> Certainly valuable to me, Tony; so, just to clarify my earlier
> thoughts and questions, you're suggesting:
>
> "Good" is always purposive, is ultimately subjective either in
> definition or interpretation, and is consequently unavoidably context
> dependent (in value judgement; in which presumably rests the
> definition of "Evil"?),
More or less. Somehow, I think, letting go of the concepts of good and
evil is part of the Path that leads to acceptance of whatever comes
along in life. We learn most when we have troubles and have to learn,
so regretting or fretting over troubles is a waste of time, when we
can just as easily see them as a means to personal growth.
>
> Interesting point you make about evolution and the "Good"; so,
> projections of the collapse of our star in a few billion year from now
> would be both objectively and subjectively bad news?
Oh, I don't know. The explosion of a giant star created our galaxy and
almost all the elements essential to life. The star might not have
enjoyed the experience, but hopefully it was ready. Dying is something
few of us desired, but none can escape. The hope is that we can accept
it when it comes without fear of what may lie ahead, if anything. Fear
is the mind killer, and desire the root of much unhappiness.
Peace,
Tony
>
> On Jul 11, 6:31 pm, Tony Orlow <t...@lightlink.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi Ben -
>
> > A good question, and not one that I haven't spent much time
> > considering. Here are my thoughts.
>
> > One many levels, good and evil are subjective. When a cheetah kills a
> > gazelle, that is good in the cheetah's eye and evil in the gazelle's.
> > Indeed, our sense of what is good or bad rests first in personal
> > pleasure and pain, and as we mature, is extended by association to
> > include that which helps or hurts an object of attachment. For the
> > rich, the current financial situation is good, and for the many poor
> > it is evil. One's personal judgment is generally dependent on their
> > perspective.
>
> > One the other hand, if we assume some greater good, then actions which
> > encourage it are good, and those that set it back or hurt it are bad
> > or even evil. For instance, for those that believe in evolution and
> > would rather be a trillion human cells able to think on our level
> > rather than a pool of algae, evolution may be viewed as a universally
> > good thing. Actions that encourage it are good and those that impede
> > it are bad. Since evolution happens on all levels, from stars to
> > physical organism to minds and memes, one may view this as a universal
> > good. Of course, this depends on whether one personally believes in
> > evolution, so again, even this objective good is subjectively
> > estimated by the individual.
>
> > Hope that was a valuable contribution. Have a nice day
>
> > Tony
>
> > On Jul 8, 11:16 pm, Ben <artistta...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > I do not believe that we can define good and evil without entering
> > > into a philosophical conversation.
>
> > > Good and evil are not absolute rules nor can there be a universal good
> > > or a universal evil.
> > > The concept of what is good and what is evil must be taught to us as a
> > > child, because we are not born inherently good or evil.
>
> > > To murder is bad. However the statement does not speak of a universal
> > > good. Murder in so many cases has been used in good ways.
> > > Euthanization has been used to end a suffering patients life. Abortion
> > > has been used to prevent a child from being born when childbirth could
> > > end a mothers life. To murder is bad in many cases but not all. The
> > > extreme case of the word murder means to kill another human being
> > > under conditions specifically covered in law. We can not define murder
> > > without discussing the implications. There are many instances where
> > > murder must be re-defined as a good not a bad.
>
> > > A child is not born inherently good or evil. Human beings are unique
> > > in the power of our brain. We are able to quickly associate good and
> > > bad. These associations are learned from society, our elders and
> > > peers. A child that is born with no contact from these influences will
> > > associate good and evil with pain and suffering. A child with contact
> > > from these influences will be able to conceptualize good and evil and
> > > apply it to many different aspects of everyday life.
>
> > > Finally, no universal good or evil will ever be agreed upon. There is
> > > no absolute good or bad that we must all follow. One concept can
> > > impede on another and we must accept those societies that have a
> > > rational way of thinking. Each society must continue to evolve these
> > > rules and change the commandments that were made centuries ago to fit
> > > the present day reality of life. To murder is bad, however we live in
> > > a civilized county in which many cases of murder are legal because
> > > they are good. No one is born inherently good or evil and our society
> > > must continue to define every aspect of what could be good or bad in
> > > order to teach our children and they to develop their own, more
> > > complete understanding to be taught to their children.
>
> > > I challenge those of you who have read this to define an absolute good
> > > and evil.
>
> > > Thanks,
> > > Ben Kaylor- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
0 comments:
Post a Comment