Regarding Good and Evil

[GiantHouseKey]

Greetings

Regarding the concepts of 'Good' and 'Evil'... I don't get it. I don't believe that Good and Evil exist. Not just that they are not actual things that exist in the form of God and The Devil, but that the conceptual ideas behind Good and Evil are non-existant.

So I ask 3 main questions:

1) What are Good and Evil? Definitive? Subjective? Can all acts be put into the catagories of Good or Evil?
2) So therefore what make's any thing, act or belief 'Good' or 'Evil'? What are the criteria? Is a Good action to one an Evil action to another, and who's viewpoint does the burden of definition lie on?
3) If Good and Evil are obvious natural instincts that all men should possess then why do I not possess them?

I apologise if this sounds like a set of infantile questions, but I genuinely don't get it and I would be interested to know what people have to say on this...Atheists, Theists and Deists alike.

Thank you.

GhK.

 

[Riverwolf]

I do agree with you, that good and evil do not exist in the real world; they exist only in our minds.

The definitions of good and evil change with the times and between cultures; currently in the West, "good" tends to be equated with selflessness, and "evil" tends to be equated with selfishness.

 

[J Bryson]

I do believe in good and evil. Not necessarily as something handed down from on high (I remain neutral on that point), but in the actions that we take. And yes, it is possible to do good with evil intentions, and evil with good ones. And yes, I also believe in shades of gray and lesser evils....

 

[ranjana]

i'm also on the "No Good and Evil" boat!

Proof to me is simply in the evil things that are done in the name of Goodness, everyday. It is pure illusion. Granted, it isnt as simple as saying "There is no evil, so everything is good." Obviously not, there is ignorance which causes pain in the minds and bodies of humans, but the source of everything, even the perverted ideas and actions, is God (you could say), which is beyond duality.

If we all choose to affirm life, in every word we speak, and every action we take, then there would be no need for the word 'evil'. Unfortunately most of us do not see the sacredness in all life; we cling to ideas of 'us' and 'them' and 'me' and 'you' and from there, evil is born very easily.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Greetings

Regarding the concepts of 'Good' and 'Evil'... I don't get it. I don't believe that Good and Evil exist. Not just that they are not actual things that exist in the form of God and The Devil, but that the conceptual ideas behind Good and Evil are non-existant.

So I ask 3 main questions:

1) What are Good and Evil? Definitive? Subjective? Can all acts be put into the catagories of Good or Evil?
2) So therefore what make's any thing, act or belief 'Good' or 'Evil'? What are the criteria? Is a Good action to one an Evil action to another, and who's viewpoint does the burden of definition lie on?
3) If Good and Evil are obvious natural instincts that all men should possess then why do I not possess them?

I apologise if this sounds like a set of infantile questions, but I genuinely don't get it and I would be interested to know what people have to say on this...Atheists, Theists and Deists alike.

Thank you.

GhK.

Hi GiantHouseKey, good and evil are just relative terms in which the concept of one defines the other. IOW, they are complementary opposites like ying and yang of the non-dual Tao.

In Zen and Taoism, the goal is to still the mind and cease dualistic mind conceptualization to realize the underlying unity and one suspects that this is also why in the Abrahamic tradition, "eating of the fruit of the tree of GOOD and EVIL" results in the loss of Eden (Divine paradise/oneness). IOW, 'good and evil' is being used as a metaphor for the dualistic mindset, i.e. conceptual thinking.

From the Tao te Ching

Verse 2.
Relativity and Not Interfering

When the people of the world all know beauty as beauty,
there arises the recognition of ugliness.
When they all know the good as good,
there arises the recognition of bad.

Therefore being and non-being produce each other;
difficult and easy complete each other;
long and short contrast each other;
high and low distinguish each other;
sound and voice harmonize with each other;
beginning and end follow each other.

Therefore the wise manage affairs without interfering
and teach beyond the words.


And from the Hsin Hsin Ming.

The Great Way is not difficult for those who have no preferences.
When love and hate are both absent everything becomes clear and undisguised.
Make the smallest distinction, however, and heaven and earth are set infinitely apart.

If you wish to see the truth then hold no opinions for or against anything.
To set up what you like against what you dislike is the disease of the mind.
When the deep meaning of things is not understood the mind's essential peace is disturbed to no avail.

The Way is perfect like vast space where nothing is lacking and nothing is in excess.
Indeed, it is due to our choosing to accept or reject that we do not see the true nature of things.
Be serene in the oneness of things and such erroneous views will disappear by themselves.

 

[bobhikes]

Greetings

Regarding the concepts of 'Good' and 'Evil'... I don't get it. I don't believe that Good and Evil exist. Not just that they are not actual things that exist in the form of God and The Devil, but that the conceptual ideas behind Good and Evil are non-existant.

