evil - the big, grand psyop!

[Phil]

My apologies...I get fired up at the promotion of social Darwinianism, the glorification of amorality (which I see as a lack of empathy)--and the borderline nihilism they tend to imply if taken to different extreme generalities than the ones you cherry pick...especially when they're wrapped in hypocritical semantic games.

If seeing humans preying on humans as evil is "virtue signaling" to you, why are you even on Earth Empaths? You get off on "vice signaling"...and the charge it gives compassionate humans?

For those of you not as clever as our friend Shez, 'virtue signaling' implies "Saying you love or hate something to show off what a virtuous person you are, instead of actually trying to fix the problem."

I contend the beliefs he's denying he even has--injected into the collective consciousness is, if not the actual cause of problem--is a strong enabler of it. Justifying/excusing the status quo, wallowing in the ability excel within it (or even skill in exploiting it), this attitude is the belief system that maintains it.

I know writing my bullshit in a forum doesn't do a whole lot to save the friggin world, but to me it is a useful tool...as I feel the need to expose these ideas to those in my real life, so I appreciate the opportunity--thanks...sorry if I got a little heated, but I truly believe some of the ideas you promote ARE the problem.

[Shezbeth]

I get fired up

"Triggered"

why are you even on Earth Empaths?

My answer is somewhere between "Sod off" and,... nah sod off works.

For those of you not as clever as our friend Shez, 'virtue signaling' implies "Saying you love or hate something to show off what a virtuous person you are, instead of actually trying to fix the problem."

Close, it is also a way for the person to egotistically attempt to subjectively claim the moral high-ground in a discussion/argument by attempting to appeal to the opinions of the majority. Thanks for noticing BTW, I am quite clever. ^_~

I know writing my bullshit in a forum doesn't do a whole lot to save the friggin world, but to me it is a useful tool...as I feel the need to expose these ideas to those in my real life, so I appreciate the opportunity--thanks...sorry if I got a little heated, but I truly believe some of the ideas you promote ARE the problem.

Its like group therapy for the forever alone crowd! Seriously, if you share with people in 'real life' by posting to an online forum,... you should maybe get to know your neighbors or something?

<ahem>

I grant you; you are entitled to your opinions and positions, and as long as you maintain them with conviction they are subjectively true...

... but that's IT.

Before getting all soap-boxxy about 'what needs to change', maybe you should get a handle on your emotions? Its knee-jerk responses like those (not 'needs' per-say, compulsions perhaps?) that result in the very predatory/malicious behavior which is attempted to be labeled in this thread as 'Evil'.

I've said it before and I'll say it again; rather than point the finger outward, point it inward? Or better yet, stand in front of a mirror and point the finger.

<goes back to keeping his side of the street clean>

[Eelco]

Social Darwinism it turns out was a system designed to misinterpret what Darwin wrote and use it to someones benefit.
As it turned out (Or so I heard yesterday) in Darwin's descend of man. Survival of the fittest is mentioned twice. Behaviour in nature Darwin observed, recognised and documented that resembled Love and Cooperation are mentioned 95 times throughout the descend of man.

just so you know, that someone said that this was the case..

WIth Love
Eelco

[Phil]

Its like group therapy for the forever alone crowd! Seriously, if you share with people in 'real life' by posting to an online forum,... you should maybe get to know your neighbors or something?

You misunderstand, I don't use the forum to "share with people in real life", not even close.

I use it to understand the narcissism and strange logic and projections of people like the character you like to play online--who just can't seem to empathize with a reality outside of the one they create...as unfortunately have to interact with them on a regular basis. So it would be closer to personal therapy for a dude who'd prefer to be in an "alone crowd". Thanks for your insights.

Before getting all soap-boxxy about 'what needs to change', maybe you should get a handle on your emotions?

You are absolutely correct, getting a handle on my emotions should always come first, brilliant...I agree. The thing is, from where I am standing, you are on the exact same soap box. My emotions were triggered by your preaching how things are always going to stay the same...which I also agree with, as long as most people share your mindset...they will. But I am humbled to be in a conversation with such an emotionally mature individual, you set a wonderful example for us all...thanks, bro.

Social Darwinism it turns out was a system designed to misinterpret what Darwin wrote and use it to someones benefit.

