Rosewin Posted October 13, 2009 #1 Share Posted October 13, 2009 (edited) 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'? Edited October 13, 2009 by Rosewin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Walker Posted October 16, 2009 #2 Share Posted October 16, 2009 (edited) 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. Edited October 16, 2009 by Mr Walker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fitter Posted October 17, 2009 #3 Share Posted October 17, 2009 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John from Lowell Posted October 19, 2009 #4 Share Posted October 19, 2009 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 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fitter Posted October 20, 2009 #5 Share Posted October 20, 2009 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lookingfortruth Posted October 24, 2009 #6 Share Posted October 24, 2009 personally I do not believe in good or evil, but interpritations of whats good and whats evil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markdohle Posted October 29, 2009 #7 Share Posted October 29, 2009 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fitter Posted October 29, 2009 #8 Share Posted October 29, 2009 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unexplained sam Posted October 29, 2009 #9 Share Posted October 29, 2009 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? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bunny Munro Posted October 30, 2009 #10 Share Posted October 30, 2009 Moral nihilism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Purplos Posted October 30, 2009 #11 Share Posted October 30, 2009 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John from Lowell Posted October 30, 2009 #12 Share Posted October 30, 2009 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. 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Purplos Posted October 30, 2009 #13 Share Posted October 30, 2009 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinieblas Posted October 31, 2009 #14 Share Posted October 31, 2009 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cluey Posted October 31, 2009 #15 Share Posted October 31, 2009 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
123er Posted November 3, 2009 #16 Share Posted November 3, 2009 The opposite of good and evil is grey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moon Minion Posted November 3, 2009 #17 Share Posted November 3, 2009 The opposite of good and evil is grey. You know what I like that, the opposite of two extremes is that which is neither. *shrugs* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jules99 Posted November 8, 2009 #18 Share Posted November 8, 2009 (edited) I think the opposite of good and evil is objective reality. Good and evil are both a relative and subjective view of reality. What benefits one party can be to the detriment of another, so both will view the same event relative to how it has impacted their lives. On the other hand the event itself can be seen as chance or random, to just have happened, totally impartial to either party. Edited November 8, 2009 by jules99 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
=Jak= Posted November 8, 2009 #19 Share Posted November 8, 2009 Nice topic.. but no idea how it go ahead! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pierce8 Posted November 10, 2009 #20 Share Posted November 10, 2009 Opposite of good and evil?....are you okay. . theres no such things there4 no opposite... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pauly Dangerously Posted November 12, 2009 #21 Share Posted November 12, 2009 Opposite of good and evil...hmmm. I guess since good and evil both imply intent, the opposite would be chaos and entropy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Hound Posted November 12, 2009 #22 Share Posted November 12, 2009 Good and bad adjectives that are used for convenience that for accuracy. Good to some may be bad to another and vice versa. I find it depends on who is doing the judgement and what they are passing judgement on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Render Posted November 23, 2009 #23 Share Posted November 23, 2009 Why assume there has to be an opposite to anything? Can't all just be one side? One whole? I think a lot of ppl have already surpassed the restricted perception that good is the opposite of evil. Otherwise there wouldn't be sayings as "The road to hell is paved with good intentions". It all blends together because it's relative. It's essentially all the same, just the expression/perception can differ. Just as we all are maybe the same entity..expressing itself in 6 or more billion ways. One. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viktor Posted August 13, 2019 #24 Share Posted August 13, 2019 (edited) I wonder if it is similar to the notion that creation and destruction occur simultaneously and constantly. Birth and death, for example. Spherical, perhaps. Constantly rotating in all directions. Good and evil, therefore, would be something that has no opposite, but relies on one another for something else, measurement or perspective for instance. It would be constant and occurring simultaneously. Edited August 13, 2019 by Viktor add word Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VastLand Posted August 23, 2019 #25 Share Posted August 23, 2019 (edited) Quote GOOD, adjective 1. Valid; legally firm; not weak or defective; having strength adequate to its support; as a good title; a good deed; a good claim. 2. Valid; sound; not weak, false or fallacious; as a good argument. 