evil - the big, grand psyop!

"Silence is golden when you can't think of a good answer."
-Muhammad Ali
User avatar
Shezbeth
Posts: 248
Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2015 7:52 pm
Location: WA State
Has thanked: 249 times
Been thanked: 310 times
Contact:

Re: evil - the big, grand psyop!

Post by Shezbeth »

Phil wrote: If the individual in question appears to like to eat/kill/rape whatever it is that it is acting upon, it would behove the other individuals in the scenario to not take it personally and fear the individual as “evil”…objectively, as a survival mechanism, it seems true that it would be helpful to not view through the “lens of evil” that shez projects for his argument.

All the semantics in the world doesn’t change the fact that for the most basic survival of self and species, those individuals should view the original acting individual as not beneficial, to be avoided or removed from their reality. That, in itself, may be viewed as “evil” to that actor…but again, verbal acrobatics doesn’t change the fact that anti-life views or choices exist, outside of those actor...which is external to the other individuals as well.
Oh you abyssmaly thick bastard. <facepalm> I'll use your OWN words this time. This is how it SHOULD read:
If the individual in question appears to like to eat/kill/rape whatever it is that it is acting upon [...] those individuals should view the original acting individual as not beneficial, to be avoided or removed from their reality.
THAT IS PRECISELY MY POINT. I'm pretty sure everyone ELSE gets that! You seem to be the only person who needs THAT bit spelled out for them. It doesn't TAKE authoritarian dictation to indicate that there are elements and behaviors that are unacceptable, but that does not make them objectively a moral issue, as morality is subjective, hence my contest of the concept of 'evil'.

I point to animalistic behaviors to indicate that they ARE a part of functioning species, but do NOT misconstrue those statements as "If animals do it its okay". Quite the opposite, I'm saying that "If animals do it, it is a natural aspect of a living organism or intersocial system, but animalistic behaviors and such are NOT necessarily something that humans can support or agree with". FURTHER, I'm suggesting by way of indicating backward (QUITE backward IMO) societies that believe in and engage in atrocities and barbarism would have no PROBLEM supporting rape, etc., and would find THOSE acts perfectly 'moral', which is a clear indication that PEOPLE cannot always be trusted to have the best interests of themselves or the masses.

HENCE one CANNOT OBJECTIVELY use the term 'evil', as it is bandied about with such liberality that it becomes completely useless.

[youtube]https://youtu.be/eJQHakkViPo?t=9m22s[/youtube]

Start at 9:22 to get my point on this, but the whole dialogue is pretty sound IMO.
http://shezbethblog.wordpress.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"I have no flaws...

... except one: I lie too much" - Ilya Alekseyev
User avatar
Phil
Posts: 476
Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2015 5:40 pm
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 859 times

Re: evil - the big, grand psyop!

Post by Phil »

Well genius, show me where I indicated anything different than this: HENCE one CANNOT OBJECTIVELY use the term 'evil', as it is bandied about with such liberality that it becomes completely useless.


I'm fairly certain I repeatedly stated it was a relative (which would indicate non-objectivity), in some way, in nearly every post.

...And defining what exactly we consider "evil" relative to us is useful, to those of who care about others, and life on this planet.
What is the purpose of your presence?
User avatar
Shezbeth
Posts: 248
Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2015 7:52 pm
Location: WA State
Has thanked: 249 times
Been thanked: 310 times
Contact:

Re: evil - the big, grand psyop!

Post by Shezbeth »

Well dumbass, pages 2-5. Each page is - at some point - sprinkled with an assertion of what 'Evil' is, either in general or 'to you'.

The latter cases appear subjective on the surface, but unerringly reaffirm the objectivity of the term 'Evil', which has been the point I have been railing against this entire time.

I don't contest countless descriptives; adverse, malevolent, malicious, non-conducive, predatory, offensive, etc. ad nauseum, because those are evident and objective descriptives. One can observe/evidence malevolence, predation, offensiveness, adversity, etc.

'Evil' is a different beast, in that it means whatever is contrary to the speaker (I think I've mentioned that already,... pretty sure I mentioned that already).

Simply put, 'Evil' as an objective concept is a LIE; a misinterpretation of context and intent (either 1st hand OR observed). Weren't you going on about lies being,... oh nevermind, carry on with whatever. I can see now that 'Donk' refers to the sound of a coherent thought bouncing off your formidably pressure-sealed cranium.
http://shezbethblog.wordpress.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"I have no flaws...

... except one: I lie too much" - Ilya Alekseyev
User avatar
Phil
Posts: 476
Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2015 5:40 pm
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 859 times

Re: evil - the big, grand psyop!

