Attempt at a WLHP definition of evil personhood. Thoughts?

[wellwisher]

We're talking about evil personhood here, as per the Western Left Hand Path (WLHP.) Do you have any thoughts on what makes an individual evil?

The western left hand path comes from the unconscious mind. The Latin word for left is sinister. The right hand path is connected to the conscious mind. The Latin word for right is dexter; mental dexterity.

These two paths are connected to the two sides or the two lateral hemispheres of the brain, with the brain cross wired relative to the hands. Therefore, the right hand path comes from the left side of the brain, which processes data in a differential way. This side of the brain helps us to differentiate reality, such as into good and evil. While the left hand is connected to the right brain which processes data in an integral way; symbolism and instinct.

In classic western tradition, knowledge of good and evil, is considered the right hand path; learn right from wrong. This is connected to the left brain and differentiates the world into good and evil. The WLHP uses the right brain to integrate this data base of differential good and evil magnets. Evil integrates from what we are taught about good and evil, via an integrating subroutine in the right brain that I call the Satan Subroutine. This can create irrational impulses, based on the learned cultural data set, fed into the conscious mind, by the cultural superego. There is also a subroutine, such as Jesus, that integrates the good side of law or knowledge of good and evil. There is differential good and evil via the left brain; unique actions, but also integral good and evil. The former more of a distinct behavior, while the latter is more of entire lifestyle of behavior.

A magnetic inversion can come from the WLHP of key humans in the cultural superego. Influential individuals in the cultural superego invert and that feed down the chain of command, sucking people in. This collective unconsciousness can become compulsive on a collective scale; lifestyle.

In classic religion, thou shall not kill is considered good. But to the political left killing the unborn is good. They will get upset if killing the unborn is off the table. The cultural superego of the left inverted the map, but not the magnet, which makes their new "good" much more compulsive. Being good is usually harder to do. It requires effort fighting unconscious WLHP urges. When you get very compulsive in the name of "good", that is classic evil in the disguise of a map inversion. The mind is following the map of a superego and not the natural magnetic directions of good and evil.

I am not trying to define a specific act as evil, but trying to point out the genesis of an entire worldview that sees evil and good and good as evil. When Trump came to power, it was one person having to defend himself from a mob. According the map inverters, one person was evil for speaking freely to the mop, and not backing down. There was no rule of fairness for the mob, which included fake news; liars. The group dymancis were very compulsive which shows evil and sheep clothing; inversion. This was why people in classic religion, supported Trump, while the Left saw then as evil.

We need to bring the magnet of good and evil to its natural orientation and not let a man made map create a trick. The North Pole of the magnetic field is like a fountain that pushes upward like walking up the mountain to go skiing. It takes effort. The South Pole is the easy path since it is like skiing down the mountain; more compulsive led by gravity.

 

[crossfire]

The western left hand path comes from the unconscious mind. The Latin word for left is sinister. The right hand path is connected to the conscious mind. The Latin word for right is dexter; mental dexterity.

These two paths are connected to the two sides or the two lateral hemispheres of the brain, with the brain cross wired relative to the hands. Therefore, the right hand path comes from the left side of the brain, which processes data in a differential way. This side of the brain helps us to differentiate reality, such as into good and evil. While the left hand is connected to the right brain which processes data in an integral way; symbolism and instinct.

In classic western tradition, knowledge of good and evil, is considered the right hand path; learn right from wrong. This is connected to the left brain and differentiates the world into good and evil. The WLHP uses the right brain to integrate this data base of differential good and evil magnets. Evil integrates from what we are taught about good and evil, via an integrating subroutine in the right brain that I call the Satan Subroutine. This can create irrational impulses, based on the learned cultural data set, fed into the conscious mind, by the cultural superego. There is also a subroutine, such as Jesus, that integrates the good side of law or knowledge of good and evil. There is differential good and evil via the left brain; unique actions, but also integral good and evil. The former more of a distinct behavior, while the latter is more of entire lifestyle of behavior.

