Why There Is no Evil

[ExploringReality]

Someone attacking you is only evil from your perspective as a survival organism that has an ego to defend, has self bias and core metaphysical assumptions of the nature of reality. You can skillfully defend yourself from an attacker without projecting evil onto it. Because from the perpetrators perspective or what you call an evil person, they are acting from good intentions from they're point of view no matter how fucked up and twisted it is. They believe they are doing good even if it's selfish and destructive because it serves the egos survival, identity and agenda . So calling someone or something evil inherently is a construct of the ego minds drive to survive because you can't see the infinite diversity of the relativistic nature of reality, only how it serves or threatens you. What you call evil is what doesn't serve your survival or what you believe is good for another. Contemplate that without getting defensive. Try to open your mind that reality has infinite requisite variety and truth doesn't always serve you, you selfish fuck.

This is the insight in a nutshell that I dreamed last night.

Edited Thursday at 09:37 PM by ExploringReality
Misspellings

[Jannes]

49 minutes ago, ExploringReality said:

You can skillfully defend yourself from an attacker without projecting evil onto it.

I doubt that. The rest I agree with. 

[Hojo]

1 hour ago, ExploringReality said:

There is no evil

You can skillfully defend yourself from an attacker without projecting evil onto it.

 

Why not take the knife and slowly carve at their eyeballs? Its good to do that in this theory.

Edited Thursday at 10:39 PM by Hojo

[ExploringReality]

@Jannes

Well, it is possible to master your emotions in such a way that it doesn't compute to a lower mind that you don't need to freak the fuck out and worry in order to get shit done. You can clean up dogshit without projecting your dislikes and fears onto it. You can whoop someone's ass if needed to protect your survival while also seeing the big picture as well. But obviously are you that mindful while in a heated position? Probably not.

[ExploringReality]

@Hojo

Your lost in concepts. Instead of playing arm chair philosophy and hypothetical scenarios, be realistic. Learn how to defend yourself, and if you need to fuck someone up, go ahead, but understand consequences in the relative domain without projecting metaphysical assumptions about good and evil based on your survival as a fictional character.

[Hojo]

@ExploringRealityThe title and content contradict each other. I don't ask for hypothetical I skip the question part and instantly take it to its extreme level to show you you are not being honest and where you arent being honest.

The title says evil dosent exist the content says evil does exist because you cant attack and murder someone you would consider yourself evil if you did and if you do it others should be able to do it.

Im not attacking the statement Im using a hypothetical to discuss what you are saying deeper. Unfortunately when a hypothetical is used most people see these as attacks against their statement.

Literally the question and topic is metaphysical arm chair philosophy so I dont know why you are projecting that.

If you want to say evil dosent exist you would say its okay to attack and murder someone for no reason because why not?

You wouldnt have to strategically defend yourself against attacks to produce as little harm to both parties as possible you could go full primal mode and thats good because evil does not exist.

Edited Thursday at 11:24 PM by Hojo

[ExploringReality]

@Hojo

You're conflating absolute truth with relative truth. You're right in the absolute sense it doesn't matter and you could do whatever you want, but there are consequences in the relative domain and you don't want to be a fool with your actions because there are consequences right? Don't get your panties in a twist because you come across paradox and contradiction. You're trying to act rational and that's why you're going straight to judgment and criticism of what I said

 

[Hojo]

@ExploringReality You are in the relative domain saying there is no evil. Then getting your panties in a twist when I hypothetically question it. And projecting it onto me that I am conflating the two when you are. I asked one question and you claimed I was arm chair philosophizing and being too lost in concepts. You didnt remedy the contradiction and then claimed me to be angry for some reason.

I am saying be realistic you are in the relative domain you need evil to exist to survive. You are the one that is conflating the truth here between truth and relative. I am asking a hypothetical in the relative domain and you are saying it cant be true or to be more 'realistic'. I dont think you understand what you are saying or what the words you are using mean.

If evil stopped existing you would literally forget you exist and you would stop existing.

Edited Friday at 02:06 AM by Hojo

[ExploringReality]

@Hojo @Hojo 

Your lost in concepts. You believe evil exists in an absolute sense. I'm saying there is no evil at all! You saying there is evil is a projection from the human mind. Is a lion eating a gazelle evil for the gazelle or the lion? No! You saying that you need evil to exist is your belief, and you cling to it because that's your ego trying to defend that. If you can't see beyond your perspective, that's on you dude, it's not my job to verify truth for you. Where in the universe is it written that evil exists? 

Edited Friday at 02:10 AM by ExploringReality

[Hojo]

@ExploringReality I am saying the only reason you think you exists is because you believe there is evil and you are lying to yourself.

