective is imbued.

 

Can you expand on this with actual examples? 

[Stosh]

7 minutes ago, Cheshire Cat said:

 

I think that if you benefit from something, it's good by definition. 

 

 

Can you expand on this with actual examples? 

Example of neutral ? I paint my house in Key West green with white trim. 

Example of  a  Problem for everybody ? I don't paint my house or cut my lawn , in your neighborhood. 

Edited July 5, 2019 by Stosh

[Cheshire Cat]

8 minutes ago, Stosh said:

I paint my house in Key West green with white trim.

 

It's good for the guy who sold you the paint and it's evil for the environment to produce the paint. 

 

12 minutes ago, Stosh said:

I don't paint my house or cut my lawn , in your neighborhood. 

 

You're favoring the growth of a peculiar ecosystem in your lawn, isn't that good for the small living beings who are trying to build their lives in the grass?

[Lost in Translation]

39 minutes ago, Cheshire Cat said:

It's good for the guy who sold you the paint and it's evil for the environment to produce the paint. 

 

Is it accurate to define Good and Evil in relative terms? I.E. Good equals whatever I prefer and Evil equals whatever I don't. That seems a cheapening of both concepts...

 

Of course I can see when that is entirely appropriate. Take, for example, the idea of the sacrifice. A people hold that great evil is approaching and consequently a very bad thing will happen. To forestall this, a single, innocent (e.g "good") person is selected for public murder and sacrifice. This has happened before among the Aztecs, and elsewhere.  One can call the murder of an innocent what it is, namely evil. There is no denying that. On the other hand, such a "small" evil is often necessary to prevent an even greater evil, and thus is good. From this perspective, both evil and good are relative. I admit that I don't see a way to resolve this, except to acknowledge that evil is necessary.

[Stosh]

In Daoism, maintaining is equated with virtue, it is not an assertive form of doing, because it is responding to things being presented.

To say the actions are evil to the environment is a second ,imposed idea of virtue again. But to the extent that you could maintain the larger issue , the house or lawn , without disturbing the more remote issue, you would be  yet more virtuous. 

So use a low toxicity paint. 

 

Allowing the house or lawn environment, to deteriorate ,reduces property values and vigor of the lawn environment. That is Daoist non-virtuous behavior, which harms all, by neglect.

 

In Daoism the cycles are understood to repeat ,with death being part of the system of rebirth, killing the individual bug is not non-virtuous, unless it's discontinuous of the cycles, eradicating species and genocide, would reflect a serious example of destructive behavior.

 

 

 

[Dynasty]

5 hours ago, Lost in Translation said:

Evil is a thing. It exists, and not every conscious being who acts in an evil fashion does so out of ignorance or necessity. Some actually choose evil. It's a conversation still worth having

 

Evil is real. And I'm more afraid of the person who is committing it out of ignorance than malice. 

 

I can level with someone who is intentional. But an ignorant person who commits evil without knowing is too far gone. 

[thelerner]

My sensei turned me on to old black and white Japanese films.  In a couple there'd be an evil character.  It was a cultural thing, because the individual wasn't bad, yet was unlucky.. born under a dark star.  What ever he did would result in bad happenings. 

 

That seems unfair, yet there are days where I've found I'm on a roll, when its bad, the best thing to do, is nothing.  No decisions no actions.  Just let the day come and go. 

[rideforever]

The only axle is your own existence ... and doing what you will.

"Good" means making progress in that direction.

"Evil" means impeding that progress.

 

But, for unconscious people, as they have little ability to comprehend what that means, an "example" must be made to them, hence the use of the terms good and evil.  Jesus talks in teachings stories, to indicate what would be "good" in a situation, or "evil".

This is a teaching story for those who are at a lower level of understanding.

Working in this way the understanding of what good and evil means.

And then by applying such stories in your life in your own situations, you can make analogies to various teaching stories, and gradually your intelligence grows, and you also have the experience of good and evil things in your life.

Eventually you allow yourself to use no examples, so intelligent have you become, that you can comprehend what is right to do at any point.

 

Due to unconscious corruption, these teachings stories can become cultural ideas that are wrong, for instance equating money with success competence or goodness ... that is corruption.

Therefore various anti-heros arise to remind people that goodness is not these cultural stories.

 

 

[Nungali]

13 hours ago, rideforever said:

The only axle is your own existence ... and doing what you will.

"Good" means making progress in that direction.

"Evil" means impeding that progress.

 

But, for unconscious people, as they have little ability to comprehend what that means, an "example" must be made to them, hence the use of the terms good and evil.  Jesus talks in teachings stories, to indicate what would be "good" in a situation, or "evil".

This is a teaching story for those who are at a lower level of understanding.

Working in this way the understanding of what good and evil means.

And then by applying such stories in your life in your own situations, you can make analogies to various teaching stories, and gradually your intelligence grows, and you also have the experience of good and evil things in your life.

Eventually you allow yourself to use no examples, so intelligent have you become, that you can comprehend what is right to do at any point.

 

 

 

I like this . It reminds me of the old initiation systems  where a person learnt how to rule their life via emulation of the  central character and or principles in the story enacted  of the ' dramatic ritual ' of the ceremony.

