Evil is simply this

reply to post by arpgme

Evil is whatever a person defines it to be. Some people think bacon is "evil", some people think cheese burgers are "evil"...

Im gonna make sure i take your food orders really carefully One slip up i will be the toast.

Originally posted by arpgme
Evil is whatever a person defines it to be. Some people think bacon is "evil", some people think cheese burgers are "evil"... I am not making things up, these are real examples I'm giving you here...

Evil is person, it will be defined by an individual as whatever makes them very negative emotions. Some of these things which cause very negative emotions (harm, torture, stealing, unfairness) most people will "agree" to that being "evil" but really it is defined in whatever way a person (or the people - if agreed) wants it to be.

This is from my point of view a discussion on duality (black/white) thinking. There are those that are sure that dualityviews are correct and then there are people who belive nonduality is the correct (creating a new duality, is not reality increadable? ). The nondualist finds that things are shades of grey instead of black and white and that the thruth normally lies between 2 extremes of an duality.

A dualist would say with 100% conviction that abotions are either evil or good. A nondualist would probably say that abortion just are or that they can both be considered evil or good depending on the circumstances.

There is only 2 dualities that I really belive in that I have not been able to dissasamble:
Nonduality leeds to opened mind and understanding and duality leeds to small mind and missunderstanding.
Service to all in symbiosis is correct vs service to one/few/ego that is wrong.

If anyone can give me another duality that I cannot dissasemble then please be my guest. I always need more knowledge/understanding.

reply to post by apushforenlightment


I guess thats one way to explain variation between views. If some one is holding the control of a tap and they turn it one way and a person suffers then thats evil, if they turn it other way and stop pain thats good. Good and evil can be viewed in simple terms. If i buy Apgme a cheese burger and its not got cheese instead has bacon was i evil if it was a mistake? If i did it deliberately yes if not then no. If im hated back for any these two reasons then its evil, although for the deliberate case id expect the punishment to be less. See its all quite clear and easy to understand.

reply to post by apushforenlightment


Service to self VERSUS service to others. It doesn't have to be 100% one or the other... maybe one can use BOTH in their lives...

There are those that believe in Balance, and so they try to limit themselves and only do what is necessary.
The release desire (mostly - except for life/survival) and live a simple life.


When you remember what is constant within, that is enough to keep you content.
But if what is without (reality/world) happens to unfold in a pleasing way;
then that is just an extra blessing on top of what is already eternally constant within you.

Originally posted by AthlonSavage
reply to post by apushforenlightment

 

I guess thats one way to explain variation between views. If some one is holding the control of a tap and they turn it one way and a person suffers then thats evil, if they turn it other way and stop pain thats good. Good and evil can be viewed in simple terms. If i buy Apgme a cheese burger and its not got cheese instead has bacon was i evil if it was a mistake? If i did it deliberately yes if not then no. If im hated back for any these two reasons then its evil, although for the deliberate case id expect the punishment to be less. See its all quite clear and easy to understand.

I have an example of the same Apgme a cheese burger thing. We had a few peoples quiting at a place where I worked and the people there got together and bought beer and liquer that is customary at that workplace. Unfortunatly we did not know that one of the people from Pakistan did not drink alchohol because he have never talked to us about it. There was noone saying he should drink and we did not notice until afterwards that he had gotten upset with ous for buying Alcohol for him. So from his point of view the group is bullying him by buying alcohol and letting him have the choice to accept it or not.

The problem I am trying to explain is that if you are on a defensive trying to justifying your differnece that does not need justifying then you might take actions that are counter to how you want it as an attack on you wants, when it is not meant as an attack. So being overly sensitive about you chooices in regards to others will make you percieve things as negative when they do not have to be.

If a person do not let a negative thing bother him at all then the negative thing ceases to matter. I myself am working on trying to become a person that can let smallminded negativity attacks pass me by without it affecting me but I am having a hard time keeping emotions under control . What I would not have given to be a Vulcan type of mind.

Originally posted by arpgme
reply to post by apushforenlightment

 

Service to self VERSUS service to others. It doesn't have to be 100% one or the other... maybe one can use BOTH in their lives...

There are those that believe in Balance, and so they try to limit themselves and only do what is necessary.
The release desire (mostly - except for life/survival) and live a simple life.


When you remember what is constant within, that is enough to keep you content.
But if what is without (reality/world) happens to unfold in a pleasing way;
then that is just an extra blessing on top of what is already eternally constant within you.

Yes there is a balance and that is why I add the symbiotic part. It is not that I am supposed to suffer for other peoples happiness?. The symbiotic part involves that I should get help and give help for the good of all including myself. If I get better because of an action and there is no negative concequense to other people/nature then I should do the action since I get better and by me getting better everyone is getting better since I am included in the everyone.