[ExploringReality]

@Hojo that's an assumption your clinging to

[Paradoxed]

You are right. Evil is a judgment your mind is making- when a lion chases and kills a gazelle, we don't see that as evil. When a lion kills another lion, we don't see that as evil either. Why is it that evil only pertains to humans and their behavior. "Good" is self-justification and "Evil" is what threatens the self.

[ExploringReality]

@Paradoxed @Paradoxed@Paradoxed@ExploringReality@Hojo 

Bingo! That's it. 

[Hojo]

@ExploringReality Humans and animals are not even on the same level. Human evil can far surpass animal. You are putting the most basic survival mechanisms and keeping someone in a basement sexually and mentally abusing them for years in the same basket. A lion cant be evil it dosent have a self to be evil a human is way different.

It only pertains to human behaviour because we can be evil and an animal cant.

Edited Friday at 03:50 AM by Hojo

[Letho]

6 hours ago, ExploringReality said:

Someone attacking you is only evil from your perspective as a survival organism that has an ego to defend, has self bias and core metaphysical assumptions of the nature of reality. You can skillfully defend yourself from an attacker without projecting evil onto it. Because from the perpetrators perspective or what you call an evil person, they are acting from good intentions from they're point of view no matter how fucked up and twisted it is. They believe they are doing good even if it's selfish and destructive because it serves the egos survival, identity and agenda . So calling someone or something evil inherently is a construct of the ego minds drive to survive because you can't see the infinite diversity of the relativistic nature of reality, only how it serves or threatens you. What you call evil is what doesn't serve your survival or what you believe is good for another. Contemplate that without getting defensive. Try to open your mind that reality has infinite requisite variety and truth doesn't always serve you, you selfish fuck.

This is the insight in a nutshell that I dreamed last night.

Alright @ExploringReality, let's break this down with the kind of clarity that makes people rethink their entire framework for understanding reality, no pun intended mate just a bit of encouragement chin up and keep it up .

First, I respect that you’re engaging in deep contemplation about the nature of morality, perception, and self-preservation. That’s a good instinct, examining the constructs of the mind is how we grow. However, every thought is a piece of engineering. If your perspective were a machine, would it actually function in the real world? Let’s stress-test it.

1. You Say Evil Is Just a Perspective. But would That Machine Run Smoothly in Reality?

You propose that evil is merely an ego-driven construct, a relative term shaped by survival bias. But let’s apply this to real-world examples:

Psychopaths & Malignant Narcissists. These individuals lack empathy, exploit others, and often take pleasure in harm. Are they just "acting from their own perspective of good," or do they operate in a way that makes their existence an inherent detriment to societal function? If we drop all moral judgment, does that help us deal with them more effectively, or does it actually hinder necessary self-defense?

Historical Atrocities: Genocide, human trafficking, mass-scale manipulation, if evil is purely subjective, do we simply "understand" the perpetrators? Or is there an undeniable functional reality to their actions being destructive beyond personal perspective? People defensive of 'evil' actions often cite how 'anyone would do it Stanford Prison Experiment, right!', well yes, and no. It's already known that some of those people had propensities, not everyone is different, its a fallacy as you're treating it as if everyone is on an even 'moral playing field', we're not. Some people fragmented hearts, this invariably leads more to evil than it does goodness, there's not much to argue there, given in the opposite we consistently see more of the opposite corresponding behaviours. This is the tripe that's said about pedophiles for example, justifying their actions while ignoring the consequences, aka a standard trait of a psychopath and or psychopathic spectrum, also, forgetting how its already proven now scientifically how people on that corresponding spectrum have much less disgust reactions compared to the general population in the same way that psychopaths are shown to have a much weaker fear reaction. 

If we accept that some behaviors generate disproportionate harm, then "negative energy" is not merely a perspective, it has a proportional relationship to what we commonly call "evil energy". Meaning, something can be objectively destructive, regardless of whether the perpetrator justifies it, and even if we say 'evil is relative', granted, still the absolute correlations still apply and its an omission of rationality to ignore them rather than a reflection of 'higher spiritual logic' by trying to discount these realities, especially when it comes to gaslighting people into the totality of the relative nature to falsely discount where the evidence and contradictions in that paradigm still persist under numerous real life case studies and thought experiments of the mind.

2. Is “Survival Bias” a Flaw, or is It a Necessary Filter?

You suggest that seeing something as evil is just a trick of the ego. But does that mean filtering threats to survival is an illusion? If we apply this thinking in pediatrics, would we tell a child who’s being abused that their suffering is just a matter of perspective? Or do we acknowledge that suffering is real and act accordingly?

