opinions wanted

Is it me or am i the only one who has come across the idea that there is a definite and neccesary purpose for evil? in contrast to its opposite... good
a great philosopher by the name of Alan Watts once said "you simply cannot have good without bad,", because we would be going against our own natural nature human nature.... our attempts to delete all the bad and save all the good are an pointless attempt to kill something inside all of us......so anyones attempts to destroy the so called "new world order" would only be in vain because there will always be evil in the earth but its ones one decision on which side to fall under.
i believe in revolutions, but revolutions will always be victims of yet other revolutions...good or bad.
anyways just had that on my mind just though id share

I agree in order for there to be good there must be evil. In order to experience happiness you must know what sadness is. Without night there is no day etc

You're not the only one...

I may sound like a buddhist or something, but ow well. I there was only "good", then there will be a protagonist (or antagonist of "good") in the future causing a revolution and turning the world towards evil/"bad". After this... vice versa will occur, a shift from "bad" to "good"... there should be a balance in everything. And another thing, if there was only good/bad, there won't be any chaos..BUT, when a "shift" occurs, the chaos would be more devastating, when there is good and bad..

And it gives people choices... become good or bad. If there was only good or bad... then there isn't much of a choice either.

My 2c

yeah that is actually very buddhist in a way ive been studying buddhism for a while now and it gives much insight on alot of "conflicts" or "concerns" you may come upon that dont require repent or any kind of thoughless, pointless action. ... the japanese call it "the happy balance"

See if you can get ahold of a short story by the author Ursula K Le Guin, called "The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas". It deals with this very idea.

I do agree, though, evil and good are opposites and both necessary, or else neither would exist. Again, take a look at the above story. It's only fiction, of course, but it is so applicable to this discussion that it's almost like it was written just for this post :p

Nete nete, neither this nor that, walk the middle road, be a light unto yourself (without darkness it would be useless), and so many ways of saying the same message, You dont have to be either and to be right in the middle is awareness.

You want my opinion. Get yourself a nice cool pint of Paulander and a good movie and chill out!

^I agree with antar...

I believe we are naturally good and it's the system with live in that brings out, and perpetuates, the bad side of our nature. That bad side is part of our natural protection, and only should come out when we are physically threatened.
We live in a society that is based on control through fear, which creates a feeling of physical threat; we are bombarded daily by our government through the media with warnings of impending threats to our safety.
Terrorism is the obvious one right now, but of course there's the threat of crime, drugs, communists, illegal immigration. The list goes on of false threats used to instill a state of fear, which ultimately brings out these very natures that we consider 'evil', or just bad negative actions and thoughts.

The state plays with us psychological on a constant basis. What was a threat yesterday is replaced with another new even more serious threat every time the old threat looses it's effect. Check your history and you'll find there is always something that we are supposed to be on the edge of annihilation by. Something that usually turns out to be no real threat at all, such as drugs, communists, terrorism etc...

There's more chance you'll get hit by a car, or die from a doctors mistake than any of those other things effecting you. Yet cars are not banned and doctors are barely held accountable.

Science confirms Humans are naturally altruistic

[edit on 22/4/2007 by ANOK]

Do you think it is eaiser to be evil or good? And from my prospective being in the middle is a very lonely place. It is not the popular or proper place to be. It threatens all. The good see you as evil and the evil see you as an insult. Yet I have noticed that neither side really ever thinks that they are the evil. Saints or sinners.

Originally posted by antar
Do you think it is easier to be evil or good?

Well I think in some cases it is easier to be evil because our society, through media and hollyweird, have romanticised evil and made it look cool to be 'bad', and weak to be caring and altruistic.

How many movies do you see promoting peace and cooperation, compared to promoting war and constant struggle?

How often in the mass media do you see alternatives to the society we live in compared to media that perpetuates it?

Why does our society get more violent with every new generation?

Does the media reflect society, or does society reflect media?

I think the later...

great feedback!!!

This society encourages evil. It encourages politicians to be evil, businesses to be evil, religion to be evil. It's much easier to be evil because society is geared that way. It's much easier to stab someone in the back than work with them to create a better world.

That's my two cents.

Evil originates in the heart of man. There is nothing evil that man's heart doesn't make it so.




