Evil and good is necessary

[draon9]

you need evil people and you need good people. i know some of you guys have heard it. good and evil need each other. why, because if you have good, you are going to have a punch of people with no drive and if you just have evil, lot of people will lose hope. some of you guys are destined to be evil and some of you are destined to be good. every event is necessary, whether good or bad is going to lead to a better future in many years to come,during the time that we all pass away. pain will only be a second,but joy will last forever. it is going to be okay

 

[Kanra Jest]

"Life is as empty without terror as without love." - Valkorion

There can be no good without evil, dark without light, negative without positive, yin without yang. Such is the nature of things. And really, and that's fine. It is simply a real reality of existence.

The only issue we have nowadays is the scales are totally tilted in favor of negativity that eats away at us without us all admitting it amidst the ignorance pertaining to our little coping mechanisms. Such is the way of us, eh?

 

[Virtual ghost]

Simplistic logic.

Good and Evil can't exist without each other on theoretical level. However in practice it is possible to have only good side implemented/manifested, while evil exists only as theoretical alternative.


(under the assumption that we can call something objectively good or bad)

 

[Totenkindly]

Define good.
Define evi...


aw screw it

every event is necessary, whether good or bad is going to lead to a better future in many years to come,during the time that we all pass away. pain will only be a second,but joy will last forever. it is going to be okay

I think it's called "entropy" and will eventually result in the end of everything that is (before the next cycle), and everything outside of it is unknown, undeterminable, and thus merely assumed. Is that cause for joy or merely acceptance?

 

[Sacrophagus]

The world is in a constant strive to find equilibrium. As the pendulum moves upwards, it goes backwards. The resulting moral ground in which both that action and reaction exist in superposition and cancel each other is called peace. An emptiness of both thoughts of evil and good. A Mu state that exists only ideally.

Good and evil are forms of duality in which none can exist without the other. Such qualifications are made from subjective definitions of both good and evil in which actions vary in their quality on that scale.

Argueing the existence of a world in which only good actions exist from the perspective of our world where It's not an option, rather, a norm, is possible. However, in that very world in which good deeds exist, there exist good deeds as well as not so good deeds. You can guess the outcome. Actions deemed moderately good in our world, will be deemed as evil and perceived as undesirable in their world. If you change and tweak the scale, you change the verdict.


Rejoice.

 

[The Cat]

 

[Tomb1]

 

[cacaia]

If there was no evil, we would not recognize the idea of "good". If there was no good, we wouldn't recognize the idea of "evil'.

 

[Virtual ghost]

If there was no evil, we would not recognize the idea of "good". If there was no good, we would all be dead.

Fixed.

 

[cacaia]

Fixed.

yep. But maybe that's not such a bad thing, you know, considering we Are more evil as a species than good.....

 

[Virtual ghost]

yep. But maybe that's not such a bad thing, you know, considering we Are more evil as a species than good.....

To be honest I dislike these kinds of generalizations and I find them counter productive.
Some parts of humanity are evil by fairly objective standards and they have to go, especially since they all have a name and surname that can be pinpointed. However most are just passive if they aren't truly good.

 

[Lark]

Simplistic logic.

Good and Evil can't exist without each other on theoretical level. However in practice it is possible to have only good side implemented/manifested, while evil exists only as theoretical alternative.


(under the assumption that we can call something objectively good or bad)

I do agree with this, also I think this is more of a thinking applied to policy, government, systems as opposed to individual conduct, which I suspect the OP may have been talking about or which is what a lot of people seem to be thinking about when they post these sorts of musings about good/right and bad/evil.

I do think there is such thing as an objective good, mainly because I believe in practical reason more easily than abstract/theoretical reasoning, like while its easy to talk over and theorize about moral relativism most people do not and could not live their lives that way.

A lot of the people who do practice subjectivism and moral relativism are not the types of people its safe/healthy to spend a lot of time around because they would be capable of the very worst things. They have a ready rationalisation to justify their actions to themselves and others/neutralize any qualm of conscience they may experience. Again that's the whole question as a matter of personal conduct or vice.

There can be something liberating about discussing matters in terms of personal conduct/responsibility, because you have control over those things and dont often have control over public policy and law, on the other hand I do think that later is more important and has a great influence/baring on the former.

 

[Jaguar]

you need evil people and you need good people.

And who decides which is which?

 

[Lark]

To be honest I dislike these kinds of generalizations and I find them counter productive.
Some parts of humanity are evil by fairly objective standards and they have to go, especially since they all have a name and surname that can be pinpointed. However most are just passive if they aren't truly good.

I agree with that, the passivity, in terms of the typology I most often think of when it comes to matters of this kind there are more neutral than there evil or good.