At what point does detachment become an excuse for inaction? Are you willing to carry this logic to its conclusion in situations where it actually matters?

3. The Contradiction: If Everything Is Relative, Why Should Anyone “Open Their Mind”?

You end by saying, "Contemplate that without getting defensive." That implies there’s a higher truth you believe people should reach, yet, by your own argument, all perspectives are just constructs. So why prefer yours?

If everything is relative, then relativism itself is just another subjective belief, no more valid than the one you're dismissing. So should we really take your insight as a fundamental realization, or is it just another perspective struggling for survival?

Again @ExploringReality , even though this discussion seems very click baity mate t’s a good thing that you’re questioning the constructs of morality and perception, most people never even try so I really, really want to encourage you even though I'm pretty much past all that now outside of tightening my grip on the 'engineering of things'. The pursuit of deeper understanding is noble, but it’s also a double-edged sword. The more you explore, the more careful you have to be about mistaking the map for the territory. It’s easy to fall in love with our own conclusions, especially when they feel profound. But the true test of any insight isn’t how revolutionary it sounds, it’s how well it holds up against reality.

Keep thinking. Keep questioning. But stay sharp. A mind that is too rigid breaks, and a mind too open leaks. Aim for precision, not just perspective.

[VeganAwake]

Yup,

Nothing is good either! Being good or spiritual is just another attempt to make self/ego feel better about itself!

Ultimately it doesn't matter which direction anything goes because direction is an illusion! Right and wrong are simply concepts created by scared conditioned humans!

Reality is complete chaos or anarchy.....that's why religion was created! Because of fear an illusory dictator or commandments are created!

❤️ 

[Letho]

@VeganAwake Ah yes, the bold proclamation that "nothing matters", ironically delivered with the passion of someone who clearly thinks their point matters. And yet, this very mindset is why people struggling with mental health in this forum don’t receive the compassion they need. Because, after all, why bother if nothing matters?

And look, I get it. This corner of the internet thrives on treating life like a parody as a replacement for real discernment, not to mention the bandwagon effect, where these beliefs spread, get reinforced, and become a self-validating loop in a space with little critical thought. But real insight isn’t found in rejecting everything, it’s in knowing what’s worth keeping.

If direction is an illusion, I assume you wouldn’t mind surgeons operating blindfolded, pilots ignoring altitude, or society discarding laws entirely? But let’s be honest, you don’t live like that. No one does. The moment someone wrongs you, suddenly "right and wrong" become very real.

You haven’t transcended conditioning; you’ve simply swapped one illusion for another. But hey, keep exploring. Just make sure you’re building something real, before you find yourself in the rubble, crying, "It's all an illusion!" only for firefighters, doctors, and the very people upholding society to remind you, quite practically, that it isn’t. Funny how the luxury to dismiss "good" only exists because enough people still choose to be.

Edited Friday at 06:52 AM by Letho

[Yimpa]

Misspellings are evil to a grammer gremlin 

[zurew]

I dont take objective morality or objective evil to be intelligible and its not even relevant in most cases.

 

Whats interesting is that for motivation (to make an agent to do or not to do a particular thing) both subjectivists and objectivists always appeal to the given agent's subjective values and they try to demonstrate to them, that given the agent's values and standards -  it would be in their best interest to do or not to do that thing.

 

The question whether morals are objectively true or subjectively true, doesn't have much bearing on how a given agent behaves. Lets suppose its an objective moral obligation that you ought to rape as many people as many you can. Why would anyone care about this principle, if there is no punishment not abiding by this principle? No one would a give a fuck about it, unless there is a guaranteed punishment for not abiding by it. 

Or lets suppose that there is an objectively true moral principle that you shouldn't kill people for fun. Most people would abide by that principle , but again, not because its objectively true, but because its already aligned with most people's subjective preferences and values.

Even when it comes to views, where God punishes you - the reason why you abide by those moral rules is because you don't want to get punished and not because they are objective (most people couldn't care less, whether those principles are grounded in God's subjective desires or whether those standards are somehow objective , what they care about is the punishment). But punishment can be given by subjectivists too.

Edited Friday at 10:57 AM by zurew

[Breakingthewall]

There are levels of separation and unity. A high level of unity would be, for example, letting them crucify you for the common good and that, a high level of separation would be putting your dick in your 3-year-old daughter's mouth because you're horny.

We call the first energy configuration "good", and we think it is "better", and we call the second energy configuration "evil" and we think it is "worse". For example, we think that it is better to be on a paradisiacal beach with the perfect woman for you and that it is worse to be being tortured with a blowtorch and pliers by psychopaths. You could say no, there is no better or worse, but well, it seems there is.