That's my understanding as well, it has nothing to do with Darwin or real evolution. It is the bizarre belief in "random"...somehow mutations got us to where we are, with no cause or conscious choice or purpose. I use the term to describe the mainstream concepts Shez revels in gloating on his expertise in, applying survival of the fittest to intra-species social order.

I believe this to be self-destructive, which implies self-harm...which if consciously done is the closest thing what we emotionally attached-ely associate with the concept of evil toward humanity. I believe any psy-op would be the purposeful/intentional confusion of the concept, which is most effectively done by promoting the horrid values that characters like Shez espouses like deception and competition (one of the biggest quasi-Darwinian "values").

If we look honestly at the social structures of mammals within nature, I don't think we find "successful" species preying on their own. Whoever convinced us this is not clear and true is evil in my book.

[Shezbeth]

In spite of all these gross misinterpretations and self-worship (implicit, but still evident), let me point a few things out.

Let's start with Giraffes. Peaceful, communitive, passive,... unless its mating season, then they literally beat eachother about the face and head with their faces and heads.

How about Deer? Hmmmm.

Rams?

Ants? Ants! Oh wait, they destroy eachother over skin color.

Hmmm. It would seem that - in spite of the previous - there are a great many instances of BOTH social darwinism AND 'evil' that can be readily and easily referenced (from non-meat eaters no less), depending on the perspective of the orator (funny how its always the loser who decries 'evil').

While my initial post to this thread said 'herbivores and carnivores', that was a quick refutation point. The reality is that - outside mortal/survival struggles - there are a great (overwheming?) number of examples in the natural world of one party 'taking advantage of' (in one sense) or 'defeating/overcoming' (in the other) another party. There is no 'fairness' in nature, there are only victims and victors, whether its a contest of territory, mating, or simple survival.

My point is that 'evil' - and I put it in 's to indicate the vacuous nature of that word, but I'll use it 'cuz its 'popular' (see what I did there?) - is a manifestation of the inherent drives of individuals AND groups, be they human, animal, plant (oh yes plant!), etc.

Humans are observably more complicated than animals, yet I find evident that these complications are an exponential expression of those very same instinctual pursuits that have animals beating and killing eachother. Simply, since we're so 'civilized', our survival motivators are far more fractally and methodically plotted. Instead of beating eachother about the face and head humans engage in courtship rituals, and social contests. Instead of fighting over grazing territory, they compete for vocational positions/promotions. Its all very civilized, yet very much the same sort of thing that animals engage in except on a much broader scale/spectrum.

BUT, this position is not popular because it puts the 'hero' on the same level as the purported 'villain' (thats why you perceive me as standing on the 'same box' BTW Phil). One can readily observe this to be the case when one (person, camp, etc.) engages in linguistic acrobatics to maintain their 'moral authority', which as I've indicated is a false claim in an amoral world (apologies, I said immoral earlier which was less accurate).

While this dualistic unity cannot change, no one (including me) appears to suggest that the situation/dynamic cannot progress, however in order for that to occur there needs be a bit more honesty from the 'offended' parties, namely by doing an honest assessment of where one's motivations lie (ha!) and can be observed to be operating from a subjective and self-serving manner rather than an objective and evident manner.

So, to readdress the OP of this thread; I agree, the concept of 'Evil' is in fact a psyop, perpetrated by any/every individual/group that has a vested interest in:
A. Being unwilling to recognize their own faults as compared to their counterparty
B. Conditioning individuals to operate from point A.

[Hermit]

(so is good a psyop?)

Are you suggesting that at the root of our concepts of good and evil is a base instinct (meaning that it is the instinct that is underlined here rather than what direction that instinct is moving, or what ends that instinct might be directed)?

In which case, if that is true, wbere does that rank instinct for an evolved consciousness?

(I'm really glad I'm eating my steel cut oats.)

[Phil]

(thats why you perceive me as standing on the 'same box' BTW Phil).

No, I perceive you "on the same box" in the sense that you are proselytizing in the same exact thread--a sort of literal sense, no other reason that. Your ideas actually demonstrate and reinforce a lot of my points in my mind, and as much as I hate to project motivations and intentions like you seem to love to do...I'd guess your motivation/intent is NOT to do that. The "soap box" was just playing off another of what is in imo a poor metaphor.

