These two things are merely created in our minds, and brought out into the world. They still aren’t good or evil though, we have an agreement on what is and isn’t. We link words to things based on results that we have seen from certain actions throughout time. We know not to do this, because this will happen, and we know this is not pleasant, so it is bad. Or maybe we say things are evil that we do not understand. With this we create good and evil, but it’s not natural. It doesn’t come with the world that we live in. And so I believe that there is no god of good or satan of evil. Nature/universe/our creator is neutral. How could evil exist in a world where stars and gas clouds and life has formed. We cannot call these things good either. They simply are, and will be, without words.That tsunami, flooding an island, that man that chose to murder a girl, they are not products of an evil. They are merely events that the majority has deemed unwanted because it disturbs our usual agreement of peace. We can call them evil yes but I see no need in immersing myself in the belief that good and evil are two sides of the same coin that we live on. To say that a good creator that can stop evil but lets it exist, simply means that it is neutral and there is no evil to go along with it. The words good and evil, are also pinned to our emotions, and how we can feel pain, which is often paired with evil, suffering, (if extended) etc.. They all stem from survival techniques that were a result of us living naturally. I’d like to hear some of your thoughts on this.
I completely agree with you, and this is something I learned from sociology. Everything we know to be true has been socially constructed as so, whether it is something the majority agrees with (such as what is good vs evil) or a truth that one hold to his or herself.
Positive and negative only exist in context. If you change the definition of the universe or environment where positive and negative exist, then you can in essence change the meaning of these words.
Negative and positive numbers only exist because we defined them as such. The same can be applied to society’s definition
Well, if you look from that point of view than I guess everything in this world, this universe is neutral. However even the frequences differ from each other. That’s why we have given contexts, concepts and names to everything, to realise these differences. If you take away all these names and their meanings, then everything becomes the same. And as I see it – meaningless.
Now then we can also say that nothing is better or worse than something else.
Am I getting your point atleast a little or am I swimming in some other river?
@whiteblueberry, It’s true, the universe is meaningless. Everything that composes what we call the universe is meaningless. For instance, the trees and the stars are meaningless, they are ultimate statements. Words have meaning; what we designate to represent objects and concepts in the form of protocol statements and combinations of such statements. A protocol statement is something like “x is a tree”. The universe is an inseparable infinity of meaninglessness. When calculus was introduced we were presented with the art of measuring the universe, the ability to discern and distinguish (the illusion) of separate objects.
@whiteblueberry, Destructive and constructive still is merely defined by social convention brought about by our social institutions. A chemical compound being synthesized can be viewed as being destroyed from its original composition. But on the hand its constituent parts are forming another compound, if not at first glace, then beyond fathom..
I agree that there is no good or evil–as far as we know…
Maybe there is good and evil. Maybe not within this realm or dimension or universe or plane or whatever you wish to call it, but maybe outside it.
That probably sounds a little silly, but it’s a possibility I ponder often.
I agree with this so much! The way i see it is Good/evil varies slightly within everyone and even greater between cultures which lead me to believe that there is no set good/evil and if that’s the case then how could it really exist as it is just perceptions of viewing the world. Also when our bodies are in physical pain-“evil” we release endorphins to make us feel good which would make it go back to neutral right? And I wouldn’t be at all surprised if there’s a similar chemical for social injustices or “evil” because people Love talking/hearing bout that shit. But what I’m trying to say is that because everything is a mixed bag of “good” and “evil” there’s no way it exists beyond our own categorizing minds. Which means that it doesn’t exist if we don’t want it to.
@brandonphillips I completely agree. “Good” and “bad” are labels that we created in order to differentiate things. The simplicity of life is complicated by the need for us as human beings to understand everything. If we just accepted the ignorance of our species, and the idea we cannot explain absolutely every natural occurrence, these labels would be unnecessary.
Adjectives are relative, and only exist as long as their is an opposite. This means that if everything were good, good wouldn’t exist because there is nothing else to compare it too. Not everything is good, so there is also bad. Adjectives are also relative to the eye of the beholder. I agree with what you’re saying, but I wouldn’t say that good and evil aren’t natural, because like you say, they stem from us (natural beings). I think a better way of saying it is that there is no constant for good and evil.
@kidd, @thereisnobox It’s obviously all out of perspective. Mine is that evil can originate from within ignorance. Some people out there aren’t ignorant, and they just love killing people. Whether by any means or not, whether with others or not, whether followed or admired or not. With that I see an evil. Despite how those people are viewed by those who agree.
@jreynolds789, “Some people out there aren’t ignorant…”
But everyone IS ignorant.
“…they just love killing people.”
Hitler in particular didn’t “just love killing people.” He had a goal and exterminating millions of people was a byproduct. I mean, hell, Hitler only went down this path because he was rejected by an art school, lol. Could we still call him evil if we know him as Adolf Hitler the artist rather than the Nazi?
Also, if we claim a man is evil, what do we do with him exactly? I guess this stems off my last question…
How do we determine evil and what do we do with it? Is it the way you’re born? Or is it a matter of circumstance? Or neither or both?
I’ve thought of evil acts being acts that are done with intention to hurt something or someone else, knowing that it will bring them misery.
but I don’t really know what that would be… would that just be something that’s fucked up?
but good and bad is all relative. agreed!
@kidd I wasn’t insinuating that Hitler pulled his shit because he loved killing people. I know the story. But there are many people. Sick people. Who genuinely, at young ages, some by 10, 11, 12.. that love to eat or kill other people. I certainly believe that is an evil, innate to say the least. I guess it could be determined by a nature vs nurture construction but that is left to the psychologists and god. What we do with those people is left to the state, and I certainly don’t have the time to change their views by what I think we should do with an innate evil of which I have mentioned, but something sure as shit needs to happen in the event of sed events..
Amen to that.
Good and Evil is a concept made up by society. Before society, there was no need to define something as Good or Bad. Before society, things were simply the way they were.
With society came possessions, with possessions came wars and violence. With wars and violence, people realized that in order to live together peacefully, they needed laws. Laws are based on people’s perception of what’s good or bad. So, they’re based on our morals, norms, whatever. ‘Cause no one likes to be killed in the middle of the night or something.
Theoretically, Good and Evil wouldn’t even exist if there was no one to judge our world. Things would merely be things, just as you stated in your post. It is our personality, our experience, our culture, our beliefs and everything that we are, that judges and gives meaning to an event which is – in itself – neutral. We can’t look at things objectively, even if we tried.
I’d say there’s no automatic good and evil, since the development of our conscience in social standards is just a part of our naturalness. Understanding the consequences of the decisions we make is supposed to lead people to maturity without following blindly rules of religion or law, but simple civility to your own kind. I think that’s what this is all about anyway. For many people it’s automatic.