 

This person, in Freemasonry was Hiram Abiff  ,   stories about him and his actions and tribulations are enacted with the candidate taking his part .   ( Sort of like a 'passion play' )   In the O.T.O. first series  of initiation, the  inspiration  is   '  Saladin  '  .

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saladin#Recognition_and_legacy

 

Even here in indigenous Australia, initiations or resultant 'walkabout '    follows the discovery journeys and trial and tribulations of 'ancestor - heroes .

 

 

 

Quote

 

 

 

 

 

Due to unconscious corruption, these teachings stories can become cultural ideas that are wrong, for instance equating money with success competence or goodness ... that is corruption.

Therefore various anti-heros arise to remind people that goodness is not these cultural stories.

 

 

 

Hercules  is a perfect example of this .   It is actually a handbook of what NOT to do and how to fail an initiation, he actually did so bad that they had to create a new level of 'lesser mysteries'   and make that an initiation level, just so he could pass  .

 

Because of his   father  ... they 'lowered the bar' .  

 

 

" The myths of Hercules show the world as it is: everyone has monsters they need to conquer and seemingly impossible tasks they are faced with and tragedies that seem too hard to bear. As it was in ancient Greece when people would sit and listen to the tales of the hero, so it has been ever since and, even in the modern day, comic books, graphic novels, books, television shows, and Hollywood films featuring Hercules continue to be popular. He remains a hero anyone can relate to, precisely because his life was so far from perfect and his character was less than ideal. When faced with some difficult situation in life, one can take comfort in the thought that, if Hercules could endure his sufferings, one can survive one's own. "

 

-  encounter a problem ?  Smash it with your club ,  fight the spectre of death ,  kill monsters (instead if making them allies or totems  ), mess with the environment, change the course of rivers   .....

 

This is not the way of negotiating through  a shamanic initiation !  

 

 

Its more like   ....    

 

 

 

HULK  WILL  SMASH  ! 

 

 

 

Odysseus  ..... there is a better emulation . What a fantastic and explorative Shaman !    Does he  kill the Sirens , to get rid of the danger , does he fall into their trap and come to ruin , does he  avoid the  island ?  No

 

he commands his men to stop their ears  and tie him to the mast so he  can experience it  .... but not lead others into danger .

 

Magnificent !

 

 

 

Edited July 6, 2019 by Nungali

[silent thunder]

good and evil

like and don't like

 

very very simple stuff

[Nungali]

On 08/12/2018 at 7:26 AM, Lost in Translation said:

 

Perhaps there is a truth behind the myriad myths?

 

 

Yep ,    and it is  'bad mind  /  good mind  '    .  Angra and Spenta   mainyu   in Zoroastrianism  

 

The root of the word  anger  ....    via  'Old Norse '   {     'angra'   to vex some one or thing  } 

 

Although this is in contention as  a latter development and the older belief was that these where deified  projections of the mind  - as above ; 

 

"  Persian duality has the god of Light ashura mazda (zoom zoom) and his evil brother angra mainyu. "

 

YET ;

 

"  AHRIMAN (Avestan: Angra/Aŋra Mainyu; not attested in Old Persian), demon, God’s adversary in the Zoroastrian religion. He seems to have been an original conception of Zoroaster’s;  ...  In the Gathas Angra Mainyu is the direct opposite of Spənta Mainyu; both spirits are essentially actors in the primeval choice, a great drama dominating the life of man and the destiny of the world. ... This feature, the drama of the choice, is missing in the cosmogonies in the Pahlavi books, where Ahriman serves as the negative counterpart, not of the other spirit, but of God,  ...  "

 

(  and here, 'sprit'  does not mean a type of lesser god , but qualities of mind  "  )

 

" ... Other variations in the concept of Ahriman were due to heresy, or to error  ** . At one end of the spectrum it is said that, since Ohrmazd is, then Ahriman is not, i.e., has no material existence. At the other end, on the level of folktale, there is the story of Ahriman transformed into a horse and ridden for thirty years by Taxma Urupi. "

 

The earlier form was a lot 'deeper'  and related more to 'mental cultivation '  rather than the latter  (although considered earlier ) forms of Gods and demons and angels and devils .

 

**  Australian Aboriginal teachings are the same , the one's most get are very simple , childlike myths , kindergarten stuff ... for the kids . The it goes on through layers of complex stuff that the outer form symbolises  .... at all depends on  "  differences in the level of culture or intelligence " .

 

*   A brilliant, positive, constructive, and beneficent spirit that seeks wisdom is called a spenta mainyu.

A gloomy, negative, destructive, and harmful spirit that wishes to remain ignorant is called an angra mainyu.

 

These are two potentials of the human 'mind set'     ( which is great !  as we know what actions and practices lead to one or the other , so we can manipulate our mind set ... a lot easier than we can manipulate 'Gods'    ) .

 

In Zoroastrianism creation was  caused by a divine  thought  . 

 

Edited July 8, 2019 by Nungali

[Lost in Translation]

11 hours ago, silent thunder said:

good and evil

like and don't like

 

very very simple stuff

 

If only it were that simple. I don't like paying my bills, but that does not make my bills evil. I like sleeping late on the weekend, but that does make sleeping late good.

 

Good and evil have intrinsically moral qualities. Like and don't like are amoral.