"Good and Evil" Don't Exist

[andre1984]

Originally Posted by passerbye999

Not within the society but between different societies that were competitive for land or food or water. The Neanderthals went extinct because they existed in small tribes with now trade with other tribes. We survived as a species because in times of hardship there was raiding but the majority oif small tribes had trading relations that sometimes spread out to 600-1000 miles.

Oh yeah, people definitely sometimes got violent with neighboring groups. Generally in times of resource scarcity though, so this was simply a natural method of population control, given that if people had refused violence, there would have been mass starvation. In the situation of war, the more capable and adapted group survived.

And it wasn't sadistic. Women and children were spared, and generally absorbed into the winning tribe.

Animals do the same thing.

[andre1984]

But yeah, your point about "evil" being harm/suffering, and this being an element of the natural world, is accurate. Though I personally consider experience itself - good or bad - to be the defining factor of meaningful existence, I am specifically speaking here about the Christian concept of "good people and bad people".

[valmar]

Originally Posted by andre1984

A response to a believer in "good and bad people".

I was trying to push you to examine why you believe in this concept of "right and wrong". The basis of it is religious and economic, as the concept did not exist before those two things colonized the human mind and soul.

Good and evil is a reduction of what human beings are, and why we do what we do, into the realm of incomprehensible pseudo-metaphysics which were designed for the purpose of subjugating the people to the whim of the economic system. It is very difficult to make an argument for good and evil without making an argument for the existence of the devil. I don't believe in the devil.

As far as humans "knowing the difference between right and wrong", that is not exactly an objective or scientific analysis. It is an unfounded assumption which is taken for granted by men due to centuries of psychological programming regarding the nature of what human beings are.

Let me elaborate on why I dub antisocial behavior as a mental illness.

Our emotional make-up is a function of survival. We like to take care of each other, naturally. That is the way we are programmed, genetically, given that our survival - in nature - requires a stable community structure. Thus behavior which is detrimental to the structure of the community is not only looked down upon, but goes against our own biological nature.

When a dog "rapes" another dog, there is no moral question involved, because this is a common method of reproduction among dogs, and it is not harmful to the continued existence of either dog's lineage. Human beings, on the other hand, require a complex social structure in order to continue their existence, and this social structure can generally not tolerate rape (unless it is institutionalized and practiced within certain boundaries, as was the case among some American Indian tribes - though this type of practice would not really fit the definition of what we presently consider rape, as there was no breach of social contract), and as such, committing rape within a human society is a behavior which is detrimental to the stability of the whole of the community, and thus of the survival of the individual who committed the rape; as such, engaging in that behavior is a form of mental illness.

We must look at what society has become in order to understand why people are engaging in all types of socially and personally destructive behaviors. The main factor is the loss of community, and the conditioning that such a state inflicts on the members of such a society (or "non-society"). We you lose community, you have simply a network of strangers, and thus there is no more internal drive to maintain the stability of the "society" as a whole, the drive is simply to maintain the survival of the individual - this is the fundamental change which takes place with the introduction of economics into a society, the transformation of the mode of self-preservation from being based on the community to being based on the individual. Because we are still biologically structured in such a way as to exist within communities, our biology is now in conflict with our environment, which causes complete psychological breakdown on every level, hence the introduction of "evil". These behavior patterns which are dubbed as "bad" are purely a result of man's incapacity to reconcile his biological nature with this new situation.

This concept of "sin" was invented by the church in order to create a makeshift bond between human biology and the new non-society which resulted from the introduction of economics, which creates a new environment, a new means of survival, and a new set of behavioral guidelines to go along with these. It is very interesting to see here in the tribal communities where Christianity has been introduced into areas that still have community. I asked them why they believe in Jesus, and they said "because he died for our sins"; I said "what is your sin?" they said "well, murder is a sin, having sex with your neighbor's wife is a sin". I said "do you murder people and have sex with your neighbor's wife?"; they of course do not do that, because that would be harmful to their community, and they have no reason to do so anyway. And so there is no sin. There are no "bad people", because the community is functioning as a community is supposed to function.