Post by Phil »

That's exactly why I picked donk, that and I donk around the forum making a fool of myself, looking like a dumbass. I donk around within my posts too, that's why it takes like 8 edits to make a thought of mine semi-coherent.

Anyway, now I understand it makes you upset that I'm fine with using an objective perspective toward the concept of "evil to humans". I live in a reality where if we (humans, actual ones that exist as you and I do right now) came upon a group (like your straw men) raping each other in a "not-objectively-evily" way that you fantasize...sorry theorize...about, I'm going to have the problem with the human that's NOT making a moral judgment about their behavior, that's standing back and accepting it into their reality objectively.

I'm not saying this to look better or superior or smarter than anybody, it's what I believe...you're mindset seems as toxic to me, as mine seems stupid to you. You can keep pretending like I don't understand it...but I'm pretty sure I get it.
What is the purpose of your presence?
User avatar
Shezbeth
Posts: 248
Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2015 7:52 pm
Location: WA State
Has thanked: 249 times
Been thanked: 310 times
Contact:

Re: evil - the big, grand psyop!

Post by Shezbeth »

And - par for the course - you either misinterpret or misrepresent my position (character-assassination much?), ironically while asserting that you 'get' it, whiles suggesting fantasizing? Wow,... the self-interested dogmatism is truly astounding.

Let us say that I'm walking up on your 'raping ppl' group. You know what I DO do? Beat the holy hell out of them (holy being an emphasis term, not to imply religion or anything like that); for one that's a clear case of zombies, and for two, raping is reprehensible. You know what I DON'T do? Attempt to claim that there's any sort of objective morality to the situation OR to my response. This gets back to my point earlier about 'evil' and objectivity, the individual who chooses to act is responsible, and its not a matter of 'morality' or anything like that. They (YOUR strawmen) chose to engage in reprehensible behavior, and I chose to respond in a manner that I felt was approrpriate given the individual violations (lit and fig) I observed; morality or objectivity need not apply.

So if I interpret your position correctly, if you walked up on me responding to the raping, your problem would be with ME because I DIDN'T engage in moral judgement?
http://shezbethblog.wordpress.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"I have no flaws...

... except one: I lie too much" - Ilya Alekseyev
User avatar
Phil
Posts: 476
Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2015 5:40 pm
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 859 times

Re: evil - the big, grand psyop!

Post by Phil »

Fuck no my brotha!! I would stand back in awe staring slack-jawed at your wicked zombie ninja skills, and ask you to explain more clearly your views on amorality and objectivity while you were cleaning your sword.
What is the purpose of your presence?
User avatar
Hermit
Posts: 286
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2015 8:29 pm
Location: Canada
Has thanked: 322 times
Been thanked: 500 times
Contact:

Re: evil - the big, grand psyop!

Post by Hermit »

Simply put, 'Evil' as an objective concept is a LIE; a misinterpretation of context and intent (either 1st hand OR observed).

Let us consider this:

Simply put, 'Good' as an objective concept is a lie, a misinterpretation of context and intent (either 1st hand or observed).

When I consider both of these, what I notice about both is that there is an attempt to remove judgement from the equation. Namely, one simply observes. Or sits on the fence.

I submit one may attempt to do this, but the vast majority (in fact, I submit 100% of the human population) simply cannot accomplish this without using discernment. When one says that E or G is untrue because it is a misinterpretation of context or intent, either first hand or observed, one fails to recognize a fundamental conflict: namely, in order to have any kind of interpretation of context or intent, one must first have a base of context in which to judge, to interpret, or misinterpret.

1. Human beings have an innate concept which they use to interface with reality. This innate concept is modified as the individual grows, matures, and interacts with the world.

2. In order to be able to misinterpret context or intent, one must concede that there is a correct or incorrect interpretation of context or intention.

3. Correct or incorrect indicate that there is a true or a false value.

4. In order to have an objective belief about an idea of truth or falsehood, one must have a priori knowledge of what truth or falsehood is. In one way of thinking, this is impossible because objective knowledge of certain ideas is impossible, but must be accepted as a subjective idea.

5. I have subjective knowledge about many things that I cannot prove objectively. David Hume addressed this in talking about miracles with specific attention to (would you believe) scientific knowledge. Here's how this goes. Although we have knowledge about things like gravity, for example, this is actually in truth subjective belief. When I drop my pen, it falls and it hits the table. I believe, because this has been reproduced over and over, that this will in fact happen again. But the reality, as Hume points out, is that we have to have subjective believe about gravity because (in fact) we do not know with absolute certainty that the pen will fall the next time I drop it.

6. We have subjective knowledge about other things in which we have certainty, even though the knowledge we have is subjective. Numbers, for example. As I wrote to a colleague of mine recently, although it is very difficult to prove that the idea of the number one would cease to exist if all human minds ceased to exist, it seems to me that I can be justified in believing that it would, and that it did before there were minds to conceive it. You can, of course, simply not believe in the number one.

