• Philosophy and Spirituality
    Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Threads of Note Socialize
  • P&S Moderators: JackARoe | Cheshire_Kat

Is evil real, or merely the absence of good

IMO evil is necessary, as much as good.

Why?

Because if everything was hunky dory in this world, there would be almost zero positive growth. Humans need challenge, heartache, pain and trouble as a cosmic swift kick in the ass.

After all our purpose here is to learn and grow.

Some say that we choose our incarnations and choose to play these roles, but we have zero conscious memory of such choosing.
 
lol sorry...

But I can't show you something immaterial that easily.

Because it's non-existent. If it was any meaningful sense real, you would be able to demonstrate some kind of concrete evidence of it. Either by measuring it directly, or by phenomena it other things with no more convincing physical causes.
 
typo for "By phenomena it causes in interactions with other things that have no more convincing physical causes"

If it's real, it should affect something in an observable manner, and that would allow one to deduce it's existence.
 
Because it's non-existent. If it was any meaningful sense real, you would be able to demonstrate some kind of concrete evidence of it. Either by measuring it directly, or by phenomena it other things with no more convincing physical causes.

Of course it's measurable. It's exemplified in the actions and lifestyle of all those who are in touch with it.

(That's not gonna cut it for you, is it?)

If you can't see it in others, you can find it in yourself... it's a very personal experience.

PiP described this better than I could

PanicInParadise said:
there are levels of consciousness though that we chose not or need not to be made aware of, such as involuntary body functions like breathing and the heart beat - those are arguably the most vital besides having the mental capacity and physical ability to feed oneself. our breathing pattern and the heart-rate can be controlled with the subtle realization of how to. the same can be done with the subconscious, the soul and true self, and thus the life-path the self has acquired; along with this knowledge knowing or doing other-wise begins to take conscious effort

(Thats still not gonna cut it for you, is it!?)

I will conclude with this: You can't measure something you don't understand. That doesn't mean it doesn't exist, or cannot be observed.
 
Last edited:
"And one of the elders of the city said, Speak to us of Good and Evil.
And he answered:
Of good in you I can speak, but not of the evil.
For what is evil but good tortured by it's own hunger and thirst?
Verily when good is hungry it seeks food even in dark caves, and when it thirsts it drinks even of dead waters"
- The Prophet by Kahlil Gibran
 
rangrz said:
If it's real, it should affect something in an observable manner, and that would allow one to deduce it's existence.

BUT I think that we need to limit the induction of such entities to hypotheses (or theory) subject to possible means of disconfirmation. Otherwise, someone could use deduction to derive something analogous to, "Life in the universe is highly complexly ordered. Conscious entities create things. Therefore, life is evidence of God," for really any observed phenomenon.

ebola
 
I love all the discussion but it almost seems like half of you are just trolling with the repetitive "evil is subjective, depends on viewpoint, none of this is real" etc

I refer you back to the "light is quantifiable but darkness isn't" metaphor

That being said the rest of you have given me more to think about than I could ever really process. Well done.
 
So are there truly evil people? Or are there merely people who just have absolutely no good in them?
I dunno, was hitler just an absence of light, or was he a kid who died spiritually at age 10 and reborn inwith the possesion of satan?
 
What defines good? I would think that the opposite of good defines evil. But you havent even defined good..
 
This is a very interesting thread, and a subject I grapple with regularly. Some thoughts:

i hate it when ppl try to live by doing good things and avoicing bad things...because if there were no "bad" things then you couldnt say anything was good.

... if everything was hunky dory in this world, there would be almost zero positive growth. Humans need challenge, heartache, pain and trouble as a cosmic swift kick in the ass.

Personally I think the most important thing to bear in mind here is that there is a big difference between the kind of things that just happen in life, that we label as 'bad' (like an earthquake destroying your house, losing your job, etc) or 'good' (like winning the lottery), and the kind of things that can happen to you as the direct result of another person's conscious action. I agree that the former kind of 'bad' is inevitable and necessary (in keeping with the 'you can't have light without dark'), but I cannot agree that the latter kind is.

Our actions; morals, emotions, mental, and state of psychical wellness is greatly e/affected by that of the society inhabited.

I think that's just attributable to good and evil being strictly human conditions/ constructs. What is good or evil? What a consensus agrees to be good or evil on a societal level and aside from that what we as individuals interpret to be such. There's nothing to suggest either exist without us aside from our own invention.

I very much agree that the social/societal element is a crucial factor in this sort of debate. Take as a (rather unpleasant) example the case of a parent having a sexual relationship with their child. The parent may either not see their actions as 'bad', or know that they are but ignore this in favour of fulfilling their needs and desires. What I think is important is the fact that the parent and the child exist within a social system in which the action (which may on an abstract level be considered neither 'good' nor 'bad') will almost inevitably cause suffering to the child - suffering which may not even be simply because of the action itself, but due to net result of the action plus their existence within that social system.

I think this means that 'evil' exists because 'good' exists, and probably vice versa. I would argue that, upon the emergence of human 'civilisation', the capacity for humans to create 'good' through their conscious actions, as a result of the intersection of their actions with the social system they were acting within, was necessarily accompanied by their capacity to create 'evil'.

I really like these points:

there is an evil in the nonapplication of particular "goods", and then there is another evil in the badness that takes some effort to create.

an analogy is to a driver and an animal on the road.
a- in the first instance the driver would run over the animal if they do not swerve out of the way;
b- the second involves the driver swerving in the attempt to run over an animal they would not have had they stayed on their original course.

what lightens the load of consciousness is doing good things, without conscious effort.

Sorry for the rather long post, I just saw so many ideas and thoughts that resonated with me or got me thinking!
 
Why not just utter "relativity" then go home. There's no point in it. It is a cop-out in the face of true discussion.

I would agree that the "it's all relative/subjective" statement is often used as a cop-out in discussions such as this. Though, I would say it can also be the basis for a legitimate argument. By stating "it's all relative" one argues that the question is invalid and thus there can be no answer. However, the dilemma that prompted that question can still be resolved by re-framing said question.

In terms of the topic at hand, the original question could be restated as: how does one define good/evil and what/who is that definition relative to?

Personally, I see good and evil as subjective concepts formed by the individual as a means of differentiating actions and ideas from an ethical perspective. While those concepts are defined by the individual, they are not without external influence, discussion being one such influence. The definition of good and evil may be relative but that doesn't mean there cannot be a definition that is not only relative to the individual but also to the group.
 
Top