Does Goodness Exist?

a reply to: backcase

An agnostic considers many things and thinks carefully about the weight of belief. We measure belief-systems and adjust our own beliefs accordingly. We're not prone to extreme views and tend towards tolerance as naturally as wiggling our toes.

Of the 'acts of the flesh,' I've partaken in half of them in the past couple of months. Of the 'acts of spirit,' I've demonstrated all of them this week and it's only Wednesday.

Nevertheless, your post has struck a chord and chimes with certain ideas that have preoccupied me recently.

originally posted by: Kandinsky
a reply to: backcase

An agnostic considers many things and thinks carefully about the weight of belief. We measure belief-systems and adjust our own beliefs accordingly. We're not prone to extreme views and tend towards tolerance as naturally as wiggling our toes.

Of the 'acts of the flesh,' I've partaken in half of them in the past couple of months. Of the 'acts of spirit,' I've demonstrated all of them this week and it's only Wednesday.

Nevertheless, your post has struck a chord and chimes with certain ideas that have preoccupied me recently.

I too take a measure of prudence in speaking and discussing. I would not think that my views are extreme and I do not think anyone else would think so if the gave them an 'honest listen'.

Many people make up their minds before they know the truth of a matter.

I am glad to hear that you put weight on belief, because the beliefs of a person truly do matter. I too consider my beliefs and question them, fortifying them. But I cannot shake this sense of duty to speak of the Truth that I know.

Do you mind if I ask you of the ideas that you have been thinking of?

a reply to: backcase

Do you mind if I ask you of the ideas that you have been thinking of?

You've asked, but I'll decline to answer. I've enjoyed the conversation and wish you well

OP, you clearly subscribe to duality. Duality between good and evil. However, duality is just a simplistic way of looking at things. In order for good to truly exist, you have to be able to define what absolute good is. Also with good, there also has to be bad. So what is absolutely bad? There has to be a clear line that can be drawn where ANYONE can say, "This is good. That is bad." It cannot be conditional. "Killing is wrong, except in self defense or killing someone by accident or the death penalty, etc" Creating conditions on bad and good means that the lines are blurred. When the lines become blurred enough, one can justify literally ANY action as good or bad depending on their viewpoint.

Sure there can be standards that the majority agrees on that are good or bad. Harming another person is generally considered wrong. But what about things like drugs? Is wasting away addicted to drugs evil or wrong? If not, is it good? But the standards change through the years and centuries. One of my chief complaints with the OT is that the god in it condones slavery, war of aggressions, murdering your child, and misogyny. The go to answer from Christians is ALWAYS, "well that was a different time." Well hold on. How can we define what is good and what is a sin if we just let the tides take our morality where ever? In order to define good, we need to properly define what is and isn't good. We can't just modify the definition as our sensibilities change. What about animals? Why do we as humans not extend the same rights to animals to live and propagate? We go on and on about human suffering, what about the suffering we are causing to the many OTHER animals out there?

originally posted by: backcase
What is thought of the common religious?

"They are hypocrites. They are the epitome of hatred. ... [sic]
But is it really so?

I believe individual religious ideas or concepts and the people who believe them are mostly separate things. Most people tend to follow their own morality whether religious or not, they just express it differently.

Some religious ideas are stupid grant you.

Because I feel that all people know in their hearts the truth,

I believe most humans have ingrained and shared biological behaviours that predefine them towards some moral behaviours that we might call some kind of truth inside some kind of metaphorical heart.

Things like mirror neurons and all the rest help us have empathy for others and build relationships, and we get those nice happy feelings when we do something nice. The occurrence of these traits could be considered 'goodness', but in a lot of people they happen regardless of what they believe.

It is said among many men that virtue is fake

But not amongst most.

What is sad is that many think that that man is happy despite his goodness.

There are actually a lot of studies that shows the brain rewards kind acts with happy chemicals for most people except psychopaths etc ... partly because we mirror other people somewhat. It's probably why it feels better to give a homeless person $20 than it does to pay some organization to build a well in Africa.

Humans aren't really evolved to pay people to build wells in Africa.

Is that man not an enigma who forgives the hand which harms him and even allows his heart to love that criminal out of pity?

Forgiveness is a good for health and for community mostly.

That man denies that the good man grasps some sort of lofty truth. Why? Because the man who does not understand 'foolish' man's actions, does not grasp what the foolish man does.

Kind of agree with you here, but forgiveness and do unto others stand on their own merits.

Ancient philosopher named Seneca once said something along the lines of, 'the greatest punishment you can give a criminal is understanding of his actions'. It's in Greek, would need to dig out the exact quote but these are ancient concepts. They shouldn't be considered lofty. Even chimpanzees, dogs, and rats understand fairness as a concept.

asking your heart to be changed so that it may move and act with actual love and happiness, that of which, it has not been capable of so far.

Understanding all those concepts is pretty neat, but it doesn't require religion to do so, it's just the secular version of these concepts were absorbed into faiths of all kinds for a couple of thousand years.

The major difference I see between many religious interpretations of good and my own is that many faiths claim you 'chose' to be good or are commanded to be so by divine will, whilst I personally feel that many people just don't get the opportunity due to factors beyond their control in the forming of their being.

I don't hold it against them, I don't believe they chose this, and I don't command them to be well, but I help out where I can. It ends up having many of the same properties of forgiveness but requires no active decision making and is born out of my understanding humanity than a relationship with a God.

Hope that helps your thinking?