3. Complete or sufficiently perfect in its kind; having the physical qualities best adapted to its design and use; opposed to bad, imperfect, corrupted, impaired. http://webstersdictionary1828.com/Dictionary/Good Quote good (n.) Old English god (with a long "o"), "that which is good, a good thing; goodness; advantage, benefit; gift; virtue; property;" from good (adj.). Meaning "the good side" (of something) is from 1660s. Phrase for good "finally, permanently" attested from 1711, a shortening of for good and all (16c.). Middle English had for good ne ylle (early 15c.) "for good nor ill," thus "under any circumstance." good (adj.) Old English gōd (with a long "o") "excellent, fine; valuable; desirable, favorable, beneficial; full, entire, complete;" of abstractions, actions, etc., "beneficial, effective; righteous, pious;" of persons or souls, "righteous, pious, virtuous;" probably originally "having the right or desirable quality," from Proto-Germanic *gōda- "fitting, suitable" (source also of Old Norse goðr, Dutch goed, Old High German guot, German gut, Gothic goþs), a word of uncertain origin, perhaps originally "fit, adequate, belonging together," from PIE root *ghedh- "to unite, be associated, suitable" (source also of Old Church Slavonic godu "pleasing time," Russian godnyi "fit, suitable," Old English gædrian "to gather, to take up together"). https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=good Good: "God", meaning: "having right or desirable quality". Quote BAD, adjective [Heb. to perish or destroy] 1. Ill; evil; opposed to good; a word of general use, denoting physical defects and moral faults, in men and things; as a bad man, a bad heart, a bad design, bad air, bad water, bad books. 2. Vicious; corrupt; depraved, in a moral sense; as a bad life; a bad action. 3. Unwholesome; as bad provisions. http://webstersdictionary1828.com/Dictionary/bad Quote bad (adj.) c. 1300, "inadequate, unsatisfactory, worthless; unfortunate;" late 14c., "wicked, evil, vicious; counterfeit;" from 13c. in surnames (William Badde, Petri Badde, Asketinus Baddecheese, Rads Badinteheved). Rare before 1400, and evil was more common until c. 1700 as the ordinary antithesis of good. It has no apparent relatives in other languages.* Possibly from Old English derogatory term bæddel and its diminutive bædling "effeminate man, hermaphrodite, pederast," which probably are related to bædan "to defile." https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=bad Bad: meaning: "inadequate or worthless quality". Quote Evil E'VIL, adjective e'vl. [Heb. to be unjust or injurious, to defraud.] 1. Having bad qualities of a natural kind; mischievous; having qualities which tend to injury, or to produce mischief. Some evil beast hath devoured him. Genesis 37:20. 2. Having bad qualities of a moral kind; wicked; corrupt; perverse; wrong; as evil thoughts; evil deeds; evil speaking; an evil generation. 3. Unfortunate; unhappy; producing sorrow, distress, injury or calamity; as evil tidings; evil arrows; evil days. E'VIL, noun evil is natural or moral. Natural evil is any thing which produces pain, distress, loss or calamity, or which in any way disturbs the peace, impairs the happiness, or destroys the perfection of natural beings......................... E'VIL, adverb [generally contracted to ill.] 1. Not well; not with justice or propriety; unsuitable. Evil it beseems thee. 2. Not virtuously; not innocently. 3. Not happily; unfortunately. It went evil with his house. 4. Injuriously; not kindly. http://webstersdictionary1828.com/Dictionary/evil Quote evil (adj.) Old English yfel (Kentish evel) "bad, vicious, ill, wicked," from Proto-Germanic *ubilaz (source also of Old Saxon ubil, Old Frisian and Middle Dutch evel, Dutch euvel, Old High German ubil, German übel, Gothic ubils), from PIE *upelo-, from root *wap- "bad, evil" (source also of Hittite huwapp- "evil"). In Old English and other older Germanic languages other than Scandinavian, "this word is the most comprehensive adjectival expression of disapproval, dislike or disparagement" [OED]. Evil was the word the Anglo-Saxons used where we would use bad, cruel, unskillful, defective (adj.), or harm (n.), crime, misfortune, disease (n.). In Middle English, bad took the wider range of senses and evil began to focus on moral badness. Both words have good as their opposite. Evil-favored (1520s) meant "ugly." Evilchild is attested as an English surname from 13c. The adverb is Old English yfele, originally of words or speech. Also as a noun in Old English, "what is bad; sin, wickedness; anything that causes injury, morally or physically." Especially of a malady or disease from c. 1200. The meaning "extreme moral wickedness" was one of the senses of the Old English noun, but it did not become established as the main sense of the modern word until 18c. As a noun, Middle English also had evilty. Related: Evilly. Evil eye (Latin oculus malus) was Old English eage yfel. The jocular notion of an evil twin as an excuse for regrettable deeds is by 1986, American English, from an old motif in mythology. https://www.etymonline.com/word/evil#etymonline_v_46806 Evil: "Yfel", meaning: "defective; unskillful, not virtuous; harmful". God and Ubil. Virtue and non virtue = opposite Usefull and useless = opposite effective and deffective = opposite suitable and unsuitable = opposite fortunate and unfortunate = opposite and so on............................................ Light brings warmth. ^^^ heat rises ^^^ Dark brings colth. vvv cold falls vvv Natural law reveals how Hot and Cold separate, and go opposite directions. In magnetism, there are two actions of magnetic charges, that is, repulsion, and attraction. The sun in the sky repels dense, cold matter. The earth below attracts, or "gravitates". Natural law shows an opposing nature. Righteousness is linked to heat, because, upon observing the virtue of fire and the sun, we see that love lives up to the same support, and function. Bodies when alive are warm. Of course there are plenty of legends of great healers who could cleanse with fire. Wickedness is linked to cold, because, it promotes death. Death of course, falls, like cold, under the ground, a dead body is cold. Chaos, the constant loss of momentum, results in density, and cold. If they were numerically one, Good and Evil, they would add to one anotherr. But we see that 1+(-1)= o, they subtract. However, +1+(+1)= 2, they are one, they add to another. Lastly, if Good be Law, the structure by which is built, how shall it stand, as long as that which destroys the structure lives with it? There would be no structure, only nothing. The structure must keep away destruction to stand. It is the Hot, the Good, the Fire, which is truely one, having no evil, and yet destroys the evil, so that there is nourishment for the good to grow. Edited August 23, 2019 by VastLand Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now