insights on criminals and morality

[Majed]

The reason criminals exist is not because they're immoral but because they're the most moral. So for example a thief justifies theft using morality that he needs to thieve for his family. Or a rapist justifies rape by fulfilling his sexual needs. Or a murderer justify murder by saying the person is so despicable he deserves it. Morality is relative. A meat eater justifies eating meat by saying he needs to feed himself or humans are superior and animals inferior. And a vegan justifies his lifestyle saying that he loves animals and doesn't want them to suffer. It's all relative. For half the population on the planet gay sex is evil and immoral, for the other half gay sex is just love and homophobia is what is immoral. For hitler the jews were an inferior despicable race. For people today hitler was a monster. So you see it's all relative. What we consider criminals don't consider themselves criminals. It's relative.

[numbersinarow]

Other than the behavior of vegans towards meat eaters which might show they are on the same sentience level as the precious animals they cry about you eating these are not examples of morality. You're using morality as just "this is better in x way."

It definitely is relative. But this doesn't mean that someone who uses temporary justifications for what they do is even nearly as moral as someone with a moral system.

[Basman]

"The greatest crimes are not those committed for the sake of necessity but those committed for the sake of superfluity (excess). One does not become a tyrant to avoid exposure to the cold."

-Aristotle

Edited November 30 by Basman

[Majed]

@Basman this desire for excess often stems as an overreaction to a trauma in the past due to a lack in necessity 

[Majed]

@numbersinarow the concept of morality itself is fluid.

[Emerald]

Morality means making an a priori assumption of "This is an absolute good" and "This is an absolute bad"... and is treated itself like a premise. And it can get very arbitrary where the moralistic values have nothing to do with harm reduction.

So, if we use the logic axiom of "If this, then that"... moralistic thinking is like "If wearing green hats is bad, then no one should be allowed to wear green hats."

So, morality is totally arbitrary and based on the assumptions of a particular culture... or a particular individual.

Because of this, I think it's wise to forgo all forms of moralization.

Instead, I prefer to operate off of an ethical framework, where the premise I operate under is to cause as little suffering as possible as an individual. 

So, if we go back to the logic axiom of "If this, then that"... ethical thinking is like "If my intention is to cause as little suffering as possible, then I am wise to avoid engaging in actions that cause unnecessary suffering to others."

And that's really my only one and only ethical compass. 

Moralism leads to arbitrary judgments and demonization... and losing sight of the reason why setting boundaries on our behavior is helpful.

Ethical thinking leads to wise discernment based on the value of loving kindness toward all.

This is useful. But do not fall into the trap of being moralistic about morality and ethics.  

[Leo Gura]

Real morality is about empathy and consciousness.

[Majed]

@Emerald you have to see that the desire to reduce suffering is a bias that won't get you to the highest levels of understanding possible. you have to integrate suffering as part of life and come to peace with it. 

[Majed]

@Leo Gura i think a conscious person would be at peace with the existence of serial killers, wars and genocide. because of understanding and integrating them as just part of life and understanding that they're love. 

[Emerald]

27 minutes ago, Majed said:

@Emerald you have to see that the desire to reduce suffering is a bias that won't get you to the highest levels of understanding possible. you have to integrate suffering as part of life and come to peace with it. 

Though suffering is an integral part of reality, it is wise to aim to reduce suffering as much as is feasible for an individual human being.

It is the integration of human-heartedness and God-mindedness that allows for wisdom to flourish.

To pay no mind to 'down to Earth' wisdom of the human-hearted bias towards reducing suffering is the folly of those hyper-intellectuals who are rich of mind but poor of heart.

Edited December 1 by Emerald

[Majed]

@Emerald at the end of day suffering is still going to happen, and you don't have much control over it. so might as well integrate it as love by understanding the reason behind the suffering, why and how it happens.

[Emerald]

21 minutes ago, Majed said:

@Emerald at the end of day suffering is still going to happen, and you don't have much control over it. so might as well integrate it as love by understanding the reason behind the suffering, why and how it happens.

Integrating suffering is in the acceptance of suffering as an integral part of reality itself, and that mercy and suffering are two sides to one coin. It's like Yin and Yang.

And in this integration, it means to recognize that a world without suffering would be like playing a video game with no obstacles.

But if you apply the perspective of the "game designer" to your gameplay as the "avatar", you will play the game foolishly because you will see negative and positive as relative equals within the gameplay.

And that is the mistake that you are making. You are applying the logic of the game designer to over-write the human-hearted common sense logic of the avatar.

