Between two tracks
Why have the concept of good and evil. Does it exist in nature or just in the collective imagination of humanity? We are of course of nature so yes, it does exist in nature itself but is it a reality, something tangible?
It would appear that good is hard to pin down as one's good is another's evil. At times it seems more like preference than anything else. Maybe even someone else's preference that has been learned, some tacitly, some directly. If it is a learned behaviour, how can it be good? shouldn't 'good' be so natural that it is a part of our structure?
I wrote a post about my dog just before. Is he a good dog? What would make him so? What would make him a bad dog? Again, it comes down to preference. For many, a bad dog is one that pees on the rug and chews all of the shoes and a good dog is one that follows command and obeys the lessons of the master.
From a dog's perspective, is the label of good or bad based on these things fitting? After all, it is a dog, an animal with instincts to act, rules created in its very nature. Do those rules say 'Do what people tell you'? By the dog's definition (if it possible could have one) a good dog is probably one that does normal dog things.
Good behaviour for humans always means some form of control. Often, the control of the very natures that make us human. I find this interesting in many ways. Especially how willing we are to give up our uniqueness to fit into a casting mold.
We are products of our environment and perhaps that is part of the problem for once that meant to be at the mercy of the elements, our two hands to build, our two feet to run. That environment has been gone for millennia and in its place is an environment contrived from the countless minds that went before to create what is. Now, like the dog acting to get the treat, we conform to the will of our environment.
And it tells us to seek what is good and destroy what is evil. A tale as old as time. Human time at least. Seeking what is good is easy, just look to what all others do within the group and that is the accepted good. Evil poses a problem.
For evil is wily according to the dogooders, we never know what trick evil will play next to bend our ear, gain our trust and drive us to do things that are unnatural, in our created environment. We must be vigilant and seek evil where it breeds, in what is not good. What is not like us.
Evil is always on the other side of us, opposed to good, the night to our day. For we cannot be evil for we do the work of good. Everyone in our group does the work of good for the actions passed down through the ages are the movements of good incarnate. History has proven it to us for the predicted future is that good always prevails. And here we are, prevailing.
But where is this evil foe, where do they live? For if we knew that, then we can eradicate evil forever. Wipe it from the face of the earth and harmony and peace will reign for once evil is no longer present, only good can be. Is it not this simple?
Good and evil seem very complicated and there are many exceptions. Do not do this or that or the other, unless. And many of the unless are introduced in the moment, by an individual or a group interested in a particular outcome. An excuse, a justification as to why in this case it is okay to do what we should not. All is fair in love and war as they say. Exceptions to the rules.
I wonder, if nature would be so complicated. Complex yes, but the rule of nature is to maximise opportunity within what is possible, even if that instance does not survive for more than a moment. The rules of humans are to limit possibility itself. Nature does not say no, it says, let's see in the instant and what may not work today, may tomorrow. It is not invested in any particular outcomes, just what continues.
Endless variations possible from endless mutations, but the world of humans is trying to create a solid framework to order the world. The perfect solution. Nature says, it is perfect now even though the now is always changing, until it changes no more.
And because of this change, nature is unlikely to concern itself with good and evil for it is on the only path possible, forward, straight down the middle. There is no deviation as it rolls on endlessly down this one way track.
But, as limited humans we are still at the mercy of our mind, what we have learned and the environment we have created and we must decide what good and evil is to us. Perhaps though, it is not a question we can answer as a group, it is only one we can discover as an individual.
I don't think most will think too deeply on this but what would happen if you did, and found you were evil? Would you believe it, or justify it away?
Taraz
[ a Steemit original ]
In order to know if evil exist one first must define it in a discoverable way. The scientific method is limited in its value because it can only know that which exist on the material plane. The concept Evil is a lot like our emotions.
One cannot using the scientific method prove something like love, hate, anger, madness. lol One can only see the effects of such. There is no placing the essence of these emotions on the table for examination. Thus the parameters of the scientific method preclude its use to prove such exist.
One can use the subjectivity of their relationship with their own emotions to prove to themselves that emotions exist. There would be no need for humans to learn to put the horse before the cart otherwise.
This is and only ever can be testimony and will most likely remain so. Even if technology allows us to view another person's emotion we would still need to overcome another barrier. Each of us has our own perspective and as far as we know only one person has that perspective. The perspective in a very real way is part of the context parameter used to decide for the individual what is important about any experience we have. Thus the same exact experience leads to different contextual parameters.
So even though we can prove that there is a corporeal world individually and personally the methods we have blind us and bind us to the idea the such doesn't really exist even though we have the evidence of our subjectivity to such things like emotions, and the evidence proving we can affect the corporeal when we put the horse before the cart.
Up to the individual experience and individual justification of personal actions. So, outside of the mind/emotion, good and evil cannot provably exist as it is all relative to the observer.
The problem is that most people think that the scientific method is the only method for proving existence. Really however there are many ways to prove things outside of the scientific method. A personal experience is one way that is not measurable by the scientific method. The scientific method breaks down at the point where existence is not dependant upon matter. One cannot examine the corporeal doesn't mean that it doesn't exist.
It just means that the scientific method and its rules about what is evidence, logic, reason and how such is used to come to conclusions needs to be modified to work the problem. Essential when we try to use the scientific method to study the corporeal, it is the same as trying to fly in a car. It is the wrong tool. The good news is that we can and we are discovering the right tools for studying the corporeal. Time is what we need. lol
'Up to the individual experience and individual justification of personal actions. So, outside of the mind/emotion, good and evil cannot provably exist as it is all relative to the observer."
The above quote is attempting to fly in a car. Using the logic and reason designed to make statements about those things (corporeal) that may or may not operate by the same rules. I actually think that the differences necessitate different rules.
Sorry. There were meant to be question marks.
I shared what I shared because of what I realized because of what you shared. Is not important that there was meant to be ?, because what is important is the truth behind what I shared. We are good. Like the stuff you post and hopefully you don't mind me blowing up comments. lol
I don't mind at all. I appreciate it.
And my often short answers are because I have very limited time mostly and if I answer fully, I will never have a moment to write anything. :)
In my case people apparently don't like my post, but for some reason I do well in comments. So while I will continue to try to write post. I don't think people are suddenly going to start commenting or upvoting my post. So in comments I am. Is oK I like commenting especially when I have something I know is valuable. Even sometimes when I only think it is valuable. lol
This is a very good perspective! Congrats!
Thanks
I really like this , only humans contradict good and evil to the next extent
Yes. I can't see how nature could be either.
It's incredible how we can just believe in something can be good or evil for our emotions, and this is allied at ours circumstances and our life context, life the years, or the raze, because the animals can be evil in a many situations, like us, human... but in the context for to survive, the "life" always choose the way to live, independently if we have to do something good or bad. (If something dont have sense is because im learning english, i really tried) greeting from Venezuela!