The Way, The Truth, The Life

[poorAtlas]

If I'm not mistaken, both pantheism and panentheism would make questions of 'good' and 'evil' having value as moot. Also, I've always learned the most by not taking things so personally. When you lose the ego, the answers seem to magically appear.

And again your ego is that of a burrow

 

[Treks]

The reason for the title of this thread and the question asked is to bring into question that the way things are labeled and said could be based in reality and lost in how we misinterpret them. If anyone here thinks they could live without a heat source(this includes your body heat), I would say try it I bet you make it a day before you conclude you need fire. Without the light all we know would parish including deep sea critters and cave dwellers.

And what do you say to the rest of my post?

For someone rocking a Stoic logo as their avatar it perplexes me why you're attributing a moral value to light and darkness, life and death, existence and non-existence. These things just are.

And Windwalker is right - darkness does not exist as a thing. It is simply the absence of light (which is a type of radiation). You may want to do more research in this area so you become un-baffled.

 

[poorAtlas]

A stoic is a person

And what do you say to the rest of my post?

For someone rocking a Stoic logo as their avatar it perplexes me why you're attributing a moral value to light and darkness, life and death, existence and non-existence. These things just are.

And Windwalker is right - darkness does not exist as a thing. It is simply the absence of light (which is a type of radiation). You may want to do more research in this area so you become un-baffled.

First a stoic person is some who handles pain and suffering without complaint. Not relevant to morality. Secondly the science is irrelevant to you and I without the light we would die. Our whole society is based on or manipulation of light(or energy if you must). Research does not keep you alive, that climate control does. And makes it possible for you to research. Maybe you should leave the comforts of you synthetic environment so you have better understanding of how reliant you are on light. Without it where would you be, in the dark. Your arguing science not reality. I understand that it's not a subject of morality. But when in the context of lets say the Bible or any other anthropomorphized tale. We get hung up on words. I don't care what light is or isn't if it's radiation or dog ****. I know for a fact it keeps all of us alive. It still baffles me that you deny that. But considering I know all is eternal, I can see why you like to stay put in you transcendental state of mind.

 

[Treks]

A stoic is a person

First a stoic person is some who handles pain and suffering without complaint. Not relevant to morality. Secondly the science is irrelevant to you and I without the light we would die. Our whole society is based on or manipulation of light(or energy if you must). Research does not keep you alive, that climate control does. And makes it possible for you to research. Maybe you should leave the comforts of you synthetic environment so you have better understanding of how reliant you are on light. Without it where would you be, in the dark. Your arguing science not reality. I understand that it's not a subject of morality. But when in the context of lets say the Bible or any other anthropomorphized tale. We get hung up on words. I don't care what light is or isn't if it's radiation or dog ****. I know for a fact it keeps all of us alive. It still baffles me that you deny that. But considering I know all is eternal, I can see why you like to stay put in you transcendental state of mind.

Yes, a "stoic" (little 's') person is someone who handles pain and suffering without complaint. However, the logo in your avatar is associated with Stoicism (upper case 'S'), an ancient Greek philosophical system fundamentally concerned with ethics, morality, and the Good (virtue). So, when a person comes on a forum conflating stoicism and Stoicism, and light (radiation) and morality, you can see how it becomes very muddled.

The rest of your post doesn't make much sense to me and I'm not sure how to interpret your tone. It doesn't read in a friendly way and you don't seem to be seeking information or constructive dialogue. So.. what's the point of your thread? It's not clear to me, I'm afraid.

 

[BSM1]

And again your ego is that of a burrow

I understand your position. Unfortunately, many people are more interested in being right than finding the truth. Have a nice day.

 

[Quintessence]

I didn't state what I believe. It's not dualism it's the comparison between day and night, to what a dualist religion might refer to as good and evil

I don't really understand your OP, then. Your OP sounds like it is going "light = good, dark = evil." That's classic dualism. What point are you trying to make?

 

[tayla]

light enables life

Physical photons traveling (light) do not uniquely enable life. All aspects of physical reality are necessary for life.

 

[Samantha Rinne]

I don't really understand your OP, then. Your OP sounds like it is going "light = good, dark = evil." That's classic dualism. What point are you trying to make?

The only real dualistic panentheism I can think of offhand are certain brands of Christianity that are super into the idea of a "body of Christ". They have clearcut good/evil, but most pantheism (and panentheism) is just not at all into that.

It seems like the OP kinda just decided to drive a point home even if it involved multiposts.

 

[ChieftheCef]

Would it be true to say that light enables life, therefore is synonymous with Good. And therefore darkness must be synonymous with Evil.

No, both are required for each other. You cannot have light without dark, and many animals, such as cats, thrive in the dark. Light is good personally for your exact phenotype with your exact environmental programming. It is not, say, particularly good for me. It dos sustain our plant but many find it in preferable, especially in a hot desert.

 

[ChieftheCef]

Stoicism is the symbol. I like the night, I like it better with moon"light". But as all of must have experienced a person or being that seem to be inherently evil\dark. Is this natural order of the universe? If so how can we be absolute about what is right or wrong? Or virtuous.

I can tell your fishing for converts because you ended that with a period. You're starting from your worldview then looking to prove it. That's the way to insanity. The way to truth is by listening, not determining what is true sheerly by what is handed down to you

 

[ChieftheCef]

I didn't state what I believe. It's not dualism it's the comparison between day and night, to what a dualist religion might refer to as good and evil

That's dualism. You know, you notice more dualists, who don't realize they're dualists, trying to prove a worldview rather than seeing where the facts lead

 

[ChieftheCef]

This assumes Evil is a thing. It is a dualistic perspective. In reality, there is no darkness as a thing. There is only light and degrees of light. There is no opposite of light. An absence of light is nothing at all. Darkness is simply the absence of light. You cannot measure nothing.

That's not scientifically true. Nothing is also a thing, ask science. Even in vacuum there is stuff. Darkness has every right to be considered a thing just like nothing.

There are no degrees of darkness. All it takes is one single ray of light, no matter how dim, and darkness is becomes light. As the saying goes, "A single candle can illuminate an entire room."