It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Is teaching humans to be good people evil?

page: 2
3
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 06:50 AM
link   
reply to post by Bluesma
 





But I do not agree that the "bad" people necessarily are the successful ones in life.


You dont advocate the myth that bad guys have all the fun




posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 06:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by AthlonSavage


You dont advocate the myth that bad guys have all the fun


No.



posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 06:55 AM
link   
reply to post by Bluesma
 


The how about the myth bad girls have all the fun....



posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 06:58 AM
link   
Is an Omish person selling fruit on the side of the road evil?

Is a person who wants to grow a garden in there back yard evil?

Is a mother who wants to not vaccinate her child and even home school evil?

Is a person who wants to make money by running a small home based business evil?

Is someone who looks a CT's evil?

Is someone who sells whole milk evil?

Is anyone who questions authority at least to ask for a simple answer or speak there mind or attend a protest evil?

Well according to TPTB these, and so many other similar situations are criminals engaged in criminal acts! And need to be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. There's just so much propaganda out there. Good and evil are turning into what TPTB tell us they are. That's one more reason not to trust TPTB, the most evil people on the planet by far. I feel sry for them though, they're going to hell in a hand-basket.



posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 07:06 AM
link   
you should not need to teach then,
yes but.

it is the fault of the parents.
they dont teach them values.
they should see it by the actions of the people around them.
but we live in a sick hell.
news and computer games.



posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 07:08 AM
link   
reply to post by buddha
 


ya hurting inside man, u need to embrace the love oF Jesus
Just kidden



posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 07:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by AthlonSavage
reply to post by Bluesma
 


The how about the myth bad girls have all the fun....


No.

......but then I do not adhere to, nor was brought up with, any system which systematically condemns things like making love as being "bad" (which is usually what such sayings refer to).



posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 05:46 PM
link   
Perhaps it is better to not put labels for things like good and evil because really, it's based on perspective. I could give money to a stranger on the street, and some might think that is me being good, but if they use it to buy drugs is my giving them the money bad?

Just teach your children common sense, and you'll be fine. For example, if you cheat on your exam or paper, and you're caught, you can be kicked out of school. I wouldn't say cheating on your exam or paper is evil. It's better to give examples of cause and effect so children can get a full understanding of why something is a good idea to do and why not.



posted on Oct, 11 2012 @ 01:09 AM
link   
reply to post by Xaberz
 


This comment reminded me of something that is an example of different moralities!

Cheating on tests- some of us would consider that bad, or wrong, everywhere, right? It defeats the purpose of having a test!

I found out that here in France, that is not exactly so. It is officially "not allowed"... the latin peoples have things like that- acknowledged as unacceptable, but it is an unspoken understanding that one is expected to pass that line.

Making elaborate notes to hide (like on tiny peices of paper, on the inside of your hand, whatever...) to bring with you and use for cheating is understood here to be a good thign because creating those cheat sheets has the same effect as doing homework!

The act of trying to determine the essential points in making notes, and writing them down (trying to make sure they are readable and comprehensible for oneself) makes the kid learn and remember more.
In fact some kids that wouldn't normally study at all get their study in doing cheat sheets!

But if it was outwardly acknowledged that it was okay, the kids wouldn't do it.

That is the latin understanding- people NEED to cross the lines of limitation at some point, if even just a little.
Because it is only when you do so that you graduate from being only a member of a collective,
to being an individual.

So some rules are placed there exactly for them to be transgressed.

Same thing with drug use- they understand that line will have to be crossed, so put it lower than they really expect- like if you don't want your kid doing meth, but are okay with them smoking a joint from time, then act like a hardass about pot. Then they can get their rebellion through crossing that and not go further to harder drugs.



posted on Oct, 11 2012 @ 04:57 AM
link   
reply to post by Bluesma
 


I didnt mean it that way although bad girls generally are the most promiscuous



posted on Oct, 11 2012 @ 06:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by AthlonSavage
reply to post by Bluesma
 


I didnt mean it that way although bad girls generally are the most promiscuous


LOL! Athy, why not be a more specific on what you consider "bad" and are refering to here?
Because reading through the replies, I wonder if everyone is refering to completely different things with that term!



posted on Oct, 11 2012 @ 06:57 AM
link   
reply to post by Bluesma
 


Ahh dont get me started Bluesma, im trying to think were my upper cereba not lower it takes will to do that more than you will know!

Besides theres someone elses feelings i have to think about so i cant talk or alude to things about sex.
edit on 11-10-2012 by AthlonSavage because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 11 2012 @ 11:11 AM
link   
reply to post by AthlonSavage
 


Okay, I didn't mean to ask directly about sex- just this idea of "bad"... See, I don't know what you mean by "bad" in the OP; in a general way, keeping the discussion impersonal- what is "bad" for you?

Is it aggressivity? Hostility? Destructive behavior towards others? Towards self?

The relativity comes in there- if one believes all agressivity and hostility is bad, then they run into the problem I *think* you are trying to pinpoint- the aggressive rule this world, at the expense of the passive. The "good" will just spend their life in suffering, dreaming and waiting for "the next world" where the tables shall turn (maybe).

That indicates to me that the people who told the good ones to be good are responsible for their suffering, therefore are in the same catagory as the "bad tyrants" they are helping!

