[subversion]

Originally Posted by harmonygirl I don't know that we can generalize that men are more evil that women. Women kill as well (there is a disturbing trend of rising girl violence in North America). I guess what I was trying to determine is if the recognition of deities (Gods or Goddesses) inevitably involves invoking a moralistic (or judgemental) framework, resulting in the creation of right and wrong. Is the conception of Goddess inextricably linked to concepts of right and wrong?

Of course we can generalize. You can't talk about everything if you don't generalize. But anyways, that's besides the point. The point is that while, yes, women kill, they do not do it near as much as men do. Also I would say that if there is indeed a trend of rising girl violence it is not necessarily a disturbing thing if it is indeed entirely natural. But to answer your question, yes, the combined God/Godess entity represents an absolute clash of good and evil but it's always slightly more good than evil, merely by virtue. So put your hands together...

[mkirkpatrick]

Originally Posted by michellemfry It remains an alternative choice to that which is Good and one has no part in the other and thus, must be parallel in it's nature. If one accepts this parallel, then one understands that without one there is no other.

You have made a positive point there,if you have one,thenthe other
is also present.


kind regards michael.

[Mohan.C]

HG

What is good and evil is decided by nature. tiger hunts down a deer it is not evil. We drop down a nuclear bomb that is evil. Any act of violence with a selfish motive is evil. But selfish i mean that-hmmm... See. we fight to protect our ego it is evil. But the tiger hunts not to prove it is strong but instead out of hunger. So it is Ego that is Evil all its causes are also evil.

[subversion]

Originally Posted by Mohan.C HG What is good and evil is decided by nature. tiger hunts down a deer it is not evil. We drop down a nuclear bomb that is evil. Any act of violence with a selfish motive is evil. But selfish i mean that-hmmm... See. we fight to protect our ego it is evil. But the tiger hunts not to prove it is strong but instead out of hunger. So it is Ego that is Evil all its causes are also evil.

I would look at your statement more carefully. If a tiger kills a deer, how is this not evil while dropping a bomb is? Doesn't any act of violence usually have a selfish motive no matter what? I mean there's only so many resources to go around, so when a tiger kills a deer it is essentially being selfish by saying "I am trying to uphold my life at the expense of whoever else." Do you agree?

Furthermore, do you think that evolution and the development of the knowledge of everything could take place without ego? It seems to me that ego may be the one thing which drives these developments.

[Mohan.C]

Originally Posted by subversion I would look at your statement more carefully. If a tiger kills a deer, how is this not evil while dropping a bomb is? Doesn't any act of violence usually have a selfish motive no matter what? I mean there's only so many resources to go around, so when a tiger kills a deer it is essentially being selfish by saying "I am trying to uphold my life at the expense of whoever else." Do you agree? Furthermore, do you think that evolution and the development of the knowledge of everything could take place without ego? It seems to me that ego may be the one thing which drives these developments.

Yes, I do have to think about your statements. But if as you say evolution is happening just for the sake of upholding one's ego then I don't want it and rather I don't agree with it. I must say evolution is a fight for the survival. If we are fighting for that I will go with it. But are we?? There are many who fight for greediness. For a more share in the sharing. God has given only man thought so that atleast let him be the one who gives up ego and learn to
co-operate with nature. But are we doing it? The more we implement our thoughts it goes for evil things. It is only human who can give up Evil. Because he has the power to do it-"He can think". But can a tiger think as u said-we must ask the tiger!!


Mohan.

[mkirkpatrick]

Originally Posted by michellemfry It remains an alternative choice to that which is Good and one has no part in the other and thus, must be parallel in it's nature. If one accepts this parallel, then one understands that without one there is no other.

How could it be otherwise??


kind regards michael.

[Mr. Nobody]

No absolute Evil nor absolute Good exists. Good and Evil are human concepts in an attempt to classify and categorize behavioral trades based on their benefits to human society.
As humans evolved within groups and developed societies, we learned and rewarded behavior that is beneficial to the survival of that group. The single specimen surrendered himself to his/her group to partake in its benefits and serve the group for the survival of the group above all. In that way, the group became the specimen, more important than the single individual, akin to cells in your body working together to make the "biological you". Beneficial trades evolved that formed the basis of the 10 commandments and then later our laws.

[harmonygirl]

Mr. Nobody, I agree with you about the social utility of good v. bad. There is also a great deal of thought that conceptions of the Goddess is a result of social utility. What I am wondering is whether these are related? Does the conception of the Goddess necessarily involve morality?

[Mr. Nobody]

The concept of a deity has to involve morality. Moral, or positive, self-less acts benefit the survival of the group. In order to reward more of that behaviour, society evolved (note that I purposefully use the word society in lieu of the individual) the concept of a reward after death. If there is a reward waiting for you after you die, you are more apt to act selfless or moral....
Nothing is imoral, moral, good or evel in nature. The preservation of the group or society rules our thoughts and emotions.

[harmonygirl]

Mr. Nobody, you hit on my point. Nothing in nature is immoral. If the Goddess is natural, wouldn't the imposition of notions of good/bad be socially utilitarian and not necessarily true?