Is doing evil a necessity of life?

[Gnostic Bishop]

Is doing evil a necessity of life?

Did the ancients know this and Is that why we are all namedas sinners?

I think nature created the potential for evil in each of usbecause without that potential we would not have the ability to make a freechoice between good and evil or evolve to find the fittest human.

Consider. Evolution has two major components that we must doto survive; compete or cooperate, as required. Cooperation we would see as goodbecause it does not create a victim or loser. Competition would be seen as evilas it creates a victim and loser.

From this view, we must do evil and to survive as thatprocess produces the fittest. To not compete would produce the least fit and wewould likely go extinct.

Do you see this conundrum of us having to do evil? If youdo, should God punish us for doing what we must do so as not to go extinct?

I do not see God as justified in punishing us and that iswhy Gnostic Christians like me are Universalists.

I see us all as not requiring salvation. God would not doevil by punishing us for doing what we must do to survive and thrive.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exsultet
“O happy fault, Onecessary sin of Adam”.
“in the light ofparadise, even the sin of Adam may be regarded as truly necessary and a happyfault.”



If sin and doing evil is good and necessary for Adam, whorepresents all of mankind, then the church and I are suggesting that it is goodthat we all do evil.

It seems that nature, or God, if you are into thesupernatural, ultimately, created a perfect imperfect world. To appreciateperfection, we must know imperfection. This knowledge frees the mind.

Regards
DL

 

[Bella Figura]

What if I don't believe in evil?

 

[Durzo1258]

What if I don't believe in evil?

Care to expand on that ?

 

[swilow]

Its not uncommon in certain primates for the males to slaughter a females infants to make her receptive to further mating. This horror is not evil, the animal kingdom is not to be judged by the morals that only humans have ever showed the slightest inkling of perceiving. Given that, its very difficult for me to say that good/evil, bad/good, etc actually exist outside the domain of human affairs. Given that humans are just another animal, it seems absurd to even consider our actions and behaviours, as shaped by evolution, to have any absolute value beyond their utility. I don't think evil exists, objectively. It is simply a semantic descriptor that, by its very nature, can only be applied to beings that have self-awareness of their actions; my cat is not torturing a cockroach as she plays with it, she is performing an action that she does not reflect upon, because she cannot do so in the same manner that humans can (lucky her IMO!). Most animals have degrees of self-awareness, but I truly do not believe that most animals have much awareness of whether their actions are right/wrong. In evolutionary terms, whether something is right/wrong or just/unjust has absolutely no relevance.

Evil is not built into this system, it is an emergent property solely related to the human intellect. It is a reaction to the neutrality of the universe which is neither fair nor unfair, just nor unjust. It just is, and we observe it and impart value to it. The value of evil does not categorically exist in nature and humans are of nature. Why are we the only evil ones? Either all life is evil, or none. Yet, something without intent or the awareness of intent cannot be committing evil. Evil is simply an ideal to explain away the parts of life that are difficult to understand, like the unending violence and competition between lifeforms on earth.

It seems that nature, or God, if you are into thesupernatural, ultimately, created a perfect imperfect world. To appreciateperfection, we must know imperfection. This knowledge frees the mind.

Perfection is also something humans dreamt up. Like a perfect triangle or perfect square; have you ever seen such in nature? These things are ideals of perfection, we consider them to impart deep truths about reality and yet they do not exist within that reality, but only within the human mind. It seems that nature simply IS, and it is humans that are dumping a whole lot of value judgement and idealism upon it. We are observers and should never discount how much our observation of reality utterly transforms the conclusions we draw about it.

 

[jibreel92]

No. Sometimes decisions must be made that can hurt someone but the decision is for the greater good, but doing evil is not a necessity.

 

[Dresden]

Good and evil--like all pairs of diametrical opposites--cannot exist without the other. So, you can't have light without dark or good without evil. It's a Taoist thing. "Low supports high. Short defines long."

The sum is always zero.

 

[Durzo1258]

Darkness is merely absence of light. Darkness cannot exist in a presence of light. The only way you can have one is without the other.

 

[Love Potion]

Consider. Evolution has two major components that we must do to survive; compete or cooperate, as required. Cooperation we would see as good because it does not create a victim or loser. Competition would be seen as evil as it creates a victim and loser

Life on a very simple level is a cumulation of personal experiences that condition us.