So I ask 3 main questions:

1) What are Good and Evil? Definitive? Subjective? Can all acts be put into the catagories of Good or Evil?
2) So therefore what make's any thing, act or belief 'Good' or 'Evil'? What are the criteria? Is a Good action to one an Evil action to another, and who's viewpoint does the burden of definition lie on?
3) If Good and Evil are obvious natural instincts that all men should possess then why do I not possess them?

I apologise if this sounds like a set of infantile questions, but I genuinely don't get it and I would be interested to know what people have to say on this...Atheists, Theists and Deists alike.

Thank you.

GhK.

I have debated this concept lots. These are my thoughts on the subject.

Evil doesn't exist it is the absence of good and nothing is truly without some good. In fact I will argue that to do bad we need to justify it with something good.

Good defined by me as something that keeps you alive or makes you happy.

Bad defined by me as something that will hurt you or makes you sad.

While there are definate things that are Good and Bad most things are good and bad depending on use and almost everything else is good or bad based on Belief.

Good and Bad are a part of Natural selection. We need to classify things to survive. I ate an apple it is good I can live by eating an apple. The snake bite him he died a snake bite is bad. If we couldn't label things good or bad we would be doomed to constantly make the same mistakes again and again. Things get gray when we invovle our feelings. I hit him I felt power it made me happy this is Good. Most people would not agree.

To further the concept of good and bad being mixed and no true evil. A crook needs to justify his actions with something good. I am doing this because I have been repressed all my life. I am doing this because life isn't fair. Only a pyscotic could be labeled evil but they are mentally sick. If someone is sick can they be evil.

Shortened version.

 

[Ozzie]

Greetings

Regarding the concepts of 'Good' and 'Evil'... I don't get it. I don't believe that Good and Evil exist. Not just that they are not actual things that exist in the form of God and The Devil, but that the conceptual ideas behind Good and Evil are non-existant.

So I ask 3 main questions:

1) What are Good and Evil? Definitive? Subjective? Can all acts be put into the catagories of Good or Evil?
2) So therefore what make's any thing, act or belief 'Good' or 'Evil'? What are the criteria? Is a Good action to one an Evil action to another, and who's viewpoint does the burden of definition lie on?
3) If Good and Evil are obvious natural instincts that all men should possess then why do I not possess them?

I apologise if this sounds like a set of infantile questions, but I genuinely don't get it and I would be interested to know what people have to say on this...Atheists, Theists and Deists alike.

Thank you.

GhK.

Not infantile at all. In fact you seem ready to go beyond prescriptions and examine individual instances of behaviour within morality built from your own experience. Trust your gut. Good luck.

 

[Riverwolf]

From the Tao te Ching

Verse 2.
Relativity and Not Interfering

When the people of the world all know beauty as beauty,
there arises the recognition of ugliness.
When they all know the good as good,
there arises the recognition of bad.

Therefore being and non-being produce each other;
difficult and easy complete each other;
long and short contrast each other;
high and low distinguish each other;
sound and voice harmonize with each other;
beginning and end follow each other.

Therefore the wise manage affairs without interfering
and teach beyond the words.

Which translation is that?

 

[leahrachelle]

Of course this isn't very scientific, but I feel good and evil. It may not exist, but it does in my mind, and in a lot of peoples'. And its how we each define it. There probably is no right or wrong answer.

 

[ChristineES]

I don't know if good and evil really exist, but I know why the terms were coined. Doing something nice- like feeding starving children was called good while doing something mean- like killing someone for no reason whatsoever was called evil.

 

[Riverwolf]

Of course this isn't very scientific, but I feel good and evil. It may not exist, but it does in my mind, and in a lot of peoples'. And its how we each define it. There probably is no right or wrong answer.

Believe me, just because something only exists within our minds doesn't make it any less important.

 

[zenzero]

Friend GiantHouseKey,

Regarding Good and Evil

Those who realise that GOOD and EVIL are just perceptions of the human mind and that means only *THOUGHTS* not reality then there remains nothing as good or evil.

As friend ben mentioned that Tao too has no place for such perceptions and truth only IS which happens when the individual mind is still or devoid of all thoughts or perceptions.

Love & rgds

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Which translation is that?

Hi Riverwolf, Sanderson Beck

BTW, check out the index on this site, there is an excellent range of Taoist and Zen translated material available.

 

[GiantHouseKey]

Thank you all for your responses

currently in the West, "good" tends to be equated with selflessness, and "evil" tends to be equated with selfishness.