From the perspective of the game designer, you need to program the game with a workable balance of both positives and negatives in order to make a good video game. And the game won't be interesting if it's too easy or too difficult.

For example, if you're the creator of the Mario games... both Mario and Bowser are an integral part of the game play. And you need a Bowser to give Mario a proper obstacle to work against.

So, this is the higher perspective you would need to look at the world from to integrate suffering.

This is what I referred to as God-mindedness because it looks at reality through the eyes of the creator who codes both negative and positive into reality. And it weaves suffering into the gameplay, because it teaches wisdom through contrast.

But if you, as the avatar, engage in the gameplay from the perspective of the video game designer, you will just let Bowser kill you... because it's all an integral part of the gameplay. And you will see no difference between Mario and Bowser and lose the game.

So, don't be foolish and reach for top-shelf God Consciousness truths to over-write more common sense down-to-Earth human-hearted wisdom. It is foolish to always be promoting top-shelf spiritual truths over down-to-Earth practical truths.

Remember... Before enlightenment, chop wood, carry water. After enlightenment, chop wood, carry water.

Instead of Spiritual Bypassing, embrace your humanity and be human-hearted. And to do that skillfully is where you do your best to reduce suffering as much as you can and to spread loving kindness as far and wide as possible.

To operate otherwise is just folly.

Edited December 1 by Emerald

[Miguel1]

1 hour ago, Majed said:

@Emerald at the end of day suffering is still going to happen, and you don't have much control over it. so might as well integrate it as love by understanding the reason behind the suffering, why and how it happens.

Ask yourself:

Why shouldnt we aim towards maximizing suffering?

Why isn’t being tortured 24/7 a good thing?

And then, ask yourself: why should we minimize suffering and aim to reduce it as much as possible?

[Basman]

13 hours ago, Majed said:

@Basman this desire for excess often stems as an overreaction to a trauma in the past due to a lack in necessity 

Excess is a viable survival strategy.

[gettoefl]

11 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Real morality is about empathy and consciousness.

There is evil and there is its opposite, holy.

All of us are tacit agents of evil: I keep myself alive whatever it takes.

This is a hard pill to contemplate and confront.

A self admitted criminal is one of the few who has managed it.

This is half way to rectifying it.

Though the evil rest of us will rather they get life without parole than rectify it.

That way we don't need to look at the evil we wage daily.

Holy is embodying the anathema of evil

a state of consciousness that is naturally empathetic

in addition to knowing that I cannot keep myself alive no matter what.

[Ishanga]

15 hours ago, Majed said:

The reason criminals exist is not because they're immoral but because they're the most moral. So for example a thief justifies theft using morality that he needs to thieve for his family. Or a rapist justifies rape by fulfilling his sexual needs. Or a murderer justify murder by saying the person is so despicable he deserves it. Morality is relative. A meat eater justifies eating meat by saying he needs to feed himself or humans are superior and animals inferior. And a vegan justifies his lifestyle saying that he loves animals and doesn't want them to suffer. It's all relative. For half the population on the planet gay sex is evil and immoral, for the other half gay sex is just love and homophobia is what is immoral. For hitler the jews were an inferior despicable race. For people today hitler was a monster. So you see it's all relative. What we consider criminals don't consider themselves criminals. It's relative.

Wrong again...

Morality yes its relative to one's culture, what we think is wrong another culture may embrace as right, so in some cases Morality is relative, but most all cultures believe the Killing or Stealing from another for one's own good is Morally wrong, and that is what most criminals are up to, but every action, every decision p[l are making can be logically justified today, a rapist can justify his actions of rape against women but that doesn't mean his actions are Moral, is it right to use a woman for Your Own sexual pleasure against her Will? No it is not.. Criminals are doing just that performing actions, justifying it to themselves but using others for their own good and purposes..

Edited December 1 by Ishanga

[Davino]

An interesting insight that I had is that criminals and cops are very alike. I saw in my MMA gym how police officers and criminal-likely individuals hang out and become friends in such environments. It is clear to me now that cops and criminals are psychicly similar and share many tastes.

[Ishanga]

16 minutes ago, Davino said:

An interesting insight that I had is that criminals and cops are very alike. I saw in my MMA gym how police officers and criminal-likely individuals hang out and become friends in such environments. It is clear to me now that cops and criminals are psychicly similar and share many tastes.

The Movie Heat with Al Pacino and Robert Deniro portrays this well, Pacino is the cop Deniro the bank robber, both have crews, both are super intelligence, determined, self centered, focused, extremists in a way, both full of intensity, its just a matter of belief systems and loyalties that separate them....