The Root of All Evil

It is my view that anyone is equal to any virtue and all peoples seek their good according to what their model of good looks like. The thing that makes possible mans inhumanity to man is that he tells himself it is not me or mine. It takes not religion but misplaced devotion to any idea.

 

Yes, man is the root of all evil. Their justification for committing evil acts is what always gets the blame.

 

Things aren't so "black and white". Bad people can do good things, and good people can do bad things. Plus, what one sees as "bad" or "good" could be seen differently by someone else. To scapegoat "religion" is just an over-simplification, and unscientific thinking.

That would seem counterproductive, for an "atheist" to be unscientific. If you don't believe in God, neither believe in science, what's left?

Truth is truth, wherever it's found. You've got to sort through things to find it.

Don't toss out the baby with the bathwater.

 

Of course you don't have to pick sides. When you do not not the world does not appear point/counterpoint, but consistent in every respect. What we before thought of as contention can be seen to be the high and low variation in bandwidth of the exact same phenomena.

Good and evil then are not different products. They are varieties of a sliding scale of evaluation. Neither are representative of an object as it exists apart from such scrutiny.

There is a whole category of description that accounts for nothing at all.
It is not truly a choice between what is true and what is false. What is false by definition is not true and therefore does not exist. Reality is not opposed to itself.

 

If you do a careful reading of the original mention of "good and evil" in the bible, you'll see that BOTH "good" and "evil" were from the same tree, the "tree of the knowledge of good and evil", in Genesis 2:9. God commands the man, in verse 17, not to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, which brings death.

"But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die."

So, BOTH the knowledge of "good" and the knowledge of "evil" were condemned, being from the same tree.

The reason?

Having the knowledge of good and evil makes man independent from God, now having a source separate from God to base his decisions, his value structure upon.

And consequently, since every man has a different value structure, a different set of definitions for what is "good" and what is "evil", you have, as a result, all the religions of the world, including Christianity, Judaism, Islam, etc, etc, fighting, warring one with another over the different values and definitions of "good" and "evil".

One believes killing is evil, another justifies it, "defenders of the faith". One believes having multiple wives is evil, another, good. I think having multiple wives is its own punishment,,lol.

Innumerable examples of conflicting values, causing mutual suspicion, hatred, killing, wars,,etc.

Religion was invented by God's enemy.

The tree of life represents God as the source of life. Since there can only be one God, by definition, those who take God as their life (in practice, not just in theory) are at peace, both within, and with one another.

The problem arises when people create distinction, identifying others as "different", and "the enemy", based on their own preferred set of standards.

John Lennon was right, in a way, in that without religion, people could be at peace with one another. The problem is that everyone is religious, even if they assert the contrary. Even atheism is a religious stance.

To assert a religious stance sets you apart from others and creates division, though people doing so believe that they are "doing the right thing", either due to their cultural tradition, or influences from without, or even their own religious nature.

Jesus said "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called children of God."

Best to be a peacemaker. Don't take sides, creating controversy.

 

Good to see you're not too ignorant to acknowledge you have some faith as well :sunny:

 

To be consistent, only god is good. The knowledge of good and evil is not knowledge but the idea that it is knowledge gives one the belief that it is actually meaningful to evaluate the world in those terms. It is not. You receive, in turn, only the reflection of your own pronouncements. Our judgements in this vain do not give us information about the world, but only of our own cultured perspective.

It is important to note that cultural tradition in any form is denigrating toward the "other".

 

I have also heard culture is a bad thing. I really love it though, but yeah I also dig religion and sex (and to some extend money is cool too).

 

I've always felt that way, about people celebrating "their culture". It leaves others on the "outside", by default.

But that's easy for me to say, since I don't come from a family that celebrated a particular "culture". I'm of mixed ancestry (aren't we all?), and have almost no idea what "culture" I should be identified with. (I'm not referring to "race", but "culture").

I do, however, strongly identify with a "culture of music", since my parents were opera singers, and our family has always focused on the enjoyment of music.

