[Rosewin]

What if good and evil are not truly opposites as we think they are. We have good on one side, bad on the other. This is the way the world is, right?

What if good and evil are not truly opposites but on the same side of an even larger balance. We have 'good and evil' on one side...so what is on the other side? Understanding? Acceptance?

Also choosing only happens when we choose to choose to begin with.

If someone does something to harm us, depending why, others will say this was either good or evil. You might be hurt if they do succeed in harming you, which is natural, you were harmed after all, but can someone simply not have to choose to label it as good or evil?

If so what is the opposite of 'good and evil'?

This post has been edited by Rosewin: 13 October 2009 - 05:06 PM

[Mr Walker]

I have never much liked the terms good and evil. I prefer the concepts of productive/destructive, and potenial enhancing/potential diminishing.

Good and evil have inherent value positions. They cant be measured or quantified. We can, however, assess more objectively,whether a thought or action is more productive or more destructive, and whehter it enhances or diminishes potential.

This post has been edited by Mr Walker: 16 October 2009 - 05:10 AM

[Fitter]

Of course good is the opposite of evil and vice versa. However, as the question is purely hypothetical, let's play.

From study of the nature/nurture debate and the observation of child to adult development, it can be seen that love as a positive course of action to a child promotes desirable development and encouraging results. Nasty, or bad treatment of a child in the formative years creates a damaged child in the most fundamental ways. These observations have been backed up with experimentation on animals, the ethics of which I will not go into here. These two types of treatment of children can be argued as being different sides of the same coin, but there is a third type of parent/child relationship that can promote either of the two developmental results... indifference. This too has yielded measurable results in animal husbandry.

Another examination of the two behaviour types could argue that good and bad are merely down to the perspective of the individual. The simplest and most straightforward example I can name is that in 1940, Nazis were sure that they were doing the right thing in the holocaust. History and free thinking perspective has put that idea firmly in it's place, but the example shows that good and evil can be considered as differing perspectives, so could be on the same side of the coin.
Press offices say that there is no such thing as bad PR... any exposure is good exposure, even if it puts a public figure in a bad light.

So maybe indifference is the opposite of good/evil. On a personal note, I know that it drives me up the wall when I hear someone say they "don't care" about something, and most people I know hate to be ignored...

F

[John A Spera]

Mr Walker, on 16 October 2009 - 01:09 AM, said:

I have never much liked the terms good and evil. I prefer the concepts of productive/destructive, and potenial enhancing/potential diminishing.

Good and evil have inherent value positions. They cant be measured or quantified. We can, however, assess more objectively,whether a thought or action is more productive or more destructive, and whehter it enhances or diminishes potential.

Yes this is the result of a logical judgment. I see the original question presented for discussion as a departure from not just good and evil but also from logical thinking.

The answer that jumps into my mind is Love. It would be the kind of love that sees all expressions of energy as serving the common good. In my view it does. The awareness that has true love for all that is, will also have a deep fondness for all ways of being.

Rosewin's question is quite a good way to present an expanded reality perspective for our human experiences, as I see it.

John

[Fitter]

Rosewin, on 13 October 2009 - 05:03 PM, said:

What if good and evil are not truly opposites as we think they are. We have good on one side, bad on the other. This is the way the world is, right?

What if good and evil are not truly opposites but on the same side of an even larger balance. We have 'good and evil' on one side...so what is on the other side? Understanding? Acceptance?

Also choosing only happens when we choose to choose to begin with.

If someone does something to harm us, depending why, others will say this was either good or evil. You might be hurt if they do succeed in harming you, which is natural, you were harmed after all, but can someone simply not have to choose to label it as good or evil?

If so what is the opposite of 'good and evil'?

Back on topic, I don't think it is possible for someone to consciously not "choose" to do good or evil to another person, in thought or deed because good and evil are a result of the perspectives of both the person doing the deed and the person being done to.
By definition "choice" is a consciously made course of action or thought. The only way a person could not choose to be nice or bad to another person was if they genuinely have no opinion or knowledge of the other persons perspective and for the other person to have no perspective on the outcome of the said action.

Both of these criteria have to be fulfilled for the action to not be interpreted as 'good' or 'bad.'

This is also the base concept of the Christian Golden Rule. "Do as you would be done by" I would imagine that other religions have the same type of this in their dogma.

Therefore, the only way for a person to not do good or evil to another is if neither have conscious involvement with each other. It's not even possible for a person to be aware of but ignore another and that not be considered good or bad if the other person has knowledge or awareness of the first; you do not have a balance of interpretation.