A magnetic inversion can come from the WLHP of key humans in the cultural superego. Influential individuals in the cultural superego invert and that feed down the chain of command, sucking people in. This collective unconsciousness can become compulsive on a collective scale; lifestyle.

In classic religion, thou shall not kill is considered good. But to the political left killing the unborn is good. They will get upset if killing the unborn is off the table. The cultural superego of the left inverted the map, but not the magnet, which makes their new "good" much more compulsive. Being good is usually harder to do. It requires effort fighting unconscious WLHP urges. When you get very compulsive in the name of "good", that is classic evil in the disguise of a map inversion. The mind is following the map of a superego and not the natural magnetic directions of good and evil.

I am not trying to define a specific act as evil, but trying to point out the genesis of an entire worldview that sees evil and good and good as evil. When Trump came to power, it was one person having to defend himself from a mob. According the map inverters, one person was evil for speaking freely to the mop, and not backing down. There was no rule of fairness for the mob, which included fake news; liars. The group dymancis were very compulsive which shows evil and sheep clothing; inversion. This was why people in classic religion, supported Trump, while the Left saw then as evil.

We need to bring the magnet of good and evil to its natural orientation and not let a man made map create a trick. The North Pole of the magnetic field is like a fountain that pushes upward like walking up the mountain to go skiing. It takes effort. The South Pole is the easy path since it is like skiing down the mountain; more compulsive led by gravity.

We are talking about what makes an individual evil here, not a culture. The WLHP recognizes the capacity for evil in collectives, (in both political and religious collectives) which is why the WLHP focuses on the individual and honors individual thought. (WLHP people can be anywhere on the political spectrum, as well.)

I don't agree with you that RHP is left brained and LHP is right brained. Rather, RHP is an outward Persona system while the LHP is an inward soul-searching journey. You are expected to use your entire brain in the WLHP. You are also expected to know thyself, including your unconscious mind, which is why all the symbolism and such is associated with the WLHP.

So, are you saying that an evil person has difficulty discerning between good and evil? Is that the main gist of what you are trying to convey?
If that is the case, I would agree with this. I would also agree that collectivist thinking can interfere with an individual's ability to discern between good and evil. My question to you is this: what kind of scenarios that arise from within the individual are there that can interfere with an individual's ability to discern good and evil and propagate evil? I can offer the three poisons from Buddhism: greed, hatred, and delusion as possible sources that can overcome an individual's mind and impair discernment. Do you have any other possible sources to add?

 

[1137]

That depends on your answer to the Trolley Problem. Is it evil to let a bigger evil happen if you could have prevented it by committing a lesser evil yourself? Or, put another way, are there moral imperatives to act a certain way or is morality simply to refrain from acting in an immoral way?

I think the trolley problem is interesting. It's a problem we don't create, but force ourselves to feel responsible for, and then literally tells us to directly take responsibility and murder a certain number of people with no further info.

 

[dybmh]

"Love your neighbor as you love yourself"

Are you referring to this as an exception to what I wrote?

If "infringement of will" = evil then anything other than anarchy is evil excluding the rule "love your neighbor as you love yourself"?

If one infringes on their own will it is evil if "infringement of will" = evil.

If infringing on my own will is not evil, then it is not evil to infringe on another's will if they "love their neighbor as they love themself".

I'm still seeing it as a faulty method to focus on "infringement of will" inspite of how it looks on paper or how it feels. True evil, in my judgement is very very rare. Harmful acts, damages, certainly happen, but even if they are intentional or negligent, they do not seem to be evil to me. This does not prohibit judgement and justice. It only means that evaluating, making the judgement, is difficult and needs to occur on a case by case basis.

 

[crossfire]

Are you referring to this as an exception to what I wrote?

yes

If "infringement of will" = evil then anything other than anarchy is evil excluding the rule "love your neighbor as you love yourself"?

If one infringes on their own will it is evil if "infringement of will" = evil.

If infringing on my own will is not evil, then it is not evil to infringe on another's will if they "love their neighbor as they love themself".

You are forgetting the second part from the OP:
"in a way that interferes with the victim's hierarchy of needs."

