Creating Good and Evil
- Thread starter ULTRA
- Start date
However they are defined, good and evil clearly exist. That the commission of either leaves an indelable legacy and changes the overall balance in the universe is something I think we should be thinking about. If an outside agency were to assess the overall balance of good and evil in the universe, how would the result read? I would prefer to die knowing I'd done more good than bad and that the net result of my life did not contribute to creating an evil universe.
One could always choose to do the best for all, even if that is not the same as one's first choice that comes to mind, which could be to just stay in bed or do one's own individual pursuits. It's often a precarious position, for one is still an individual and so one still needs to do some of that.
But who's to say what is good and bad? Look around at many countries ways of doing things. Muslims can beat their wives as an example and that's good they say but is it really? Then you eat meat which means an animal was killed for you to do so, is that good to kill animals when you really don't need to in order to survive? So the questions will mount as to what are good and bad things and who will be the judge on how you lived your life after you depart or who really cares?
CT, definitions are unimportant here, it is sufficient that they exist. I think we judge for ourselves what is good or bad, context and interpretation make it very subjective. The point is once a new evil is comitted, its repercussions will echo on throughout time. The overall balance is permanently shifted one way or another. Are we happy to delegate our responsibilities to others such as the police, or should we take more personal responsibility towards our impact on the greater universe?
A balance should be sought between them both I'd say. You can't take the law into your own hands everytime a person does something wrong but you also must try to not do things that harm others at the same time.
I think we should actively attempt to create more than less good. If the universe were somehow judged to be evil, I would at least be consolled by the fact I've done my best to create more good than evil. A nil balance might not be so bad as you suggest, and certainly better than a -ve influence. But as beings with the ability to create new good or evil, we should at least be aware that the action will henceforth have a potency that permanently affects the overall balance.
did you ever notice how is it easier to create evil than it is to create good?
Yeeah. That seems uncomfortably true. Maybe some of us need to make a concerted effort to stay good and not relapse into dastardlyness. For people like me with a chequered history, maybe we need to work harder at it.
i think it ties into how easily it is to point at some ones faults..
we are quick to call evil that which does not line up with ones beliefs,
current society is in the process of redefining what is good/evil (see accessibility to porn as compared to years ago)..
which revisits the question of whether the world is truly 'going to hell in a hand basket'..
By how much? We're one tiny planet in a vast universe.
False. The potential must exist before something is created. Otherwise it couldn't be created.
Do we? What effect could we have on the universe? Good and evil are human concepts. Does the universe care one or the other?
Rocket science didn't "come from Nazi Germany". Ever heard of Goddard? Or Tsiolkovsky?
Why do you think that what we do is indelible?
What "overall balance"?
Bearing in mind you're the one who stated "Nor is it about religeon" what "outside agency"?
Is it? Isn't that "affecting the balance"? Effectively you're saying you DO want to affect the balance, but you want it to tilt YOUR way. Your personal perspective is the one you're giving ascendancy to. Is that not, in and of itself, evil?
No.
Hi Dywyddyr. You've picked up a few of my questions there. This is what I'm trying to explore. What people think about how much we change the universe we live in.
When I wondered what an outside agency would think, it is a rhetorical question. You can take it to mean God if you wish, but I was thinking an impartial observer. Do you not think if other beings exist, they might have a view on how much good or evil we create?
You are correct I guess that unless something already had a potential to exist, it cannot exist. We merely bring the potential into reality.
I am not sure that tilting the balance in a +ve way is necessarily a bad thing..We could do a lot worse.
By indelible I mean that what we do has repercussions that affect the future. We can't necessarily undo what we've done. Then future becomes present, then past, and you can't change the past.
When I wondered what an outside agency would think, it is a rhetorical question. You can take it to mean God if you wish, but I was thinking an impartial observer. Do you not think if other beings exist, they might have a view on how much good or evil we create?
