good & evil

[Lao Tzu]

what are your opinions. try to be intelligent please.


To me, good & evil are a result of one direction being better than another, something that is not a universal principle. Not only that but good & evil are due to emotions & logic, both of which exist in the nervous system. no nervous system = no good & evil.

A planet circling the sun doesn't consider an asteroid that hits it & knocks it out of orbit evil because it

1. doesn't have a nervous system
2. doesn't have a set of values (biological & social) that say path A is better than path B

So good & evil aren't universal characteristics, they are earth-bound nervous system bound traits that force us to choose one path over another.

Not only that, but what other potential 'good & evil' systems are there? if good & evil are a direct result of anti-entropy (or whatever it is called when things develop into complexity and therefore have to maintain a set path) then they are one set of rules. There are potentially endless methods of good & evil in existence as long as complexity exists.

 

[HumorMe]

A planet circling the sun doesn't consider an asteroid that hits it & knocks it out of orbit evil because it

1. doesn't have a nervous system
2. doesn't have a set of values (biological & social) that say path A is better than path B

Not trying to be an ass or anything.

If a planet.... "considers"....doesn't that mean that the planet would have a nervous system therefore making your example null and void?

 

[Lao Tzu]

Re: Re: good & evil

Not trying to be an ass or anything.

If a planet.... "considers"....doesn't that mean that the planet would have a nervous system therefore making your example null and void?

it doesn't consider at all, which is why good & evil, rather than being universal systems, are just tools built into our nervous systems to ensure obedience. The principle of good & evil is probably foreign to existence at large

 

[HumorMe]

Not only that, but what other potential 'good & evil' systems are there?

OK, I think I am with you but with the above quote....are you talking about other different systems such as "happy& sad"?

 

[Warik]

I believe that good & evil can be defined absolutely.

I believe a person is evil if he believes something is evil, yet does it anyway.

Let's say we have potential murderer A. He sees random guy walking down the street and feels like killing him. Murderer A truly believes that killing for no reason is evil, yet he kills random guy anyway. Murderer A is evil.

Now let's say we have escaped mental patient B. He sees murderer A trying to kill random guy. Escaped mental patient B truly does not believe that there is anything wrong with killing someone for no reason, so he helps murderer A kill random guy. Escaped mental patient B is not evil. He truly did not believe that what he was doing was wrong.

Let's attempt to distinguish "truly believe" and "didn't think."

You can't fake "true belief." You can't say "oh I don't believe stealing is wrong today... let me go pick that guy's pocket. oops I think stealing is wrong now! that's ok... I already got that guy's wallet."

Of course, we cannot establish whether or not the individual "truly believed" that what he was doing was evil, yet did it anyway. Only he knows that for sure.

I suppose our definition of evil relies on the idea that most people have a general idea of what is basically evil and that most people are competent enough to make that distinction; thus, by our logic, anyone who does anything we consider as "evil" must have known that it was "evil," and is therefore, "evil."

The asteroid that hit the planet is not evil, because it is not a sentient being in control of its actions. The planet can't label it as evil for the same reasons.

Besides, who's to say that if the asteroid DID have a set of values, it wouldn't consider hitting the planet to be a better path than dodging it? (Hey, dodging takes a lot of energy.)

-Warik

 

[Warik]

Re: Re: Re: good & evil

The principle of good & evil is probably foreign to existence at large

That's because existence at large is believed to be mostly inanimate matter. The atoms of hydrogen floating around in space neither know nor care what is going on around them. Good & Evil is a concept reserved only for sentient life.

-Warik

 

[Lao Tzu]

Re: Re: good & evil

OK, I think I am with you but with the above quote....are you talking about other different systems such as "happy& sad"?

i'm talking about systems of 'acceptable & unacceptable conduct' that would seem totally alien to us. I can't explain what i mean by it though.

Doesn't anyone find the idea fascinating that good & evil, the cornerstone of existence for sentient life, is an artificial program ensuring our obedience on a solitary rock in a dead existence?

 

[HumorMe]

Just trying to grasp the depth to this discussion before making myself look like an ass(although, I probably already have). I really don't think I have ever considered what you are talking about. Now that I think about it, I wonder who came up with the ideas that a certain something was good and a certain something else was evil.

 

[buddy28]

Re: Re: Re: good & evil

Doesn't anyone find the idea fascinating that good & evil, the cornerstone of existence for sentient life, is an artificial program ensuring our obedience on a solitary rock in a dead existence?

That is a fascinating theory. However, a person would have to assume the nonexistence of a universial deity, which is fair.

Most people arnt athesist and most people arnt familar enough with evolutionary theory to acknowledge the distinction your making. It is pretty amazing. Its comparable to studies in neuroscience. Your right, all of our emotions, our complex behavours, seem to be reduciable to biochemical interactions coupled with appropriate neuronal pathway stimulation (however complex). What is the scent?! Scent is nothing, just like taste is nothing. Scent is just molecules emmitted by a piece of physical matter which stimulate chemoreceptors in a organisms nasal passage, which are interpreted by the brain as a "smell". But there is no universal "smell" associated with atomic matter. Its the brain that makes it smell. Same with gustation (taste), and emotion. Take a hit of E and watch how powerfull the individuals emotional reaction is to a diluge of seeminly innoculent biochemicals. Just chemicals. How can a chemical make me feeel good, unlesss feelings are associated with biochemical reactions?! From the adaptionists, or evolutionists perspective, emotions and sensations our brains attribute to innoculous matter and events, helps the species survive.

Yep. Its complex stuff.

 

[aurelius]

I believe a person is evil if he believes something is evil, yet does it anyway.

I think we can both agree that people don´t behave in this manner. Rather, they rationalize what they do to themselves, therefor making whatever they do OK.