I'm still seeing it as a faulty method to focus on "infringement of will" inspite of how it looks on paper or how it feels. True evil, in my judgement is very very rare. Harmful acts, damages, certainly happen, but even if they are intentional or negligent, they do not seem to be evil to me. This does not prohibit judgement and justice. It only means that evaluating, making the judgement, is difficult and needs to occur on a case by case basis.

A case-by-case basis means individually, no? Loving your neighbor as yourself means seeing them as an individual and respecting their individuality as you cherish your own individuality (individual will and hierarchy of needs.)

We're not that evolved yet, though. We have to spell out basic individual rights in order to remind each other not to violate them. (And people still try to find ways to get around those!)

 

[dybmh]

You are forgetting the second part from the OP:
"in a way that interferes with the victim's hierarchy of needs."

If the entire hierarchy of needs is considered, then any infringement on the will which interferes with self-actualization is evil. If someone wants to self-actualize as an evil person, then it is evil to stop them. This means there cannot be any rules to protect any victim.

A case-by-case basis means individually, no? Loving your neighbor as yourself means seeing them as an individual and respecting their individuality as you cherish your own individuality (individual will and hierarchy of needs.)

Well, it could be individually or as a comittee, a "court". But I would not expect a judgement of "evil", like I said, I think that is very rare. Instead it would be a judgement of "guilty" or "not guilty" with an assessment of damages if applicable. The problem with the golden rule, is that one person's values is being projected onto another. That only works if the two actually share the same values. A great example of this is in Florida where many would apply the golden rule to prohibit gender affirming care, because, they would not want that for themself. Instead they would want counseling to convince them out of it. This is because they do not cherish their individuality in the same way as a trans person does.

We're not that evolved yet, though. We have to spell out basic individual rights in order to remind each other not to violate them. (And people still try to find ways to get around those!)

I cannot ever imagine an evolution where each and every person shares the exact same values of cherishing individuality. And even if they did, that would mean an individual could choose to be evil and infringe on anyone's will that they choose without breaking society's rules. This would produce an warzone of anarchy without serious qualification and additional rules infringing on liberty. This returns the convseration back to square one. Rules are needed in order to prevent people from harming others.

 

[The Hammer]

People constantly say stuff like "support the lesser evil." In other words they seem to knowingly and willingly support evil acts, ideas, or people. Would this make them evil, and make evil people much more common?

"The lesser of two evils" is typically used for being presented with two options you dislike, and you choose the one that most aligns with you, because we can't like every aspect of everything (usually used in regards to political candidates in modernity).

 

[1137]

There has to be away to defend self actualization without allowing evil.

 

[dybmh]

There has to be away to defend self actualization without allowing evil.

Of course! Use the definition I brought on the first page. Prohibit that in "real life" with real victims, but allow it virtually, in AI built spaces with AI victims, along with any other forms of self-actualization.

This is already happening in video games, right? Grand theft auto?

 

[1137]

Of course! Use the definition I brought on the first page. Prohibit that in "real life" with real victims, but allow it virtually, in AI built spaces with AI victims, along with any other forms of self-actualization.

This is already happening in video games, right? Grand theft auto?

Just to confirm, this definition right?

I would go with feeding off another's misfortune for pleasure alone

 

[dybmh]

Just to confirm, this definition right?

I would go with feeding off another's misfortune for pleasure alone

Yes: I would go with "feeding off another's misfortune for pleasure alone" as a defintion for evil. I propose, if someone desires to actualize themself as an evil person, they can actualize that in an individual, solo, virtual environment with virtual victims, but it is prohibited in real life with real victims. This is no different than "Grand Theft Auto" the video game. This concept can be expanded to include any other behaviors which society considers "evil". It's an evil person's sandbox.

Rules, borders, boundries can be established by society and enforced by a justice system to prevent harming innocent victims, while simultaneously those who are evil can actualize those desires in a safe environment. It's a win-win. Those who are very very evil might even choose to live full time in that virtual world, and, maybe that's for the best. Plug them into their own private matrix, and let them atrophy.

