[Profpat]

In the process, "evil" will destroy the old ways of life, select against them, until all that is left is the cooperative structure. There will still be competition, but organized competition - not the imbalanced process we most recognize as evil.

So in your theory evil = good ?

[Darwyn43]

That's an interesting way of putting it. I think evil is ambivalent, but then again, good is morally grey itself, in that it often justifies short-term evils for long-term goods.

First of all, you have to consider the feeling from the reality. From this perspective, evolution has created the ability to think self-reflectively which has made us all of us feel we have a right to life and dignity and so on. So in that sense, the universe is cruel for making us, her agents, aware of the pain of being sacrificed. In that sense, evil hurts like a son of a b***h whether it's you or me or Adolf Hitler on the recieving end.

But as far as actual good and evil beyond mere pain, if you accept the premise that nature is a directional process toward balanced systems of cooperation and competition, first creating the cell, then the organism, then the social system -- than threatening the system is evil. Killing citizens, stealing money, etc. all are against nature's plan which is reflected in our moral codes. But then, sometimes the cooperative system, while it's evolving, doesn't extend it's benefit to everyone equally and may seem like IT is acting evil toward YOU, which in a vacuum of perspective, education, support and so on, may justify parasitic behavior in someone's experience. In that case, even the criminal him or herself, perpetrator of evil, was created by the evolutionary process and the system's inability, not having finished it's evolution, to provide equality, security, education, perspective, balance or what have you, equally to everyone. In the mean time, we act cruelly to criminals because we need to clear obstacles to the greater good, but by calling what we are doing just or good, we ignore that they too were created by the process and our treatment of them is merely a short-term evil justified by a long-term good.

Just to be clear on where I stand on evil is good, I give a resounding "I don't like it -- but kind of."

[Profpat]

OK I can buy into that. It's like evolution, to me it's neither good or evil, just necessary.

BTW Welcome to the forum Darwyn43. I hope you enjoy yourself here.

Best,

Pat

[Darwyn43]

Thanks Pat. I'm really stoked to have found this place

[Tina]

Originally Posted by Profpat OK Tina you defined evil as something which defaces life, and then we had a discussion as to the definition of defaces: TRANSITIVE VERB: de·faced , de·fac·ing , de·fac·es To mar or spoil the appearance or surface of; disfigure. To impair the usefulness, value, or influence of. Obsolete To obliterate; destroy. Best to all, So using that definition would not death meet the criteria of defacing life? Best to you Tina, Pat

No "death" per se does not meet criteria of "defacing" life because death is an inherent part of life and necessary for the continuation of the life cycle.

[Tina]

Originally Posted by Darwyn43 I think evil is ambivalent............in that it often justifies short-term evils for long-term goods. ...... if you accept the premise that nature is a directional process toward balanced systems of cooperation and competition, first creating the cell, then the organism, then the social system -- But then, sometimes the cooperative system, while it's evolving, doesn't extend it's benefit to.... Just to be clear on where I stand on evil is good, I give a resounding "I don't like it -- but kind of."

Thanks so much for your insightful comments here.

I do see the human as still evolving - and living out "good/evil imperatives" that will eventually bring us that place of "balanced systems of co-operation and competition". This will be the day when we turn our weapons into ploughshares" as the saying goes.

[Tina]

Originally Posted by mkirkpatrick "Being" in form-idable existence roots the cause of evil. regards michael.

Michael I've been trying to fathom your statement for a while now...but no progress. Can you elaborate on it please.

[Profpat]

I believe what Michael is implying is that since we think we have an individual FORM it seperates us from being part of the ONE. Consequently there is you and me, and we believe we are seperate and distinct and that is where evil begins.

But I hope Michael will see your question and answer on his own, rather than relying on my interpretation.

Best to you Tina,

Pat

[Tina]

Originally Posted by Profpat I believe what Michael is implying ..... there is you and me, and we believe we are seperate and distinct and that is where evil begins. Best to you Tina, Pat

Yes that sounds like it might be where Michael is coming from.

My question is:

What is it about human self aware subjective selves (which is a necessary condition of sentient existance) that has led us to create these negative connotations of seperateness.

We await your reply Michael.

[Profpat]

Hi Tina and everyone;

I just heard that on Comedy Central ( American TV ) March 12, 2008 they are going to have Lewis Black do a special on the ROOT OF ALL EVIL. Maybe then I'll have an answer to your thought provoking question.

Best to all,

Pat