I hate to imply that celebrating one's culture is a bad thing, and yet it always seems as if the ones doing the celebrating are either pompously displaying some form of superiority, even attempting to "spread" their own culture and cultural values to others, in a seeming attempt to dominate local society, or simply making a statement of isolating independence, in that they refuse to assimilate into the surrounding community, adopting its values as their own.

It always appears that culture and religion do more to separate than to bring together.

 

If religion is the root of all evil, why do non-religious evil people exist?

 

Artistic expression does not need to be separated out culturally, it stands on it's own virtue and doesn't need an antecedent to support it. Music, dress, and food preparation are less than sinister aspects of culture. It is at the level of moral indoctrination or at the level of a sense of worthiness, that cultural traditions betray the common virtues of mankind. Cultural style is not the same as cultural tradition in this respect.

 

Who defines just who is "religious" and who is "non-religious"?

When I speak of "religion", I do not merely include all that 'appears religious'.

Religion and religious attitudes don't have to be clothed in priestly robes or traditional garb, outwardly displaying a "religious" appearance. To be "religious" is simply to have a strict, inflexible, manner of living. Even so-called "liberalism" can become a form of religion, and be promoted with "religious zeal". Atheism can be as religious an ideal as a strict adherence to a "faith" or "code".

Most people are religious in some way, and the ones that aren't are at least influenced by a religious nature. Obsessive-compulsive types tend to be religious, some even having their own "religious" practices, which cause them some degree of comfort, through repetition. The autistic do certain things religiously, in order to feel comfortable with themselves.

To be religious is to be staunch in one's beliefs, though without life. This fosters dead ritualistic practices, substituting these for a living contact with a living God.

God, the living God, has been objectified by religion and religious people. They refer to God a lot, but the life is gone, along with any subjectivity. "Feeling" God or "experiencing" God is foreign to these ones, and considered as contrary to "sound doctrine".

Even people who appear "un-religious" can have some religious tendencies, and based on these, can carry out some aberrant behavior.

 

^ An example of a non-religious person would be an atheist.

Are you saying evil atheists don't exist?

 

If religion did not exist then bad people would not be called evil people. Evil originated from religion and spirituality. In their definition it is a bad imaginary force that transcends the physical world and brain. To a religious person, evil is more than just bad. As an Artiest I use the word to describe extremely bad people or ideas. Faith can manifest some pretty evil actions. Without religion and spiritual fantasies, evil would just be called bad, corrupt, mentally ill, criminally insane... Only people of faith see EVIL as religion defines it, and that gives "Evil" more power and status that it really deserves. Where an atheist would see mentally disturbed, a religious person might see demonic possession or something. That's dangerous thinking that can lead to dangerous actions, and it can also cloud judgement and impede real justice.

 

^ Since the word 'evil' is in the title of this thread, I thought it would be appropriate to use it too. But if you don't want to use the word, that's ok.

So then could we replace the word 'evil' with 'bad?'

The question would then look like this:

If religion is the root of all bad, why do non-religious bad people exist?

How would you answer that question?

 

I never said you can't use the word, only acknowledged there are two meanings. The word originated from the more powerful religious meaning. I did not create the title, but I agree with the title in the sense that religion created the idea of evil and gives bad things more power than they otherwise naturally have. I also see the irony in the ignorance of faith creating it's own oblivious evils. Religion creates supernatural bad, of course natural bad happens naturally. The title is not talking about natural bad, it's talking about religious fantasy, supernatural, super bad, ignorance of faith bad...

 

If 'natural bad happens naturally' then religious influence cannot be a factor in natural badness. Religion therefore cannot be the root of all evil.

 

The root of all badness being it natural or supernatural, profound or mundane, is
perception regarded as knowledge. The root springs from a seed of conception.

 

Again, the whole subject is religious bad, the origin of the word evil. Does obsessing over semantics help distract from the fact that faith is ignorant, dangerous and bad?