 

[wellwisher]

I'm kind of curious - why do you feel this is an "original sin" mindset? I mean, I'm Pagan - I don't believe in that so I'm not writing any of this with that perspective in mind. Could you elaborate on the connection you're seeing there so I can understand a bit better? Maybe I'm not understanding because I don't see any of this about "guilt" or anything? I look at things in terms of interconnectedness and how it's all woven together. Or maybe I'll just stay confused... haha.

Original sin is symbolically connected to the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Data such as knowledge of good and evil is processed in the left brain. The left side of the brain, differentiates reality, such as cataloging what is good and what is evil. Natural instinct, on the other hand, is more integral. This is done in the right brain. Natural instinct integrates animals within themselves and with nature; eco-systems.

The symbolism of original sin is actually about human conscious evolution, when the conscious mind; ego differentiates; Adam, and then migrates from the right brain, to the left brain. This caused it shift in perception from integral to differential thinking, which we still do today. Natural instinct is repressed, as was integral thinking, since the ego is mostly on the other side of the brain.

Most humans tend to take a side; left or right, or use will and chose things to make it unique. This does not integrate us with each other, but rather makes us unique or differential, and can even set up walls; long standing grudges like in the Middle East. All the gripes about morality and not being able to do your own thing, is about differential thinking; left brain. Morality is more right brain; integrate like instinct. Paradise lost was due to this neural migration.

The symbolism of genesis speaks to the right brain, which is repressed in left brainers. Such have lost consciousness of their natural integrated connections, and have become differential; faux, man made and original sin.

I previously discuss good and evil as beinglike a magnet with two connected poles. These is no magnetic monopole. This is how the left brain processes data. Even cause and affect are connected opposites like a magnet.

The symbols of heaven and hell are the two poles or the sum of all the two sided magnets. Hell is at the center of earth gravity; pulls us downward. While heaven is above us and lifts like, south and north poles, respectively, of a magnet.

 

[The Hammer]

There has to be away to defend self actualization without allowing evil.

Two parts of a whole can't be separated.

 

[dybmh]

Two parts of a whole can't be separated.

Why not? You just... keep'em seperated ... maestro?

I proposed they could be seperated in a solo matrix realm to do their worst on AI victims. They're just flip sides of the same coin. Everything is like that, with maybe just 1 exception.

Even if we join together, we're still seperate. It doesn't devalue the union. To the contrary it lifts to a higher plane. That's harmony.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Agreed. But like pornography, I know it when I see it.

Ah, but can enjoy it in the same way?

 

[1137]

Two parts of a whole can't be separated.

Can you elaborate?

 

[The Hammer]

Can you elaborate?

As I've had mentioned to me before here. When you are taught good, you are ultimately taught it's opposite, and vice versa. They are two halves of the same coin.

Dark and light are halves of a whole unit. You can't appreciate the Light without Darkness, and you can't see Shadows without the Light.

 

[Stonetree]

I want to mention that Judaism and Christianity's transgressions seem to be basically violations of civil rights. Both belief systems state a believer must give to God supreme respect but then all "sins" are antisocial. In these belief systems, evil is a serious act of opposition to social order.

 

[dybmh]

Ah, but can enjoy it in the same way?

 

[Brickjectivity]

There is another type of evil individual not being addressed in the OP, and it might be worth considering. Its a very deep flaw that we demand things suit us, and this flaw expresses itself in more than one way. We see this in children when they have tantrums over something which frustrates them. (Hopefully such a tantrum ends with the child learning to accept change.) Demanding to know answers is one expression of this flaw. Another is demanding to have something. I am not talking about demanding out of need but out of the belief that things ought to be how we expect them to be. Another is getting upset with interruptions. This evil does not require other people. It is a self harm though others may be affected. We tend to label it immaturity, however it can be a flaw in otherwise mature people.

What makes a fundamentalist approach, by itself, an evil? It is the above. What is wrong with an obsessive-compulsive disorder? It is the above. When we cannot accept change and cannot deal with new things, the problem is that we expect things a certain way, just because we do.

Its more healthy to adapt to changes as they come, and it is therefore good or better to do so. A bad person cannot accept change. They must have control.