I also agree that happiness comes from within but that within can have an external source. . I am not sure I belive any thing except energy is constant and even energy is changing form from one thing to another. From my point of view everything that is me and can be percieved as me is in a constant evolution. I can never be what I have been since there are small differences that are hard to notice but are still there. I can only mimick being what I have been but it will still not be exactly the same me. Every moment I die and get rebirthed as a new me that is a litte hard to notice change.

reply to post by apushforenlightment


We get caught out sometimes. What can we do, we cant triangulate for every outcome. You example is a good one it shows ever if i get the burger right im might still be scolded for the Drink. Just gotta roll with the punches sometimes.

The definition of evil I use to base my life decisions:

Evil is the violation of free will - asserting one's personal desires over another, regardless of their desires.

Evil is the violation of free will - asserting one's personal desires over another, regardless of their desires.

reply to post by Skarr


what happens if one person likes being controlled by another, does that make the controller evil? We have to face in life some people will want to be controlled, and some do the controlling. So control is not always evil

Strange ideas about evil. Here is my own. I could never see any ultimate author of evil, no Devil, or Satan sitting there actually creating evil and running an army of Demons. As far as I am concerned, the Church made that all up years ago to scare parishioners into compliance. And it works quite well on anyone gullible enough to believe it.

That being said, Evil lives in the heart of Human Beings. When a person gets angry at another, and does something that is designed to bring harm and suffering to that person, that is evil. We are supposed to love each other, not hurt each other.

Most do not understand the true nature of who and what you are, a Spirit inhabiting a carbon based body, and having a human experience. The Spirit that animates us all is a wild thing, totally wild. It cannot be tamed by conventional means either. One must train their own selves. A young Creative Spirit is a dangerous thing to set free, that is the purpose of being trapped in a human body and being forced to experience pain and suffering as a human being.

Evil as a concept is simply this:
It is one side of a coin, one polarity opposed to the other polarity, two sides of one thing. Like Dark and Light. One defines the other, and one cannot exist without the other, opposite force. The trick is not to just embrace one, while disregarding the other, but to find a Balance between the two, understanding both, drawing power from both, in a completely neutral way.

reply to post by apushforenlightment


He overreacted. If he didn't want the alcohol, he should have just said "Sorry, I don't drink" instead of being mean and catching an attitude.


reply to post by apushforenlightment


Yes, happiness CANT come from without, I did not disagree with that. I said that only what is within is constant. Reality changes, the FOCUS of mind changes (thoughts, emotions, etc), but MIND itself is constant.


reply to post by autowrench


Yes, generally speaking, the basic definition of "Morality" most have is "don't intentionally hurt others". Unfortunately, it starts to contradict once people throw in the bible or whatever other rules they are following beyond this...

But yeah, a good rule of thumb is to

NOT intentionally hurt others but if others do it to you, do what is needed to defend yourself and that's it.

reply to post by arpgme

Yes but if he feels that alcohol is irresponsible or is the sign of a destructive thing then he might have reason to not like his coworkers for participating in it or for ever thinking he should.

Picture this:
"Hey, Jake, this alcohol won't hurt you. Just a few drinks to loosen up. It's harmless."

If Jake believes alcohol is destructive then what does he say? The other man is also being somewhat insulting towards Jake's attitude towards alcohol in his subtle choice of words.

If Jake is smart he'll walk away but there's every possibility his coworkers will think less of him. They might prove to be lesser human beings for it, but it's a common thing to do if somebody doesn't choose to be in the "group". This is especially true for groups that use alcohol commonly.

Our opinions don't just determine whether we drink alcohol or the amount, it also affects what we think of those who do or do not drink alcohol. Some opinions, like our favorite flavor of ice cream, don't cause us to be critical of those who disagree. But others, like political party or choice of clothes or religious faith, can motivate criticism if agreement is not reached and/or the persons involved cross into the space of another. Ever heard someone say, 'I disagree with them, but they're ok if they leave me alone." But when the other people who disagree DON'T leave you alone or impact your life in some way then there's trouble brewing. No quicker way to make people fight then box them up.

One example is a vegetarian who thinks we shouldn't kill animals for food since animals are higher conscious beings like ourselves. When others eat animals, they feel anger in response because in their mind the person eating the animal is killing the consciousness of another living being.

The main thing is that when you think that someone else's opinion is impacting your own life and not allowing you to enjoy yourself or to feel content or satisfied then you become angry.