I believe "civilization" is a manifestation of evil, and it's insane to project it on to the animal kingdom. What exactly do you think the word "civilized" even means?

I do actually agree with your final A/B statements, where the closest thing to "evil" is the sort of psyop that is the condition folks to self destructive/deceptive behavior...despite the fact pretty much everything else you've written seems to be from the sort of mindset that reinforces the ideas that perpetuate that concept

(so is good a psyop?

Maybe we should try to make one...though by my definition we couldn't use deception, so it might not be technically a psyop. But trying to lead others to believe that competition and deception and other forms of intra-species (this is an important point shez, no one but you and your strawmen think regular natural predatory behavior is evil, and I've never seen an ant eat its own) predation are not effective survival methods nor do they enrich life is an activity I enjoy engaging...not to stand on some moral high ground or to appear good or smart or right--I actually believe it is true and worth working toward

And if I'm deceiving myself, well it will probably be blatantly apparent...no verbal acrobatics can change reality. As it stands now, we live in a civilization where the mindsets and behaviors shez so brilliantly describes prevails. And people who are attached to them tend to get upset at the suggestion it can be changed

Or maybe my emotional tone makes my ideas invalid, as he suggests. I'm secure enough to admit a mistake, and I'm continually self reflecting. But I'm also going to share what I believe, while I still do believe it. Everything I think know is suspetible to change

meaning that it is the instinct that is underlined here rather than what direction that instinct is moving, or what ends that instinct might be directed)?

I believe there's beings (who very well could be human in physiology, but have a flaw or condition or virus or something) that have exploited a way to create or manipulate strong emotional attachments to our base instincts, twisting them in ways to cause the behaviors we are talking about to arise

That's where the disagreement is I think, my (unpopular?) idea is that an external concsiousness made decisions/choices that are the CAUSE of the types things most (incorrectly?) associate with "evil". This being(s)/cause is contrary to the accepted belief that It is "human nature": a random mutation in "Darwinian" evolution or original sin or just plain "shittiness of humans".

It is what I consider true evil toward humans. The "causer" itself is not "evil", it is doing what is "good" for it. But it's evil to us, and causes us to make "evil" decisions unwittingly. So if I'm wrong, then doing the healing work, the seeking out of lies we tell ourselves it should lead, the changes in the ways of thinking that may come about from believing something similar to me...if that type of thing happened based on my false premise...well there's your "good" psyop for ya

[Naga_Fireball]

In her book A Swiftly Tilting Planet, Madeleine L'Engle touched briefly on the "shittiness of humans", to borrow your term, when the unicorn Gaudior tells Charles Wallace Murry that most unicorns think humans are dangerous and destructive creatures, leaving only the few unicorns capable of time travel to help the humans..

She deals also with the concept of possible futures outside of God's plan, which she calls " projections", ie the intended future of an evil civilization if it does not first change.

Being like a child does not imply civilization or civility beyond basic human trust, need, and joy. Jesus was not the only teacher but he didn't take crap from his own civilization, although he took pains to avoid bringing Roman authority down on the Jews that he preached to.

Evil might be our attitude about innocence, whether to preserve it or take advantage of it.

[Phil]

Evil is what happened to Jesus when he shook up the money changers in the temple, his overt attempt to effectively change humanity's path away from "civilization" and toward something less anti-life, anti-human

[Hermit]

I've had more time to consider this, and I need to ask a really, really basic question that I think needs to be answered, and maybe is a question I should've asked about 20 posts earlier.

Could someone please define what a psyop is?

Phil, at the heart of what you are saying is I think a really strong, solid explanation of the situation as it exists. (I think the big wigs in academia allude to it as post modernism.) I might use different words to explain it because I'm coming from a theological-philosophical background, but at it's heart we agree almost 100%.

One thing I might observe: it is very easy to state an idea as a means of not taking a stand, but in reality the stand one takes is defined by the ideas one enforces. To do otherwise is simply to become a straw man...or perhaps a hollow man might be a better description. What occurs to me is that deliverance from evil is, to put it simply, to walk away from the easy path that provides one with the needs one thinks one requires and instead takes on a harder, more difficult challenge of discernment: what does it mean to be human, to be spiritual, and to be integrated in a world we have mistakenly believed to be simply material?

Cheers mate.