You are correct I guess that unless something already had a potential to exist, it cannot exist. We merely bring the potential into reality.
I am not sure that tilting the balance in a +ve way is necessarily a bad thing..We could do a lot worse.
By indelible I mean that what we do has repercussions that affect the future. We can't necessarily undo what we've done. Then future becomes present, then past, and you can't change the past.
I'll answer this at the end, where you make a related point.
Do you think this "impartial observer" would share our view of what is good and evil?
I'd suppose they would. But I'd also suppose they'd have their own views on what actually constitutes "good" and "evil" - views we may disagree with or not even recognise.
This ties in with "how much we change the universe".
How much of the universe can we affect? We're an insignificant planet stuck on the edge of a not-particularly-remarkable galaxy. What can (what could) humans do that affect the universe? Even if, somehow, we manage to destroy let's say a few hundred star systems (in some manner) what percentage of the universe is that? Negligible.
If we affect the future how long (as a percentage of the life of the universe) will that effect last? Here and gone in an eyeblink.
I'll repeat this: Effectively you're saying you DO want to affect the balance, but you want it to tilt YOUR way. Your personal perspective is the one you're giving ascendancy to. Is that not, in and of itself, evil?
You have decided that what you call good is preferable (on a universal scale no less!) to what you call evil. Who are you to decide? What makes YOUR choice any more valid that anyone else's? What makes humanity's (should we decide as a race) choice valid?
One possible answer -
Simply this: because we can. Now tell me about about good and evil.
I'm not trying to dictate anything. I would be a hypocrite if I were to extoll people to do only good and no evil. I am merely posing the question, should we take more responsibility? Fortunately I'm not a meglomaniac, and am in no position to enforce my will on others!
As I said earlier many times, the exact definition of good and evil is not important. That they exist, and we have the choise to do one or the other, that's important.
How much we change the balance of good and evil in the universe depends heavily on whether we constitute 100% of beings with the ability to choose, or not. If so, our influence is disproportionately large. The evil we do may constitute 100% of the evil in the universe. The potential we bring into reality can cause the potential for other realities to occur. If this is an evil reality we create, its repercussions could be virtually infinate. Likewise with good.
As I said earlier many times, the exact definition of good and evil is not important. That they exist, and we have the choise to do one or the other, that's important.
How much we change the balance of good and evil in the universe depends heavily on whether we constitute 100% of beings with the ability to choose, or not. If so, our influence is disproportionately large. The evil we do may constitute 100% of the evil in the universe. The potential we bring into reality can cause the potential for other realities to occur. If this is an evil reality we create, its repercussions could be virtually infinate. Likewise with good.
No, you misunderstand - I'm not accusing you personally of doing this but rather anyone who makes the decision.
Your comment: "I would prefer to die knowing I'd done more good than bad and that the net result of my life did not contribute to creating an evil universe" indicates that you've made the choice.
But then we come back to: why should we?
Why is it important? Essentially it's important because you (we) have decided that it is. Another example of "because we can", no?
Heh, even if we were the only life-form in the entire universe we still can't affect any significant proportion of the universe. We're still less than a dust speck in the overall scheme of things.
Yeah, I suppose it comes down to a choise about whether we want to live in an essentially "good" or essentially "evil" universe. It's true that it may not make tuppence worth of difference in the long run, its more kinda how we want to see ourselves in a wider context, and, if there are other beings - how we would want to be assessed by them. They could decide we're just too damn evil for our own good and use it as an excuse to wage war on us!
It's not just me that thinks the choises we make are important. I was hoping not to involve religeon, but it is a prime example of people trying to enforce thier concept of good over evil, with the threat of penalties for those that won't comply!
It's not just me that thinks the choises we make are important. I was hoping not to involve religeon, but it is a prime example of people trying to enforce thier concept of good over evil, with the threat of penalties for those that won't comply!
This is a great example of a root of evil, a 'concept of good', one even being proclaimed out of nowhere.