[subversion]

Originally Posted by Mr. Nobody In that the groups struggle for domination, they fight wars, not to gain access to resources only, but to advance their ideals, their ideas. The group idea is vicious, it can and will afflict suffering whenever necessary to survive and to propagate. Propagation of this winning ideals is the continuation of biological evolution. Evolution of idealogies.....

I totally agree. If it weren't for wars, the TOE would never have come about. That's not to say that it couldn't have come about without wars, just that it didn't happen to. So now we owe our gratitude to something we don't like whether we like it or not. We owe our gratitude to every event of the past no matter whether we outwardly approve of it or not.

[subversion]

Originally Posted by harmonygirl Sub, we're talking at cross purposes. I am not saying something is both good and bad (although this can happen depending on perspective ie the 1776 revolution of the states, good for america, bad for britain). I am talking about the whole picture. If you define good you MUST by definition define bad. Because of balance, equilibrium and related concepts, things tend towards the centre. good is not the ultimate outcome, neither is bad. There is no logical connection for your statement if not all actions are good, we will all be bad people. Some actions can be good and some can be bad. By themselves (individual actions) they don't define people as entities. It is the aggregate that we look at. I get the sense that this dialogue is bordering on simply restating our opinions, which is pointless. The original idea of the thread was whether the concepts of good and bad were necessarily linked to the Goddess. I think I have my answer, they are not, they are social constructs. Thanks for your opinions.

I did define bad. Bad is nothing and good is everything. If not all actions are good we are doomed to bad actions therefore we are doomed to be bad. You cannot be good if you are bad, period.

I could prove it to you more blatantly but then I'd have to give away the theory of everything. I don't want to do that because people are going to have to figure it out on their own so that way they will HAVE to learn to be optimistic, since nothing I can say seems to make a difference and nobody seems to believe me that everything is what we should appreciate. Show me the absolute appreciation of everything, and I will show you a TOE. The two may be closer than you realize.

[harmonygirl]

Sub, if your TOE is premised on the notion of absolutes, then I think it is wrong. The labels good and bad are transitory so yes, at one time something or someone can be good and later bad and then good and then bad. This has nothing to do with the Goddess, nor optimism. It has to do with reality.

[subversion]

I agree with you harmonygirl. We can think that somebody is bad and then change our mind later based on what they do and call them good. This just proves that our judgement was never correct in the first place, for people who are truly good never had any potential for evil. The part where reality wins is where everything says that everything has always been good from the get go, we just never realized or were able to appreciate everything in that sort of a way. But the theory of everything requires us to.

ANyway, if you think that my theory is wrong because it's a theory that is absolute then how the hell is the TOE supposed to be? Isn't everything the absolute greatest thing possible by definition? Therefore it is not only a good thing and an absolute thing, it is literally the greatest thing. Right? Bear with me here

[harmonygirl]

Sub, I'm not sure that I agree with you that when we change our mind and re-label something or someone that our judgement was never correct, I think we simply have more data available and are able have a more informed opinion.
I said that if your TOE is based on absolutes, then it may be wrong. As experience tells us, absolutes are misleading. My preliminary TOE is flexible and doesn't use absolutes.

[Mr. Nobody]

You both are still missing the point. Everything is already here. Reality works, with or without our knowledge. It is for us to discover, it is for us to classify and to categorize, to weigh and measure. We use norms (good and bad) to compare, norms that evolved based on their usefulness to us and only to us, the social animal.
Should the human species be wiped out at the hand of a madman or a group of madmen, bent on tyranny and domination, do you think the sun will stop shining? Do you think anybody will shed a tear for us?
Call it evil or whatever, in the end it will make no difference to the universe whether we make it or not. Matter will still continue to form, to evolve, it will deem intelligence a dead end for this go around, self destructive and it will go on fighting entropy in other ways. Remember the dinosaurs...
If intelligence on this earth fails who will be next, who will inherit the earth and crown himself the true pinnacle of evolution, the end of all and around we go, all good, all evolving, revolving....

And your Gods, Goddesses, deities, lords, saviors, devils, demons, angels, bibles, korans, torahs and whatever religious fables you cooked up to cope with death will die with the memories of homo sapiens, the killer ape that ruled the earth for a blink of an cosmic eye.

[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 are so right there!




kind regards michael.

[subversion]

I agree but we have to be careful. Everything can't exist unless nothing exists also but that doesn't mean that nothing is actually something. It's still nothing. So while evil does have to exist for good to exist, it doesn't necessarely mean that evil is something or that it is important. It's entirely possible to have everything be good and nothing be bad and the concepts of good and bad still be upheld.

[ANDY J]

Evil exsists when you know it is the very opposite of pure good, perhaps people that perform evil deeds do not know good and do not recognise their own evil doings, as a animal would not consider toying with its prey before killing it to be evil.
If you removed all evil from the world their would still be recognisable degrees of good, but perhaps the least good of these deeds would bocome the new evil.

[Mr. Nobody]

Where was good and evil before mankind gave it names?
What did good and evil do before homo sapiens came down from the trees?
What was/is their purpose?
Is a supernova evil if it wipes out populated planets?
Is the black hole evil if it swallows matter?
Good and evil are like colors. They reflect how we experience the world and how we measure certain acts/ behavior against an established norm. What is absolute red? Without the eyes, we see no colors, there is no colors. Describe red to a blind man. Without a comparative judgement of actions there is no good and evil.
Describe absolute good and absolute evil without relating it to the human experience.
Sentient acts in relation to the impact of their societies are good and evil. Human sacrifices were good for the Aztec society but unthinkable for western cultures