Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

"Evil" is hogwash

"Evil" is hogwash
April 16, 2010, 06:59:30 AM
There is one true spiritual perspective: that this physical reality is the result of a wise and infinite universe which clearly has if not intent a working blueprint to improve any situation toward consciousness.

This ultimate good, or as ANUS calls it "meta-good," requires a fertile ground for growth -- which requires both life/construction/positivity and death/deconstruction/negativity/entropy. Good and evil are servants of meta-good.

Claiming to fear or fight "evil" is pointless; that's like claiming we fight blisters, so we avoid wars where swords can blister our hands.

Claiming to fear or fight "good" is pointless; that's like claiming death is a solution to life.

There is only one spirituality, and it involves seeing both good and evil as means to an end, and questioning whether our goal is constructive -- like that of the universe itself, constant growth and development toward great intelligence, like natural selection or the scientific method.

Re: "Evil" is hogwash
April 16, 2010, 08:43:10 AM
"Make haste towards the good
and check the mind for evil.
The one who’s is slow to make merit
delights in the evil mind."


Dhammapada chapter 9, 116.

One, as a metaphysical principle, is evident to be beyond dualism. However, in a esoteric way, there are decisions that sink us in illusion (doing evil) or that take us to the Truth (doing good).

"Make haste towards the good
and check the mind for evil.
The one who’s is slow to make merit
delights in the evil mind."


Some people here call it productivity. :)

Re: "Evil" is hogwash
April 16, 2010, 07:50:59 PM
I would argue that although "good" and "evil" are just labels they are important labels insofar as your characterization of and intention for your own person goes. I would argue that, in terms of managing your emotions and choosing how to act, think, desire, etc., I would argue that to have good intentions and to have evil intentions both constitute evolutionary modalities that are extremely different the one from the other. Some spiritual people will deny that evil exists, but I do not because I have had much experience with it. Evil is a path, and I think it's incorrect to say that the evolutionary modality of the human condition always remains constant and the choices we make in life are just offshoots of that central constant--rather I would say that at some point if you pursue the evil path enough then you will evolve in an altogether different direction. To be clear, I would say the vast majority of 'evil' people are very ignorant of how to walk the path of evil successfully and they are in store for rude awakenings, and that they never embark upon this different evolutionary vector, instead they fight against their conscience and get wrapped up in denial and inner confusion.

The main reason I think it's important to make this point about good and evil is not to warn against inadvertently leaning towards some slippery slope towards the path of evil, to me that is fear-mongering and unhelpful. Rather the main reason I think it's important to make this point is to qualify what the standard human evolutionary modality is like: I do not believe it is neutral, but good. Maybe the label "good" is not ideal, but I think it's important to emphasize that the way emotions operate is not totally random but there are principles involved and one must learn how to handle emotion in the proper way (in accordance with these principles) if they are to evolve spiritually on a good path; I would say this involves learning to not take things personally, to have compassion, etc. I think the principle of allowing emotions to rise and pass without identifying with them is inextricably connected with the state of awareness of enlightenment that emerges as this practice is refined. So in discussing the ideal paradigm and morality of a good spiritual path I think it is important to affirm moral perspective in accordance with an enlightened perspective. I think to affirm a moral perspective in accordance with a neutral perspective that sees things like compassion as more neutral, I think this obscures the healthy (efficient, sustainable) way to deal with emotions, and thereby the healthy way to deal with life.

Of course there are many definitions of enlightenment, and I don't think I should get into what mine is, or what my view of enlightened morality is, because it's a very long subject.. suffice it to say that I'm not fluffy, I see there are many different varieties of enlightenment available, and that throughout all varieties there are some common denominators.

Re: "Evil" is hogwash
April 17, 2010, 04:00:58 PM
I do not believe it is neutral, but good. Maybe the label "good" is not ideal, but I think it's important to emphasize that the way emotions operate is not totally random but there are principles involved and one must learn how to handle emotion in the proper way (in accordance with these principles) if they are to evolve spiritually on a good path.

Who defines these "principals," you? I'll give you the personal morality and enlightenment card, but it's evident that society and upbringing have massive effects on ones personal principals and emotional conduction as it were. Not to mention numerous other factors involved. That's why the "good and evil" philosophy can never be nailed down, it's all speculation based on personal experience.