A man I know told me something once. He may have been quoting but I dont know the source, and he was probably saying it sarcastically. Neverthless, I find it to be important:
"There is no such thing as altruism, only different levels of selfishness. There is no such thing as sadness, only different levels of fulfillment. There is no such thing as good, only different levels of evil."

What are you views?

I do believe in good and evil. Not necessarily as something handed down from on high (I remain neutral on that point), but in the actions that we take. And yes, it is possible to do good with evil intentions, and evil with good ones. And yes, I also believe in shades of gray and lesser evils....

Ok, you believe in Good and Evil. But what defines them? What actions are good and what actions are evil and why?

If we all choose to affirm life, in every word we speak, and every action we take, then there would be no need for the word 'evil'. Unfortunately most of us do not see the sacredness in all life; we cling to ideas of 'us' and 'them' and 'me' and 'you' and from there, evil is born very easily.

I like what you say here, but I don't fully understand it. Are saying that good is anything that is not intended to uphold the piety of life? I guess from this statement it is clear that good and evil are terms you can understand, then?

Hi GiantHouseKey, good and evil are just relative terms in which the concept of one defines the other. IOW, they are complementary opposites like ying and yang of the non-dual Tao.

In Zen and Taoism, the goal is to still the mind and cease dualistic mind conceptualization to realize the underlying unity and one suspects that this is also why in the Abrahamic tradition, "eating of the fruit of the tree of GOOD and EVIL" results in the loss of Eden (Divine paradise/oneness). IOW, 'good and evil' is being used as a metaphor for the dualistic mindset, i.e. conceptual thinking.

Interesting...So are good and evil together really just evil? Is there no such thing as good but only good+evil which is simply neutrality?

We need to classify things to survive. I ate an apple it is good I can live by eating an apple. The snake bite him he died a snake bite is bad. If we couldn't label things good or bad we would be doomed to constantly make the same mistakes again and again. Things get gray when we invovle our feelings. I hit him I felt power it made me happy this is Good. Most people would not agree.

Snake bite = Death = Evil...So could you say that the snake is evil? Or is it just the action that is evil because it has caused a negative effect to the recipient?
I myself am a chronic catagoriser, I have the need to catagorise EVERYTHING. But Good and Evil are just not catagories I understand. I understand that if you have a spider and a carrot (For example), you could catagorise them into animal and vegetable, big and small, orange and black, but I can't see the catagorisation into good and evil...

Of course this isn't very scientific

That's fine, after all, it isn't science that we're discussing

I feel good and evil. It may not exist, but it does in my mind, and in a lot of peoples'. And its how we each define it. There probably is no right or wrong answer

Sure. What's your definition? What do you feel as being good and evil?

Doing something nice- like feeding starving children was called good while doing something mean- like killing someone for no reason whatsoever was called evil.

I see...But killing someone for no reason makes no sense. There is always a motive, otherwise it's not really a murder. Does the person doing the killing think it is evil? Do they think they're doing good? Do they care? If they thought it was wrong they wouldn't do it, right? What i'm saying is, is there a definitive way of saying what is good and what is evil?

GhK.

 

[Riverwolf]

A man I know told me something once. He may have been quoting but I dont know the source, and he was probably saying it sarcastically. Neverthless, I find it to be important:
"There is no such thing as altruism, only different levels of selfishness. There is no such thing as sadness, only different levels of fulfillment. There is no such thing as good, only different levels of evil."

What are you views?

Interesting.

It's all about perspective, I guess.

The difference between a hero and a terrorist.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Interesting...So are good and evil together really just evil? Is there no such thing as good but only good+evil which is simply neutrality?

So where in my post did you derive the understanding that "good and evil together is really just evil" was implied? Until you refer specifically to where in the post you perceive that was implied, I'm at a loss to comprehend where you are coming from.

Again concerning your second question, where in the post is there any implication of a concept of "good+evil" to mean neutrality?

FWIW, IMO there appears to be a lack of affinity of understanding here in the interpretation of that which was conveyed. Unless you are able to understand what is said to you, there is no point in discussing your same basic questions. The answers you seek will ultimately come from within you anyway, and not from the outside, so be prepared to work on yourself to find true understanding.

 

[roli]

Greetings

Regarding the concepts of 'Good' and 'Evil'... I don't get it. I don't believe that Good and Evil exist.

I tend to believe they exist,but obviously not in tangible form, although it is plain to see their effects exist in human nature and are tangible,observable and dualistic in nature,constantly opposing one another.
I believe the absence of good is evil,as is the absence of light is darkness, the absence of heat is cold
Although "good and evil" can't possible be measured in the same manner they are ,I feel they are more internally measured and monitored and the driving force behind our behavior. But in today's ammoral society these dualistic natures are totally influenced by outside sources,such as,circumstances,mindsets,(relativism,humanism,secularism etc)trends,cultures.
That external drive now sets the standard to which we measure the two concepts.