7. We have subjective knowledge about even more personal ideas, like our own minds. I submit we cannot have objective knowledge of mind. We can measure waves in the brain using scientific equipment that indicate electrical current in the synapses, but case studies have demonstrated that even with the cessation of brain activity, *mind* activity continues.

8. So here's the problem I need to submit to this conversation. Even though good and evil may be suggestive ideas, the premise you're using to define your terms involves objective concepts, or ideas, which I would suggest are in fact incorrectly defined. What you're saying implies that the statement you are making, that evil as an objective concept is a lie, is not in fact subject to objective thought.

So, to put it simply, subjectively your statement has no legs to stand on unless you suggest that it is in fact based on objective ideas. In which case, are you suggesting that good and evil, truth and lies, are in fact objective?

A sound has no leg to stand on my friend, and I find the repeated use of ad hominem attacks against Phil not only revolting but bellow your abilities. In fact, I believe what we've witnessed here isn't as much of a conversation as it is bullying.
Ingressum instruas, progressum dirigas, egressum compleas.
User avatar
Naga_Fireball
Posts: 2012
Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2015 6:22 pm
Location: earth
Has thanked: 1751 times
Been thanked: 1566 times

Re: evil - the big, grand psyop!

Post by Naga_Fireball »

Evil is dependent upon power structure as well. Absolute power corrupting absolutely etc. The power to do great things for good or ill, yada yada.

Brother harming brother sucks but is understandable due to sibling rivalry. Deviation beyond rational expectations of society is often considered evil. Here I mean not petty things like cursing or tattoos, but child abuse and date rape and the other "crimes of opportunity" difficult to justify in the eyes of society/religion/visceral instinct..

I need to finish reading hermit's post lol but needed to share before forgetting.
Brotherhood falls asunder at the touch of fire!
He finds his fellow guilty of a skin
Not coloured like his own, and having power
To enforce the wrong, for such a worthy cause
Dooms and devotes him as his lawful prey.
~William Cowper
User avatar
Shezbeth
Posts: 248
Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2015 7:52 pm
Location: WA State
Has thanked: 249 times
Been thanked: 310 times
Contact:

Re: evil - the big, grand psyop!

Post by Shezbeth »

... and again I point out that there are societies in which child rape - as one such example - are customary. Oh, you DIDN'T know about Afghanistani (NOT exclusively, but a childhood friend has first-hand testimony so I'm focusing on them) men and their penchant (read: culturally/socially accepted practice) for raping boys? You should read more.

Alright look, everyone has their opinion on what 'is' evil, but there is no consistent opinion. What's more, an individual's opinion - no matter how collectively agreed upon - is not an argument.

I have yet to see my argument refuted; that 'evil' is what people refer to the actions which they oppose as, usually with the intent to moralize the discussion and in so doing demonize whatever is receiving the label. I assert that it is far easier for people (who 'naturally' want to see themselves as 'good') to decry something/someone else as evil, but quite simply this is intellectual laziness.

Don't feel bad though, no one at Avalon could manage either. Far easier to play games with rhetoric about how 'this position is what enables evil',... blah blah blah.

P.S. For all the idiots in the audience, I'm not saying that what is usually called (by the ignorant) 'Evil' is not horrible, etc., nor that it should be tolerated/accepted/unopposed; I'm simply putting to rest this notion that 'evil' is anything BUT a convenient and lazy way of denouncing something/someone rather than doing any empirical observation/analysis.
http://shezbethblog.wordpress.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"I have no flaws...

... except one: I lie too much" - Ilya Alekseyev
User avatar
Eelco
Posts: 459
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2015 6:12 pm
Location: Gaia
Has thanked: 274 times
Been thanked: 785 times

Re: evil - the big, grand psyop!

Post by Eelco »

Ichneumonidae is a family of parasitic wasps, and one of my particular research interests. If you’ve never heard of a parasitic wasp before, think chestburster from Alien, but for insects. A more scientific definition is that parasitoid wasps lay their eggs inside or on top of other insects; those eggs then grow and develop by feeding on their host’s tissue, resulting in the eventual death of the host.
Well that's nature for ya.

So good and evil are social and or cultural phenomenon?

I agree that people can and will see different things as being acceptable or not. That said i do believe ,so there is no hard proof or refutation there, that every human being is capable of projecting what they would want to happen to her or himself unto its fellow human being.
No parent will happily allow the rape of their own child. Not unless culture had prepared him or her to think for such an event.

With Love
~ “for what it's worth”~
~Placebo~
Post Reply

Return to “General discussions”