Re: "Evil" is hogwash
April 22, 2010, 10:40:49 PM
I do not believe it is neutral, but good. Maybe the label "good" is not ideal, but I think it's important to emphasize that the way emotions operate is not totally random but there are principles involved and one must learn how to handle emotion in the proper way (in accordance with these principles) if they are to evolve spiritually on a good path.

Who defines these "principals," you? I'll give you the personal morality and enlightenment card, but it's evident that society and upbringing have massive effects on ones personal principals and emotional conduction as it were. Not to mention numerous other factors involved. That's why the "good and evil" philosophy can never be nailed down, it's all speculation based on personal experience.

No by principles I just mean the structural, mechanistic principles, for example if negative emotions cause toxins to be released into your body (to take from a thread recently posted in this forum). I meant "principle" in the sense of "law" or "dynamic".

Re: "Evil" is hogwash
April 23, 2010, 08:43:17 AM
I would say that at some point if you pursue the evil path enough then you will evolve in an altogether different direction. To be clear, I would say the vast majority of 'evil' people are very ignorant of how to walk the path of evil successfully and they are in store for rude awakenings, and that they never embark upon this different evolutionary vector, instead they fight against their conscience and get wrapped up in denial and inner confusion.

I think sin is error, and evil is willful repetition of that error for the short-term gains, using justification and social pretense as a cloak.

There is no Satan; there are plenty of self-interested people who destroy good shared things in order to have personal gain. Like Sauron, they desire power without a goal. Just power itself, or wealth itself, or sex itself, or even pot mooches who desire only marijuana and not friendship.

When people make that decision, and go down that path, it's time to kill them. Even the smallest sins if made a matter of course corrupt, so even kill the pot mooches. (Hell, kill them first.)

Unchallenged evil becomes the norm, because the short-term is easier to see than the long-term, except for people with both intelligence and the character to go in the opposite direction, which is to accumulate wisdom.

Ultimately, the origin of evil is stupidity. Inability to see long-term damages. Inability to see why they should care. Even many "smart" people are only partial intelligences, meaning they are good at a narrow range of tasks, but lack the ability to have wisdom. PEASANTS

Caste-mixing, equality and utilitarianism of course make evil a de facto state of law...

Re: "Evil" is hogwash
April 23, 2010, 09:15:50 AM
Ah, I guess I should have made a clarification. The evil I described has a spiritual--specifically occult--component to it (which is not to say that all occultism is necessarily evil).

You don't believe Conservationist in, as the expression goes, things that go bump in the night? Do you think then that all experience reports about for instance malevolent astral entities boils down to mental illness?

Re: "Evil" is hogwash
April 23, 2010, 10:37:01 AM
Thanks for bringing it up again, but I have to disagree with about 50% of the original post.
First of all, there's this myth of progress or evolution in the last sentence: which metaphysically is absurd, because what is good has always been and will never increase.

To "fight" evil is first of all to avoid it for yourself, and to instead become good. This is not pointless, it's the point of human life. If there were no difference in willing the good and avoiding evil, by extension one would have to say one prefers nothingness to being. Sure, you can say it, but it won't convice me.

If you're interested, consider how F. Schuon analyses "evil".

One of the excerpts on "evil" to be found in the Glossary of terms used by Frithjof Schuon:
Quote
Manifestation is not the Principle, the effect is not the cause; that which is “other than
God” could not possess the perfections of God, hence in the final analysis and within the
general imperfection of the created, there results that privative and subversive
phenomenon which we call evil. This is to say that the cosmogonic ray, by plunging as it
were into “nothingness,” ends by manifesting “the possibility of the impossible”; the
“absurd” cannot but be produced somewhere in the economy of the divine Possibility,
otherwise the Infinite would not be the Infinite. But strictly speaking, evil or the devil
cannot oppose the Divinity, who has no opposite; it opposes man who is the mirror of
God and the movement towards the divine. [PM, Man in the Cosmogonic Projection]

Encore:
Quote
Devil: The devil being the humanized personification – humanized on contact with man –
of the subversive aspect of the centrifugal existential power; not the personification of
this power in so far as its mission is positively to manifest Divine Possibility. [EPW,
Hypostatic and Cosmic Numbers]

Re: "Evil" is hogwash
April 26, 2010, 02:20:33 PM
To "fight" evil is first of all to avoid it for yourself, and to instead become good.

This bores me. Instead of focusing on an inversion (avoid x), focus on the obvious goal: adapt to reality. If "evil" is sin is error, and the path of error leads to more error, focus on finding what is true.