New thread - Iambiguous, here are your PROOFS

Philosophy Forums Philosophy
61

I want to add, because I mentioned my teachers with serious name dropping…

I exceeded my teachers, and they are proud of me.

Just like a high school history teacher would be proud of a student that became the worlds best historian.

I exceeded my teachers artimas

62

We are, by your own definition, a subset of existence, representing that subset, the cosmos knows what good and evil is.

63

You cannot say all consent violations are evil so your definition is not a universal one as it only applies in specific cases

64

I believe you Ec but you have to stay away from values and observe desire/value for what it is, illusory.

I am not saying you’re consent argument is wrong completely but it does head towards an extreme of attributing unnecessary/unreasonable value of which reality functions regardless of our observing/valuing.

Even the Buddha himself showed what desire and attachment to them can/may do.

65

Sure I can. A consent violation is different for every being, but immutable of itself. It always is what it is, regardless of being mutually exclusive …

There mere existence of it is evil.

66

The cosmos knows absolutely nothing at all other than how to exist the way it does so has no concept of good or evil

67

We do, and we’re a subset of the cosmos.

68

The issue is that of the word you’re using Ec, not of your argument. It can’t be evil because it doesn’t understand.

Evil only stems from ignorance or a point of an understanding lower than one above it, evil requires intent, so if one is ignorant (one understanding below the next) in a certain facet/aspect, then how can one intentionally be evil, if the very act itself is from an ignorant standpoint? Evil is a slippery word of attributing an extremist idea of subjectively and usually agreed upon ‘bad’.

Being wise is through an understanding of self and morality, if one doesn’t understand self completely then how can they understand morality?

69

As I said t the Buddha, attachment to the dharma is just another attachment, so why do you teach and defend this?

The buddhas response?

I have nothing more to teach you

70

It is an attachment to nothingness of which reveals everything. Have you attached to that nothingness yet?

I agree it is extreme as well, which is why I advocate balance and not 100% Buddhism.

You can always find a contrast and where the contrasts lie, so does the balance. But have to understand all sides to see the balance.

71

@artimas

I’ll tell you what I understand about individuals:

You’ll get a lot of pushback, even I did a little, for saying, “all is forgiven, no matter what”

That’s how your messages read.

Everyone will seek to atone for their own transgressions, unless you forgive yourself, all is not forgiven.

Evil is error, and there is always a self reckoning - and it’s not anyone’s job except them to embrace that

72

@artimas

You won’t find balance in existence.

I am not a Buddhist

I’m an atheist.

My higher power is non contradiction

73

We are human beings not planets or stars or galaxies just human beings

Planets and stars and galaxies dont understand evil only human beings do

74

True evil requires intent through having somewhat of an understanding though. But every position of understanding is still an ignorant position since knowledge is eternal.

Forgiveness and acceptance of oneself and mistakes is the only way out of a self created hell. Judgement/guilt and all of that is when one understands the implications of their actions if they had negative effects, it is the understanding after the first initial understanding, the next step that they didn’t see previous, then they connect the dots due to their ignorant acts of harming.

75

@surreptitios

We are subsets of existence, therefor, there is knowledge of good and evil in existence

76

Sure you can find balance. Balance through ones own subjectivity with observing of objectivity to make the most balanced decisions.

We are a balance in itself, know how I understand that? Because value is subjective outside of existence.

Everything in existence is a balance, everything has a positive and a negative, a “good” and “bad” facet, observable to consciousness.

77

By definition, nobody would knowingly choose to be evil, even if they thought they knew. They didn’t.

That doesn’t absolve them of karma or atonement

78

They’re not absolved of karma because they didn’t heed the subconscious morality system of which signals not to do bad by punishment of guilt/judgement. They did not seek to understand the lessons of which appeared to them. Lessons, not evils.

79

Again, no, there’s not balance in existence, for example, matter won the war.

There is only otherness

80

@artimas

What’s the definition of sin, etymologically?

“Missing the mark”

Evil is defined as “missing the mark”

To not call it evil is to do injustice to those who are incorrect