Is this a self evident truth for Good and Evil?

Forums: Religion, Philosophy
Email this Topic • Print this Page

Is this a self evident truth for Good and Evil?

In moral terms, the terms Good & Evil are only useful on a graph and are inseparable.

I see that many just look at these terms as opposites or duality.
Black white. Hot cold. Whatever.

It does not matter because, in moral terms, good and evil must be on a graph to be of any use to any discussion of moral issues.

That is why the ancients wrote them into the Bible as the tree of good and evil.
It’s fruit symbolizes that good and evil cannot be separated. One tree, one fruit that gives both good and evil at the same bite.

Evil, used as nouns does not say much of anything useful. For morals, evil as a noun does not stand well alone. If I were to tell you that something good or evil was heading your way, you would not have a clue as to what I speak of.

As adjectives, evil and good are good and useful.

It is what goes between these two adjectives then that is at issue and how and where we place them on the graph.
Ideally, the good and evil line will have a top and a bottom because issues often times have both good and evil within their character and is dependant on circumstances.

Like God for instance.

Basically, if you are arguing good and evil in any other way than described here; you are IMHO, wasting your time.

If you look to God for our moral sense you are also wasting your time because it is to mankind to set the rules of our dominion, not God‘s.

Good<----------------------------------------------->Evil.

Take either word Good or Evil away from this graph and it loses all meaning.

I think that the above is a self evident truth on how moral good and evil should be thought of.

Do you?
If not, why not?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A1-kTEyKMzQ

Regards
DL

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Question • Score: 0 • Views: 860 • Replies: 14

No top replies

@Greatest I am,

Yes, it's definitely a convoluted situation.

(it was the tree of the knowledge of good and evil)

1 Reply

Assuming a judeo-christian God figure or other unique creator manager, yes. Good is whatever s/he says it is. Otherwise I don't think one could argue for a self evident good that has no exceptions or shades of relativity.

1 Reply

@Greatest I am,

I belive the terms "good and evil" are very oldfashion concepts that today are washed out and meaningless.

Such terms doesn't take account for demagogues, naivity, corruption ..etc.

1 Reply

@HexHammer,

HexHammer wrote:

I belive the terms "good and evil" are very oldfashion concepts that today are washed out and meaningless.

Such terms doesn't take account for demagogues, naivity, corruption ..etc.

They do if used the way I suggest they can only be used.
Just place your markers on the line.

Regards
DL

1 Reply

@GoshisDead,

GoshisDead wrote:

Assuming a judeo-christian God figure or other unique creator manager, yes. Good is whatever s/he says it is. Otherwise I don't think one could argue for a self evident good that has no exceptions or shades of relativity.

I agree and that is why I indicated that the graph should have a top and bottom line.

Murder is usually evil but to murder Hitler, most would consider good.

Regards
DL

0 Replies

@Arjuna,

Arjuna wrote:

Yes, it's definitely a convoluted situation.

(it was the tree of the knowledge of good and evil)

True but you will also know that to read the information is to bring it to mind and Jesus, archetypal Jesus that is, said that to think of a sin is as good as doing it so in a sense, we are all sinners by just knowing and thinking of the various sins as we place them on the graph.

I have never considered myself a sinner when doing so and would chastise Jesus for laying that guilt trip on us.
Then again, the Church is all about guilt is it not?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SF6I5VSZVqc

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yZM3FXlLMug

Regards
DL

0 Replies

@Greatest I am,

Greatest I am wrote:

HexHammer wrote:

I belive the terms "good and evil" are very oldfashion concepts that today are washed out and meaningless.

Such terms doesn't take account for demagogues, naivity, corruption ..etc.

They do if used the way I suggest they can only be used.
Just place your markers on the line.

Regards
DL

Many joined GW Bush in his good cause "war against terror", only that it caused more damage than good, so there's countless of other example where people are utterly naive and oppotunistic who thinks they do good, but only cause harm, if you can't realize that ..then you don't have much rationallity.

1 Reply

@HexHammer,

HexHammer wrote:

Greatest I am wrote:

HexHammer wrote:

I belive the terms "good and evil" are very oldfashion concepts that today are washed out and meaningless.

Such terms doesn't take account for demagogues, naivity, corruption ..etc.

They do if used the way I suggest they can only be used.
Just place your markers on the line.

Regards
DL

Many joined GW Bush in his good cause "war against terror", only that it caused more damage than good, so there's countless of other example where people are utterly naive and oppotunistic who thinks they do good, but only cause harm, if you can't realize that ..

I thought I did when saying we can place then on the graph but hey, have it your way.

Regards
DL

1 Reply

@Greatest I am,

..and where would you place the war in your scale?

1 Reply

@HexHammer,

HexHammer wrote:

..and where would you place the war in your scale?

Not usually on the good side but would you put the west going against Hitler on the evil side?
I would not.

Regards
DL

1 Reply

@Greatest I am,

Greatest I am wrote:

HexHammer wrote:

..and where would you place the war in your scale?

Not usually on the good side but would you put the west going against Hitler on the evil side?
I would not.

It's usually only in fairy tales that people do things out of unselfish reasons, in real life nations do things in self interest. USA has always waged wars in economical interests, paranoia of commie regime or other interests. Only war I can ever remember having some unselfish interest was about the civil war based on slavery ban, else WWII was to stop the facist regime the Axis Powers would bring to the world.

Many gullible people will belive in the politicians demagogery and belive it's out of unselfish reasons and be of "good".

1 Reply

@HexHammer,

HexHammer wrote:

Greatest I am wrote:

HexHammer wrote:

..and where would you place the war in your scale?

Not usually on the good side but would you put the west going against Hitler on the evil side?
I would not.
It's usually only in fairy tales that people do things out of unselfish reasons,

This has not been my experience either as a giver or taker.
If what you said applies to yourself, then smarten up and lead by example.

Regards
DL

2 Replies

@Greatest I am,

Greatest I am wrote:

HexHammer wrote:

Greatest I am wrote:

HexHammer wrote:

..and where would you place the war in your scale?

Not usually on the good side but would you put the west going against Hitler on the evil side?
I would not.
It's usually only in fairy tales that people do things out of unselfish reasons,

This has not been my experience either as a giver or taker.
If what you said applies to yourself, then smarten up and lead by example.

Regards
DL

On individual lvl there are endless who wanna do unselfish things, but once it becomes as govermental lvl, it's a far different case. Sure goverments send aid to catastrophes and such, but else it's very limited.

0 Replies

@Greatest I am,

Besides you have a very selective approach to the matter, you don't account for all the things that damage your view of the matter, you should try speak on both sides of the fence.

0 Replies

Is this a self evident truth for Good and Evil?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know