F

[lookingfortruth]

personally I do not believe in good or evil, but interpritations of whats good and whats evil.

[markdohle]

Rosewin, on 13 October 2009 - 12:03 PM, said:

What if good and evil are not truly opposites as we think they are. We have good on one side, bad on the other. This is the way the world is, right?

What if good and evil are not truly opposites but on the same side of an even larger balance. We have 'good and evil' on one side...so what is on the other side? Understanding? Acceptance?

Also choosing only happens when we choose to choose to begin with.

If someone does something to harm us, depending why, others will say this was either good or evil. You might be hurt if they do succeed in harming you, which is natural, you were harmed after all, but can someone simply not have to choose to label it as good or evil?

If so what is the opposite of 'good and evil'?

Indifference perhaps, the simply not caring either way.

Peace
Mark

[Fitter]

markdohle, on 29 October 2009 - 10:03 AM, said:

Indifference perhaps, the simply not caring either way.

Peace
Mark

That's two votes for 'indifference' one vote for 'love'

Any advance on that ?

F

[unexplained sam]

Perhaps good and evil is just an interpretation of something we try to define in. Something that needs to be here, and without good and evil, we would be somewhere to at least chaos. Our brains would not be able to function without the concept of good and evil. But the opposite of good and evil is simply just in out mind, and how we see things, no one will ever truly know what the two really mean. In fact isn't it impossible to be all good? and isn't it impossible to be all evil or bad. Unless of course we live in a fairy tale life, lol. We might separate good and evil with love, or indifference as others have said. What would you rather believe in?

[Bunny Munro]

Moral nihilism.

[Purplos]

The first thing I thought was apathy, which is essentially indifference.

I think love encompasses both good and evil: a passion of emotion. Love and hate are practically metaphors for good and evil. Apathy, or indifference, is opposite.

[John A Spera]

Purplos, on 30 October 2009 - 11:47 AM, said:

The first thing I thought was apathy, which is essentially indifference.

I think love encompasses both good and evil: a passion of emotion. Love and hate are practically metaphors for good and evil. Apathy, or indifference, is opposite.

My thoughts on love are different.

Quote

The answer that jumps into my mind is Love. It would be the kind of love that sees all expressions of energy as serving the common good. In my view it does. The awareness that has true love for all that is, will also have a deep fondness for all ways of being.

I guess I should have said the unconditional love that sees value in all things and is fond of all ways of being.

John

[Purplos]

Quote

I guess I should have said the unconditional love that sees value in all things and is fond of all ways of being.

A person can love evil though, right? A degenerate has an unconditional love for torturing animals. A pedophile has an unconditional love for abusing children. I would guess they see great value in the things they do - pleasure for themselves, mostly.

[tinieblas]

psychology says it is essential hate of self and denial of the value of self which leads people to transfer their own feelings of worthlessness onto others and be thus capable of harming them; because they deserve it. Just as the inflictor believes that they themselves deserve nothing of value. What many mistake for "evil" entities are simply beings which are lacking the moral code which we need to exist as a race living in such close proximity to one another. Many of the things we abhour are quite common in the animal kingdom afterall.

[cluey]

Fitter, on 18 October 2009 - 02:34 AM, said:

Of course good is the opposite of evil and vice versa. However, as the question is purely hypothetical, let's play.

From study of the nature/nurture debate and the observation of child to adult development, it can be seen that love as a positive course of action to a child promotes desirable development and encouraging results. Nasty, or bad treatment of a child in the formative years creates a damaged child in the most fundamental ways. These observations have been backed up with experimentation on animals, the ethics of which I will not go into here. These two types of treatment of children can be argued as being different sides of the same coin, but there is a third type of parent/child relationship that can promote either of the two developmental results... indifference. This too has yielded measurable results in animal husbandry.

Another examination of the two behaviour types could argue that good and bad are merely down to the perspective of the individual. The simplest and most straightforward example I can name is that in 1940, Nazis were sure that they were doing the right thing in the holocaust. History and free thinking perspective has put that idea firmly in it's place, but the example shows that good and evil can be considered as differing perspectives, so could be on the same side of the coin.
Press offices say that there is no such thing as bad PR... any exposure is good exposure, even if it puts a public figure in a bad light.

So maybe indifference is the opposite of good/evil. On a personal note, I know that it drives me up the wall when I hear someone say they "don't care" about something, and most people I know hate to be ignored...

F

well said fitter............having gone through most of those feelings/emotions in the last few months...........everyone reacts differently to things....and peoples differing perceptions also changes how it is seen