It is okay to be competitive, just as it is okay to criticize without causing harm to others. There are constructive ways to do both. We liberate ourselves through these actions. We learn from our mistakes and we better ourselves through challenges. By losing you learn what your skill set is and what your weaknesses are. If you lose or fail you can either give up or train harder, study more or change paths. When you lose you are not experiencing the nature of evil, you are being taught a valuable lesson. Thinking of yourself as a victim can be very addictive and self destructive. A lot of times this can lead to an attitude that the world owes you something, a sense of entitlement is immature and selfish. Take nothing for granted. It is this imbalance that is destructive. These examples of imbalances can be seen on a larger scale in the bureaucracy, in the organized hierarchies, that cause harm to others. Indeed power often corrupts. But we can't forget that these same systematic processes and organized hierarchies are necessary to maintain order, maximize efficiency, and eliminate favoritism.

Learning from the mistakes of others is a true godsend.

Each individual has a set of skills, some people are built for jumping, while others running, wrestling.... Others have artistic abilities. Some people are less inclined to do any of these things. We are products of our environments. Humans have evolved to appreciate activities that are "recreational". Some folks win the birth lottery and are conventionally beautiful, athletic and intelligent while others not so much. But if you really think about it we all won the birth lottery, if you stop comparing yourself to everyone else and realize that you are currently experiencing the precious gift called life you may be less inclined to focus your attention on the trivial nature of life and be more inclined to make the most out of it.

 

[Gnostic Bishop]

What if I don't believe in evil?

Then you are not using the word correctly.

Its not uncommon in certain primates for the males to slaughter a females infants to make her receptive to further mating. This horror is not evil, the animal kingdom is not to be judged by the morals that only humans have ever showed the slightest inkling of perceiving. Given that, its very difficult for me to say that good/evil, bad/good, etc actually exist outside the domain of human affairs. Given that humans are just another animal, it seems absurd to even consider our actions and behaviours, as shaped by evolution, to have any absolute value beyond their utility. I don't think evil exists, objectively. It is simply a semantic descriptor that, by its very nature, can only be applied to beings that have self-awareness of their actions; my cat is not torturing a cockroach as she plays with it, she is performing an action that she does not reflect upon, because she cannot do so in the same manner that humans can (lucky her IMO!). Most animals have degrees of self-awareness, but I truly do not believe that most animals have much awareness of whether their actions are right/wrong. In evolutionary terms, whether something is right/wrong or just/unjust has absolutely no relevance.

Evil is not built into this system, it is an emergent property solely related to the human intellect. It is a reaction to the neutrality of the universe which is neither fair nor unfair, just nor unjust. It just is, and we observe it and impart value to it. The value of evil does not categorically exist in nature and humans are of nature. Why are we the only evil ones? Either all life is evil, or none. Yet, something without intent or the awareness of intent cannot be committing evil. Evil is simply an ideal to explain away the parts of life that are difficult to understand, like the unending violence and competition between lifeforms on earth.



Perfection is also something humans dreamt up. Like a perfect triangle or perfect square; have you ever seen such in nature? These things are ideals of perfection, we consider them to impart deep truths about reality and yet they do not exist within that reality, but only within the human mind. It seems that nature simply IS, and it is humans that are dumping a whole lot of value judgement and idealism upon it. We are observers and should never discount how much our observation of reality utterly transforms the conclusions we draw about it.

You have a good mind. But you are analyzing words instead of speaking to the fact that you must compete to survive and thrive and that includes knowingly making losers to the competitions you win even while knowing that the loser will think evil has come his way.

No. Sometimes decisions must be made that can hurt someone but the decision is for the greater good, but doing evil is not a necessity.

Doing direct evil is not, I agree but now you know that competing for a job will cause evil to befall the loser so the next time you compete, you will recognize that you are doing evil to another but as you say, the greater good for you must prevail. So it is necessary because if your take it out, the greater good is denied.

Good and evil--like all pairs of diametrical opposites--cannot exist without the other. So, you can't have light without dark or good without evil. It's a Taoist thing. "Low supports high. Short defines long."

The sum is always zero.

Not to me as without the evil of competing, we would go extinct.

We can live in full cooperation but that would weaken our species and the fittest would never get to be the fittest.

Life on a very simple level is a cumulation of personal experiences that condition us.

It is okay to be competitive, just as it is okay to criticize without causing harm to others. There are constructive ways to do both. We liberate ourselves through these actions. We learn from our mistakes and we better ourselves through challenges. By losing you learn what your skill set is and what your weaknesses are. If you lose or fail you can either give up or train harder, study more or change paths. When you lose you are not experiencing the nature of evil, you are being taught a valuable lesson. Thinking of yourself as a victim can be very addictive and self destructive. A lot of times this can lead to an attitude that the world owes you something, a sense of entitlement is immature and selfish. Take nothing for granted. It is this imbalance that is destructive. These examples of imbalances can be seen on a larger scale in the bureaucracy, in the organized hierarchies, that cause harm to others. Indeed power often corrupts. But we can't forget that these same systematic processes and organized hierarchies are necessary to maintain order, maximize efficiency, and eliminate favoritism.