In Rome, when the idea was first introduced, the society was broken completely, with all types of murder and rape and whatever else it is these bad people do. As such, the concept was taken as valid, as it was addressing an existing problem in the society, and it presented a ham-fisted but still workable solution to it - the fact that the behavior existed, and that there was no memory of a time when it didn't exist, meant that man was somehow intrinsically prone toward this "bad" behavior, and thus needs a fear of divine retribution to keep him in line.

So, to summarize, "good and bad people" is a fallacy that was adopted by a deformed society in order both account for and to regulate behavior patterns which developed as a result of the clash between human biology and the unnatural environment created by economics.

I ask you now: why do you believe in "good and evil"?

Once I did...but no so much anymore. "Good and Evil" are so over-rated! What is "good" and what is "evil"? They are concepts. The things we think are "evil" are considered good by somebody else. Lucifer/Satan is considered "evil", yet to me, he is "good", due to his respect for free will and condemnation of control. The Zionists are seen as evil...however to them, they are doing the highest good, as they are following their holy book. We believe that what they are doing completely disgusting, yet to them they consider it their obligation somehow...just an example. But you get the drift.

Everything is both good and evil. It's all about perception.

[passerbye999]

Originally Posted by andre1984

But yeah, your point about "evil" being harm/suffering, and this being an element of the natural world, is accurate. Though I personally consider experience itself - good or bad - to be the defining factor of meaningful existence, I am specifically speaking here about the Christian concept of "good people and bad people".

I agree the standard Christian interpretation is a little off the wall. escpecially with fundamentalists but that is the same with all organized religion. You are by definition a heathen if you aren't a member of that particular tribe. This is more discriminatory in nature. They are so afraid of "Satan" that they lose sleep over the concept. Personaly I do believe in negative energy and a negative being. Just as I believe that energy and being must be balanced by its doppleganger so to speak. Yin and Yang you know what I am saying it is kind of a karmic law.

[openwide333]

Originally Posted by andre1984

99.999% of anything I have ever heard from atheists amounts to Christian-style moralizing. It is generally just a lot more extreme and weird.

Really even given the absence of an afterlife, god and religious dogmas etc. you think atheistic morals tally up with Christian morals 99.999% therefore I guess what makes it "more extreme and weird" is this 00.001%.

Well give me a few moral dilemas and what you think the Christian perspective would be on them and I'll give you mine and then we'll see how accurate this 99.999% is for me.

[neutrino]

Originally Posted by andre1984

Why would a person get pleasure from killing or torturing?

I dunno, lets resurrect Vlad The Impaler and ask him.

[kalindu10]

i should say this is one of the best opinions of good and evil i have read so far. and i totally agree with your conception. our temples, churches have bought up these good and evil. i think morality should be questioned argued and condemned before selecting them to a society by intelligent people other than churches and worship houses.

read this article too which i found very interesting when it comes Good Vs Evil and Human Condition

http://www.worldtransformation.com/good-vs-evil/

[zhiba]

i think 'Good' and 'Evil' does exist, but only at certain levels of consciousness.

'Good' and 'Evil' are kinda slippery terms - one's understandings of them are purely influenced by one's state of consciousness, in much the same way as our understanding of the term love.

Love can mean different things to different people, but a precise understanding of Love can not be defined by love within a material world.

Both Good and Evil are material world realism's, matrix based philosophies, however tangible the terms are within the matrix, on a higher consciousness level they are........ nothing more than imagined concepts.

The imagination can be a powerful thing, however.

[zhiba]

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showt...hlight=duality

[konjim]

I believe in Good people who help others , God is Every where it depends upon you what you that . if you think that God is Exist then you believe other wise you not ...

[naked11]

The Cult of Osiris vs the Cult of Set
The Cult of Yahweh vs the Cult of Satan

How dark(light) the con of Man...

[grandmasterp]

I can only speak as I find and I've found most people to be basically good, pleasant and helpful.
They'd do you a favour before ever they'd do anything against you. That seems to me to be the 'norm'.
I have also come across a very few twisted evil bar stewards who got off on making the lives of others as miserable as possible, most of whom ( I've been a workplace trade union rep this thirty-odd years past) have been 'managers'.
HTH