Did I understand correctly?



posted on Oct, 11 2012 @ 04:35 PM
link   
reply to post by Bluesma
 




what is "bad" for you?


The worse form of bad is hurting a person you love. Sometimes silence and doing or saying nothing is also bad to this person. It works both ways as well. Two people can be punishing eachother with words or silence, and if they love eachother then its really, really on the level of a bad situation.



Is it aggressivity? Hostility? Destructive behavior towards others? Towards self?


If Karma exists and i believe it does then Yes.




That indicates to me that the people who told the good ones to be good are responsible for their suffering, therefore are in the same catagory as the "bad tyrants" they are helping!

Did I understand correctly?


I think you have understood it correctly. The bad ones sometimes are the ones injecting the so called "good" ideas of morality as a control system. For examples the Romans created cristianity to control the social behaviour of the masses. How we should we be reacting to that is something which would be worthy of a thread alone.

edit on 11-10-2012 by AthlonSavage because: (no reason given)

edit on 11-10-2012 by AthlonSavage because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 12 2012 @ 01:47 AM
link   
reply to post by AthlonSavage
 


*nod*... Okay, yeah, that does make sense. It was part of what Nietzsche pointed out when he described a "slave mentality" (using christianity as an example of that) which is helpful to those who wish to have power over a peoples.

I guess one could say that those who encourage and teach the young to be part of the (abused) passive mass coud be judged as "bad" then too.
But I would want to point out that this might not be done on purpose. People further such ideologies for other reasons- because having a more passive child or class enables them to be less aggressive and forceful in their leading approach (and they feel they are being more "good" then).

That is a common type of parenting you see especially with single mother households. It is understandable, since they will tend to be overwhelmed with responsibilities, so with less energy, but also having a natural feminine tendancy to be repulsed by aggressivity. There is nothing bad about their intent! They want to be nice to their kids, they want their kids to be nice enough so that they can.


Then, it does become a problem when that kid gets out into the social world and find themselves bullied and overcome by others who aren't so "nice". They are very sensitive and get hurt easily.

For those who judge it bad to be aggressive, that is just further proof that aggressivity is "bad".
Personally, I believe there is such a thing as "positive aggressivity", which is more akin to "assertiveness", but can include hostility at times, but that needs to be learned.

If you don't teach it, the child will have a uncontrolled type of aggressivity emerge when necessary instead- what americans call "rage".
Consciously applied aggressivity doesn't become anger.

Aggressivity doesn't come from the emotion of anger- anger is born from repressed aggressivity.


Wow, I am straying from what I meant to say....

Summary is- intent of each individual may be worth considering in ones judgment of "good" or "bad"?
As well as the individual desires and will of the person being taught such an ideology- what if the person WANTS to be controlled by another?
What if they do not want the responsibility of power themselves, and want to be protected and directed and always have others to blame if things go wrong?



posted on Oct, 12 2012 @ 02:27 AM
link   
reply to post by Bluesma
 


Theres nothing wrong being controlled by another if thats what you want. Some people need to feel protected. Children need protection from Bullies, of course they should have that protection.
As adults the game changes. The battle field is our survival and sense of worth. Love and War will be who sides of the same coin. Who who controls the love will control the war. Now is that evil or acceptable?



posted on Oct, 12 2012 @ 07:39 AM
link   
reply to post by AthlonSavage
 


I used the example of a child, but let's look at the example of an adult-

Say, a woman, who is pregnant, or has a infant in her care. She is then, temporarily vulnerable. Having someone else be a protector for her at that time is not so irrational a desire!
Yet- protection is synonomous with submission; it lends ones power over to another. She is now in the "passive" or receptive mode in reagrds to to her protector.

See, what I am trying to get at is that I know many men who tend to think their natural aggressive instincts are what is "bad" about them.

Yet, as a woman, I found I very much appreciated the aggressive part of my mate, especially when it comes to trusting him at times with my power, when I was vulnerable. Who wants a nice guy that is unable to defend his family and home against threats?? Who wants a yes man that will give away his wife or kid to someone else who asks for them? Someone who wil never get aggressive enough to stand up and decide he has enough and will move the world NOW.

I like altruism, I like to bring that to the table in a group. But I am glad that not everyone is so altruistic! The world needs a bit of everything- even aggressivity. Thankfully, not everyone needs to have the same preferences as I.

I don't completely agree that the aggressive have all the power in this world..... I think there is more than enough power being exercised in subtle ways that are less obvious, by the meak of this world. They just use methods that are more of delayed satisfaction than immediate.



posted on Oct, 12 2012 @ 08:02 AM
link   
reply to post by Bluesma
 


When i attended an course called 'How to be Assertive' it opened up a whole new world for me. It helped me to find an alternative to victim or bully. The mind works in opposites so it will flit from one to the other so by giving it a neutral space it eliminates conflict.
edit on 12-10-2012 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 12 2012 @ 08:05 AM
link   
reply to post by Itisnowagain
 


There are no bounds to a cruel heart even in enlightenment. We must practice being strong. Fair hearts versus cruel hearts. Who will win?



posted on Oct, 12 2012 @ 08:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by AthlonSavage
reply to post by Itisnowagain
 


There are no bounds to a cruel heart even in enlightenment. We must practice being strong. Fair hearts versus cruel hearts. Who will win?


Who are you fighting?



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join