Learning from the mistakes of others is a true godsend.

Each individual has a set of skills, some people are built for jumping, while others running, wrestling.... Others have artistic abilities. Some people are less inclined to do any of these things. We are products of our environments. Humans have evolved to appreciate activities that are "recreational". Some folks win the birth lottery and are conventionally beautiful, athletic and intelligent while others not so much. But if you really think about it we all won the birth lottery, if you stop comparing yourself to everyone else and realize that you are currently experiencing the precious gift called life you may be less inclined to focus your attention on the trivial nature of life and be more inclined to make the most out of it.

Mostly all true but those who lack the skills, end up being losers to those who do and thus those losers would feel that evil has come their way.


"It is okay to be competitive, just as it is okay to criticize without causing harm to others. There are constructive ways to do both."

Indeed but there is no way to negate the sting and evil of correction, that the recipient of that correction will feel.

Sure, he may note that he has been risen by that correction, but the chastisement he gives himself he would se as a mental sting and evil as he would have preferred to be right in the first place.

I am sure that you have cussed at yourself for being wrong about something and having to be corrected.

Regards
DL

 

[Nixiam]

It's really hard for me to justify the condemning of behavior that reminds us of what we shouldn't become, if we (as a species) want to pursue a kind of "turning point" in civilization.

I think many things that we apply "evil" to is just natural process, and part of a balance, which I hope none of you see as a view lacking in empathy, because I struggle with that concept of balance as well.

The world, to me, seems to be working towards cutting back on actual evils, choosing to create victims at a greater expense than a reminder of our need for good and justice, and what those two mean. Think suicide bombing. Its expense is greater than a reminder of what we shouldn't be doing, imo, it hurts more and is just a sickness. Unnecessary suffering.

As another species, we probably have necessary and unnecessary suffering (I'd give examples, but I'm stupid and would have to think harder).
At some point, ideally, we'll have fixed all of our issues and will have bubbled all needs to be self destructive and resource draining out of our genetic code. Idk though, maybe it's wishful thinking.

Pretty sure that people create evils, and that we aren't at an equilibrium, or a collective homeostasis, or a balance. Not yet anyways.

 

[Gnostic Bishop]

Well spoken.

We are not there yet but technology is making it easier for us to make less harmful and evil decisions.

You seem to have a good grasp of the world.

I have been working on an O.P. to try to express what we need in terms of a leader for the future. It was prompted by all the statistical lies that are told when politicians are fighting to get elected and to try to confuse truth.

I put a religious tone to it that I might edit out. I am not sure yet. Care to have a look and briefly opine to try to help me dither out what I want to do with it? If so, please see below, if you do not have the time, no problem.

-------------

Can Truth in guidance only be ours, if our future Politicaland Religious Gods are demographers?

What is primary to good governance is the statisticalinformation it works with. Only with this statistical and information base canthe world know what is thought to be the real truth of all things.

Presidents and Religious con men manipulate our focus;deflecting it away from our various demographic markers. This prevents us fromliving in more security, which is not the goal of our Masters. They want us togo to them for truth. They care only for their benefit and not that of thewhole demography.

The world needs a new President or God in the image of HansRosling. We create all of our Gods so this should not be a problem for humankind.

I invite you to listen to a few minutes of this good man’spresentation and imagine what he, representing us, would do if he couldmanipulate, for the world’s benefit, the various bubbles he works with. Wow!Right?

Of course, in a free world, the bubbles would have tovoluntarily move.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbkSRLYSojo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=ezVk1ahRF78

We are at the point in time where we can, (basically), rathereasily control most important aspects of life; should we choose to do so. Ithink we should make it so as the world wants globalization.

This would entail the world’s countries giving more meaningto their U.N. membership. This would lead to a head demographer who, if as gooda man as Hans Rosling is, would the speed up our collective passage tocivilization and world peace.

I suggest that the world would be well served if it would nominatedemographer to lead us so that we can get this show on the road.

Everyone wants a voice in their future. Without demographiccontrol, you can never have that. For all of us to be heard, --- and thus berelevant to the whole, --- we must all be in the same socio economicdemographic pyramid. I think people will all be in the same tribe in the futurebecause of globalization of economics which will force us into participating ina one world socio economic demographic pyramid.

Demographers, or those who rely heavily on them and theirdata, must rule in the future if we are to seek the truth of reality and berelevant to the world.

Do you agree?

Regards
DL