Sometimes we can just walk away from it, but sometimes we have something to lose if we do. And this is where the conflict in many cases starts, I think. The lack of control breeds more anger. The person feeling the anger is forced to confront the opinion(s) that're causing the conflict.

reply to post by jonnywhite

Originally posted by jonnywhite
reply to post by arpgme

 

Yes but if he feels that alcohol is irresponsible or is the sign of a destructive thing then he might have reason to not like his coworkers for participating in it or for ever thinking he should.

Then that is his choice. As long as they aren't trying to force him to drink, or he isn't trying to force them to stop, there is nothing "evil" going on here.

Originally posted by jonnywhite
reply to post by arpgme

 

Picture this:
"Hey, Jake, this alcohol won't hurt you. Just a few drinks to loosen up. It's harmless."

If Jake believes alcohol is destructive then what does he say? The other man is also being somewhat insulting towards Jake's attitude towards alcohol in his subtle choice of words.

The person offering the drink is the wrong because in THIS situation he's trying to force him to drink.

Originally posted by jonnywhite
reply to post by arpgme

 

Our opinions don't just determine whether we drink alcohol or the amount, it also affects what we think of those who do or do not drink alcohol. Some opinions, like our favorite flavor of ice cream, don't cause us to be critical of those who disagree. But others, like political party or choice of clothes or religious faith, can motivate criticism if agreement is not reached and/or the persons involved cross into the space of another.

If we started making laws (moral or governmental) , eventually there will be no free-will and lots of censorship, a person can just claim to be "offended".

As long as everyone has the free-will to do whatever they want, and no one is forcing another to drink or stop drinking, everything is ok, they made their choices for their own lives, caring about whatever thinks or trying to control what another thinks or feel is also wrong. In away, it is still trying to push alcoholism on him if he doesn't want to drink and they want to FORCE his opinions to change, and the same in the opposite situation.

Originally posted by jonnywhite
One example is a vegetarian who thinks we shouldn't kill animals for food since animals are higher conscious beings like ourselves. When others eat animals, they feel anger in response because in their mind the person eating the animal is killing the consciousness of another living being

And that is their right to have their emotions and opinions, as long as they don't force all others to change their emotions and opinions against their will.

(The free-will of the animals is digressing from my point - I'm talking about "evil" in the sense of a social code for how humans interact together...)

Originally posted by jonnywhite
The main thing is that when you think that someone else's opinion is impacting your own life and not allowing you to enjoy yourself or to feel content or satisfied then you become angry.

An opinion does not stop you from enjoying yourself. It is your choice to keep thinking about that opinion and make yourself feel bad - put that opinion over your own self-judgment, or to focus on thinking of other things, care about your own self-judgment and enjoy yourself).

Originally posted by jonnywhite
Sometimes we can just walk away from it, but sometimes we have something to lose if we do. And this is where the conflict in many cases starts, I think. The lack of control breeds more anger. The person feeling the anger is forced to confront the opinion(s) that're causing the conflict.

What is there to lose if you walk away? The person that you only hate and argue with in the first place? Everything in your life will be the same except the person will not be in it - and if the disagreement is so bad that the person can no longer be in your life, then there is not much you're "losing out" on anyway...

(of course, the exception is that there are no misunderstandings. People argue over small things sometimes and make the large and then wind up not being friends - an unfortunate situation - but still the free-will of both people - as long as they are not trying to FORCE the other to do anything).

Originally posted by autowrench
I could never see any ultimate author of evil, no Devil, or Satan sitting there actually creating evil and running an army of Demons.

Satan doesn't create evil, and he doesn't force men to do bad things, Jesus puts that squarely on us, where it belongs.

20 And he said, That which cometh out of the man, that defileth the man.
21 For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications, murders,
22 Thefts, covetousness, wickedness, deceit, lasciviousness, an evil eye, blasphemy, pride, foolishness:
23 All these evil things come from within, and defile the man.

Originally posted by AthlonSavage

what happens if one person likes being controlled by another, does that make the controller evil? We have to face in life some people will want to be controlled, and some do the controlling. So control is not always evil

Well then you're not violating anyone's free will - you're just engaging in a little D/S _javascript:icon('

')

Originally posted by AthlonSavage

I have to say that this is the worst explanation for what evil is that I have personally ever heard. The philosophical spin you tried to put on this is an epic fail. I think you need to re-think your philosophical viewpoint a bit. The parameters of what evil truly is goes far deeper than this meager explanation and/or viewpoint.

reply to post by Rubicant13

 

I rest my case. Evil in action.

This has got to be the perfect example of what you was talking about.
'Evil is what evil does'..and its alot of hateful evil people on this site,and this is a perfect example of what you stated in the OP.
Here is your first star from a good person.

reply to post by LastProphet527


Thankyou for positive reply and very much appreciate the star