I kind of see evil and good as requiring more intention, deliberation, action and effort than most people.

Like Orwell said that a lot of people viewed nazism or fascism as a bee hive state and he said that it wasnt a good analogy and instead he suggested a society of rabbits ruled over by stoats was a better analogy.

The vast majority just try to get by whatever designs the big bosses actually have or are trying to materialize in the world at large.

 

[Kanra Jest]

And who decides which is which?

Whichever civilization beats the other civilization and deems their view of right and wrong, good and evil. Naturally.

Does Good and Evil exist? Morals would say so, but what are our morals anyway but formed by what we're often told

Within sometimes, but even that can't be quantified as anything other than "this feels wrong"

 

[Lark]

Whichever civilization beats the other civilization and deems their view of right and wrong, good and evil. Naturally.

Does Good and Evil exist? Morals would say so, but what are our morals anyway

Morals could be a chicken and egg scenario, I would suggest that there is enough innate natural law and conscience to have given rise to morality in the first place but the passing on of morality one generation to the next is an attempt to save the arduous process of learning from being repeated incessantly.

Memory serves a good purpose or at least it should.

Even if morality where only what authorities, ie victors, said it was there would probably be a lawful good underground exist in opposition to the phony orthodoxy.

 

[The Cat]

There cant be a lawful good underground. There could be a neutral or chaotic good underground but not a lawful good underground. Thats like having a legal black market.

 

[Lark]

There cant be a lawful good underground. There could be a neutral or chaotic good underground but not a lawful good underground. Thats like having a legal black market.

Alright, well, mind how you go there.

 

[shinedowness]

The fact that there are people that understand that there is good and evil and another fact that there are people that have subjective views on what is good and/or evil make our world a place where chaotic diversity and inevitable risks create an arguably interesting world. I do not consider myself completely idealistic despite my ANFJ personality type. After the experiences I had in the past, I know that the world has people who like to cause pain to themselves, cause pain to other people, compete in ruthless ways, not care about what people think and feel because they only care about themselves and no one else, etc. People who like to be compassionate to get rid of pain and deceitful competitors, and people who like to care about what people think and feel because they can see past their selfish survival to make their beautiful vision come true, etc. might exist, but I have yet to find those compassionate and caring people.

In my point of view, I don't want to be a hypocritical idealist that is on their arrogant high horse and thinks that they are invincible and should not be trifled with in an excessively serious manner that it is rendered unserious and laughable when I try to talk about the goods and evils of the world.

However, I will say that I find cheaters, liars, rapists, thrill-seeking killers, the druggies, hypocrites, food addicts, alcoholics, pedophiles, inbreeders, almost all religions, the fact that people are divided because of countries, political systems, marriages, certain technology, sadists, masochists, sociopaths, psychopaths, cancer, diseases, financial inequality, money, etc. to be the evils of the world and I think they are the reasons why the world is failing increasingly because people are vulnerably trying to survive through desperate methods that are arguably counterproductive in regards to helping people live better. I would argue people have went backwards for human progress; the more the humans "try" to "progress" through industrialization, consumerism, etc. the more they get away from health, compassion of the environment, compassion to each other, compassion to the animals, the natural beauty of nature instead of a cold robotic city with robotic phones that don't care about you on the inside, etc. I would argue humans have destroyed what helps them live through greed because their brains and bodies can make people become destructive much more than other animals that exist in the world. I think there are countries like America with a culture that encourage people to be overly greedy because that culture only cares about money, 1st world country power, and things rather than people and actual justice that causes a stability of people rather than the overly greedy tipping of the scale of justice. But, I do not want to hope for too much and be too disappointed in the end. People cannot get away from their imperfect human nature such as myself and chaos and risks will ensue because we all have feelings caused by survival instincts even though some people are thinkers more than feelers and some people are feelers more than thinkers despite what is good and what is evil. But, I do hope that there is a balance of good and bad in the end despite something inside of me telling me that my hopefulness is idealistic rather than pragmatic. And I really don't want to be the person who has nice guy syndrome and trying to be nice with good intentions but I'm actually causing more harm than good by trying to be nice.

 

[Amberiat]

And who decides which is which?

Self-righteous assholes.

Good and Evil are subjective, what you view as "good" others might view as "evil" and vice versa. It's a matter of perspective.

Of course there are basic things like "serial killers are bad", well yeah, but that doesn't apply to everything in life, most things are not as black and white as that. (And even then, serial killers are only evil because we live in a structured society, if we didn't, there'd be literally no situation where the distinction between good/evil could be made easily, if at all)

Being too self-righteous and thinking in black and white terms when it comes to good and evil creates a small guy with a tiny, weird moustache.