3) If Good and Evil are obvious natural instincts that all men should possess then why do I not possess them?

You have no inherent good or evil within you,..have you scratched the surface.

 

[GiantHouseKey]

My apologies, I am not famed for my ability to understand what people say and develope a correct interpretation. And im sorry if I misunderstood your post.

Hi GiantHouseKey, good and evil are just relative terms in which the concept of one defines the other. IOW, they are complementary opposites like ying and yang of the non-dual Tao.

Good and Evil are relative terms, so what you see as defining Good and Evil is different to my definition? My problem is that my definition does not exist, and I come to a point whereby I am trying to understand individual explanations on the subject.

I've not had much time to study the concept of yin and yang so I should try and learn soon. But nevertheless, what I think you to mean is that with one (Good) comes the other (Evil). So the way I see it is that if they are both together, so having Good means that Evil also exists because it has been so because of Good, and so therefore Evil, simply, is. I think my misunderstanding came from my thinking on the concept. The way my mind understands is that there is no Good or Evil so introducing the concept of Good (and therefore the concept of evil) would introduce evil. In this way, the concept of Good and Evil is simply evil, much like the concept of Just and Unjust war is unjust (Or so, in my opinion, alike Good and Evil). I now see this is not what you meant, and so I apologise. Just my mind running away again...

In Zen and Taoism, the goal is to still the mind and cease dualistic mind conceptualization to realize the underlying unity and one suspects that this is also why in the Abrahamic tradition, "eating of the fruit of the tree of GOOD and EVIL" results in the loss of Eden (Divine paradise/oneness). IOW, 'good and evil' is being used as a metaphor for the dualistic mindset, i.e. conceptual thinking.

Man is ignorant. Man knew nothing other than obeidience and all things that God told him. Man eats from the tree of knowledge of Good and Evil, and therefore knew of Good and Evil. Knowing Good and Evil resulted in the fall from grace. So therefore, would the concept of Good and Evil not literally imply Evil in it's own case?

Im almost scared of asking now, though, as I have been so obviously wrong before. If I don't immediately understand, have patience with me, you obviously understand your concept better than I do.

GhK.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Hi GhK, there is nothing to be sorry about, understanding is an ever unfolding process, there appears never to be a conclusion though there are some extraordinary revelations along the way, but each end up being a prerequisite for yet another unfolding of even deeper mystery.

ben d...

Hi GiantHouseKey, good and evil are just relative terms in which the concept of one defines the other. IOW, they are complementary opposites like ying and yang of the non-dual Tao.

GhK

Good and Evil are relative terms, so what you see as defining Good and Evil is different to my definition? My problem is that my definition does not exist, and I come to a point whereby I am trying to understand individual explanations on the subject.

I'm not defining anything here except pointing out that concepts are not real, they have no reality except as a concept, i.e. concepts are symbols to represent human mind thoughts about Existence, but are not Existence.

GhK..

Im almost scared of asking now, though, as I have been so obviously wrong before. If I don't immediately understand, have patience with me, you obviously understand your concept better than I do.

GhK, who said you were wrong? Understanding is about understanding, not about being right or wrong, so there is nothing to be scared about. Forget about being right or wrong, seek understanding!

Actually this is a good example of the limitation of conceptual thinking, once you conceive of a circumstance as 'wrong', it is only so because of giving it meaning by contrasting it with the concept of 'right'. This is quite natural and will be eternally the plight of minds that function it a time/space environment, i.e. universal spirit that has incarnated in mankind and is now subject to a dualistic limited conceptualizing mind, hence the metaphorical curse for those who "eat of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil"
However what is not yet realized by humans in this condition is the reality behind the concept of non-duality, i.e. Existence that is indivisibly ONE and can't be confined by any space, limited by any time, known by any knowledge or described by any words.

Unless one transcends the mortal dualistic mindset, one's mind will continue to be subject to the endless 'dance' of karmic forces (and that includes conceptual debates about good and evil). Man is not ignorant per se, the dualistic conceptual mindset that he uses is natural for the species, but there is more to awareness than conceptual thinking and that require the cessation of all thoughts, i.e. a still mind. Those who realize such non-dualism have completed the ultimate purpose of human being and the animating incarnate spirit leaves the body temple.

 

[methylatedghosts]

Until someone shows me an example where everyone in the world agrees on the evil-ness or good-ness of a thing, I can't see that "good" or "evil" exists other than in terms of that which people agree or disagree with