That's why I'm a stranded hybrid.


For eye has not seen, nor ear heard, and what has not entered into the heart of man is what God has prepared for them that love....


I'm with implied chaos on that one - day, night, sadness, joy etc....All for the glory of man.

From the functionalist perspective of sociological thought, evil serves an important fuction in society.

It rallies groups of people together to help define and enforce norms, mores, and laws. When we, as a community, hear of some evil thing, we then voice our opposition to it so new generations learn what is acceptable and what is not.

It promotes change. Evil acts make many uncomfortable and they add burdens to society that must be overcome. This requires change. Such changes, or evolutions in society, might not take place otherwise because changes are rarely made if everyone is nice and comfortable.

So under this perspective, it is not a waste of time to fight against evil things. On the contrary, it is the fight against them that matters most. In short, evil does serve a function. The function of evil is to cause us to stand up against it.

^Hmmmm I disagree....

Why do we need something to stand up against?

What do you think would happen if society was indoctrinated to wards peace and cooperation, instead of war and destructive extreme competition?

What if our energies were focused on improving society for the good of all, instead of just grabbing what we can for ourselves while we watch society fall apart around us?

Our very nature is perverted just so a few can live in luxury, while we fight the psychological war that the state perpetuates, and the physical battle of just trying to get by.

Well ANOK, I am not much of a functionalist myself. I simply shared the functionalist perspective because it fit the jist of the topic very well.

Your post reflects a conflict perspective, which I do believe is more appropriate in view of power structures and class/status.

I normally approach things from a symbolic-interactionist perspective myself.

The part of functionalism that I do agree with is that we don't usually change anything if we are comfortable with what already is. However, I think it would be great if we were socialized toward peace. Too bad we aren't.

edited for clarity

[edit on 4/23/07 by wellwhatnow]

Originally posted by ImpliedChaos
I agree in order for there to be good there must be evil. In order to experience happiness you must know what sadness is. Without night there is no day etc

I understand that concept, but I am not so sure it is true. The measure of how good or enjoyable something is is not always related to comparing it to a bad experience. For instance, the day is good because of its own merits, just like ice cream and watching fireworks.

Breathing is good as well, but it doesn't mean that we all experience asphyxiation to appreciate it.

I think a world of bliss could exist theoretically without any bad and it would be pretty good!

Originally posted by wellwhatnow
...The part of functionalism that I do agree with is that we don't usually change anything if we are comfortable with what already is. However, I think it would be great if we were socialized toward peace. Too bad we aren't.

I hear what ya saying mate. That definitely applies within our present regime. If we were socialised to wards peace then the need for change wouldn't be as necessary. It's when people get comfortable with what they have within a society that is unbalance and unfair to large groups of society that is the problem.

It depend how you define 'evil' also. I could argue that the system we live in is evil, benefiting the few at the expense of the many, and yet I see only a very few who are trying to work to wards any change (and they are labeled 'hippie scum' or simply nuts by many). The rest of society don't even realise the possibility of change, or alternatives to what we're presented with by the state.
How many people think the society we live in is natural? When in reality it's a perversion, and it's only selfishness, perpetuated by the state and capitalist system, that keeps people from seeing this. The fear, again perpetuated by the state and capitalist system, of becoming destitute keeps people from trying to make change.

So does evil create change, or stop change? I think the later in this case.

What do you think?

"I think a world of bliss could exist theoretically without any bad and it would be pretty good! "


i agree, but only when you see beyond "obstacles' and "differences" such as the race, religion, culture, and background of the masses ......which truly shape most people's lives...we could create a positive utopia there but there would be "needed" for example a source of unity that spiritualy connected us all and there already is .. which most people seem oblivious to.....its the game that shouldn't be treated as one.... the game of life....
we are all in this massive confusion together now remember that!

[edit on 24-4-2007 by _ComplexTactics]

[edit on 24-4-2007 by _ComplexTactics]

[edit on 24-4-2007 by _ComplexTactics]

[edit on 24-4-2007 by _ComplexTactics]

i think that through challenges and by overcoming obstacles we truly evolve,a "warrior" is the most evolved person in my opinion and i concider myself as a warrior,maybe we are not yet ready to comprehend happiness without first a touch of misery-evil