The Knowledge of Good and Evil

[Rasputini]

Oh true. I didn't even think about changing states of mind. Though there are some things i believe a person will always view as "evil." As I suggested about with the emotional connections, if a person has a positive connection to life, and a negative connection to pain, violence, and death, any form of murder would: 1) go against their positive connection, making it evil, and 2) do something to their negative connection, futher enforcing the act as "evil." I think the changing state of mind can only be applied to smaller things.

[vajrasattva]

I disagree "humbly" because everything is subject to evolution

[Doobah47]

Originally Posted by Aristoddler

He criticized the thoughts of happy and unhappy as ambiguous because they're subjective, from what I understood...unless you're speaking of his disdain of materialism, but that was something he gained from following the teachings of Confucius, from what I understand.

Happiness is such a fuzzy indeterminate would it should not really be used, especially not in order to influence people. Words such as contentment or euphoria are far better suited to social intercourse than 'happy' is, and probably on a psychological level they better explain somebody's mental process and emotional state. To me 'happy'='good mood', and 'good' seems like a bad choice of words, thus so does 'happy'(!)

[Didymos Thomas]

Interesting. So far we have brought up the changing nature of good and evil. Isn't this precisely why 'knowledge of good and evil' is so destructive? We call things evil, injecting an unnecessary bias, usually towards other human beings, who we then treat differently because, at some moment, we labeled them evil.

[boagie]

Originally Posted by saiboimushi

I think there may be some interesting similarities between Eastern philosophies and Christianity. Of course, it all depends on how one interprets things. The "knowledge" of good and evil, for example, can be interpreted as the opposite of Wisdom--as a kind of error or false belief, which produces and has produced every ill that flesh is heir to. The world of opposites may undermine itself, returning unto dust, for it is inherently self-opposed, a house divided against itself. Truth may exist beyond opposites, beyond good-and-evil, where all is only Good.

Furthermore, the notion of an anthropomorphic diety could actually contradict Christ's teachings, making Christ more of a Buddhist than a Jew. But, as I said, it is all a matter of interpretation.

saiboimushi,

Excellent! What of we philosophers, who realize the subjectivity of the evaluation of good and evil and the nihilistic understanding that the physical world is without meaning in the absence of an emotionally conscious subjectivity. Are we not in this day and age responsible to this clearer understanding of the human condition, instead of trying to accomadate an ancient holy text which is ever proveing to be sacred ignorance.

[Didymos Thomas]

Are we not in this day and age responsible to this clearer understanding of the human condition, instead of trying to accomadate a ancient holy text which is ever proveing to be sacred ignorance.

Except that, as Saiboimushi points out, that holy text goes a long way to give us a clearer understanding of this human condition.

[boagie]

Originally Posted by Didymos Thomas

Except that, as Saiboimushi points out, that holy text goes a long way to give us a clearer understanding of this human condition.

Didymos,

Do expand! How does the concept of good and evil give us a clearer understanding of our own subjectivity and thus our world.

"Subject and object stand or fall together" Schopenhauer

[Rasputini]

I was thinking about "good" and "evil" and was wondering if good is what is natural, and evil that which is not. Let me know what you think of that, and I'll expand from there.

[boagie]

Originally Posted by Rasputini

I was thinking about "good" and "evil" and was wondering if good is what is natural, and evil that which is not. Let me know what you think of that, and I'll expand from there.

Rasputin,

There is no such thing as good and evil in the biblical sense, your biology determines what feels good and what feels bad, and that goes for situtational experience as well, whether in the moment, recalled or projected mentally into a speculatiive future. It is all natural, both that which you like and approve of, and that which you do not like and do not appove of. It is your own being in relation to the physical world. Good and evil in the biblical sense are products of a shopkeepers mentality, all the while you are alive and living your life, you are increaseing a bill to be payed---------just send your money to me at, "The Sons Of The Morning Light."

[Rasputini]

Well I think i ment natural and unnatural in terms of how the body reacts to something. Kind of like a comfort zone. If the body is ok with something, then its "good," that being natural; whereas if the body gets some sort of uneasy feeling that makes something "bad" or "evil." This makes the concept of Good and Evil a very personal thing, which I think it is. The very fact there is a branch of Ethics I suppose shows that (in terms of the fact there is discussion and debate on what is the "right or wrong thing to do").

As for a biblical sense of good and evil. Well I'm not a religious person, but what little i do know, I think I'd have do disagree with your statement of "there is no such thing as good and evil in the biblical sense." I think the bible is full of examples of good and evil. First of all there is the set up of an all-powerfull, all-knowing, all-good god; and then there is this complete opposite character of Satan who is the encarnation of evil. The concept of heaven and hell suggests there is a system of "good" and "evil;" along with the idea of a judgement day. If there is no right/wrong, good/evil what is there to judge? Next you have the concept of sin and the act of original sin with Adam and Eve in the Garden: that suggests a biblical sense of good/bad. You have Cane killing Able and being banished: again a sense of what's right or wrong/good or bad. There's the flood to whipe out all sin.... I think you get the picture, but I'm only in Genisis of the Old Testiment (being raised Jewish that's all I've ever been really exposed to).

So I 100% aggree with you in that "good and bad" are a biological reaction. I suppose I'm looking for the root of that reaction. As for the Biblical stuff.. Well I think I ranted enough there to show that I disagreed with that statement