The Dark Side

Laika · May 28, 2015

hey everyone,

. I'm an atheist but I keep finding myself coming to the view that 'bad is good and good is bad'. This is particuarly to do with being a materialist and therefore placing physical and psychological needs as being more important than 'moral' restriants and this is nihilistic.
In Christianty, a great deal of our natural desires (particuarly sex) are demonised as sinful- yet really this has little to do with the nature of the act and instead more to do with it challanging authority and social norms. pleasure is sinful, but thats no fun.
This view is basically inherited into Liberalism that human nature is inherently selfish and must therefore be subject to checks in competition and limits to power. I'm steadily rejecting a great deal of the 'traditional' morality which is submission to an authority and entertianing some fairly nihilistic ideas as a result given that what 'the powers that be' say is wrong is precisely what they do. The confusion over the sense of right and wrong gives me a lot of headaches and trying to seperate between caring what happens to people and what people think is pretty tough.

Of course, I realised the Left-hand path has been here before and I'm just a late commer to these problems.

You probably know better than answers to these questions, so I wanted to ask;

When you accept no higher authority to judge your actions and to rebel against such power, what do you believe constitutes 'good' or 'evil'? And how is that different from the moral perscription of the authority?

Nakosis · May 28, 2015

You have to come to know yourself, accept yourself. When you're happy find the cause of that. When you are unhappy, understand the cause of that too.

You got to live life according to who you are and not according to being the person you think others think you should be.

Learn who you are and go forth into life trusting that person. It's terrible to go through life trying to pretend to be the person you are not.

Adramelek · May 28, 2015

We who walk the Left-Hand Path consciously separate ourselves from social norms, the conventional, the traditional ebb and flow of society and popular culture, and conventional religion and morality. "Good" and "evil" are not absolutes here, they are purely subjective. Rational self-interest is good for you, it can make you healthy, wealthy, and wise. Keep up the good work Red.

Laika · May 28, 2015

Nakosis said:
You have to come to know yourself, accept yourself. When you're happy find the cause of that. When you are unhappy, understand the cause of that too.

You got to live life according to who you are and not according to being the person you think others think you should be.

Learn who you are and go forth into life trusting that person. It's terrible to go through life trying to pretend to be the person you are not.

Thanks.

that is some good advice.

Adramelek said:
We who walk the Left-Hand Path consciously separate ourselves from social norms, the conventional, the traditional ebb and flow of society and popular culture, and conventional religion and morality.

How do you overcome the peer pressure btw? is it to do with knowing yourself and what you want? it takes alot of guts to be the rebel.

The longer I've been on RF, the more I realised I'm a 'bad' atheist, as it has never been about whether god existed or not for me. The freedom is much more intresting.

Adramelek said:
"Good" and "evil" are not absolutes here, they are purely subjective. Rational self-interest is good for you, it can make you healthy and wise.

This is somewhat my dillemma. as on the one hand I can agree that good and evil are subjective, but you can't rid yourself of the authority without creating new objective ethics which are independent of the will of the maligned authority. A subjective ethic is only a rebellion because it cannot create a new revolutionary order. Or is the power to challange the authority the objective basis for the ethic? it is real because we make it real?

Adramelek said:
Keep up the good work Red.

Your welcome. We both worship the darkness and its freedom in different ways. God must learn his place.

Quintessence · May 28, 2015

Red Economist said:
When you accept no higher authority to judge your actions and to rebel against such power, what do you believe constitutes 'good' or 'evil'? And how is that different from the moral perscription of the authority?

Firstly, @Nakosis made an excellent post on this matter in forwarding that the idea is to be who you are. I'd like to add to that the possibility of rejecting a dualistic framework entirely. In my path, this isn't even a valid question because of that. Just be who you are. Toss moral-based ethics into the trash bin and pick up virtue-based ethics. IMHO, they work better anyway because they're not so... contrived. Further, one can ascribe to virtue-based ethics regardless of adherence or lack thereof to a "higher authority."

Infinitum · May 28, 2015

I don't believe in any absolute rules and am pretty convinced it's impossible to find any. However I've picked secular humanism as my own ethical framework. I don't believe in evil, but I find "good" to be a helpful term. For me "good" is anything that increases happiness and well-being, not just for us humans but for other living creatures as well. I rely on empathy and knowledge to recognize that good, and my good might well be different from someone else's idea of how things should be.

All any of us have in the end is our inner moral compass. Everything else is just an attempt to justify it.

AnnaCzereda · May 28, 2015

Red Economist said:
How do you overcome the peer pressure btw? is it to do with knowing yourself and what you want? it takes a lot of guts to be the rebel.

It does take some guts to be the rebel. Dunno if a lot. That would depend on a situation which you find yourself in. It's easier to stand out from the crowd in a democratic society than in a totalitarian regime and it's easier to speak your mind at home than in public. However, it's a fact (it's even scientifically proven) that nonconformity is painful. Resisting group pressure causes emotional discomfort. It doesn't have to be the big deal but still it's easier and more emotionally gratifying to conform. You have to pay the price for non-compliance. It's often called the pain of independence.

I found this short and inspiring blog about endurance in the face of social pressure:

Do you feel ‘the pain of independence’ sometimes? | Len's Blog

Yesterday, big raindrops began to fall. The rain fell slowly at first; and then with some vigour. I loved the way the rain painted the wooden pillars of our patio; painstakingly drop by drop till finally the pillars were completely drenched. This morning, the pillars were dry again!...
Peer pressure, can be unpleasant and can actually change one’s view of the world. Yet, sometimes we remain uninfluenced and then feel ‘the pain of independence.’ And for all this we don’t often realise that the health of society, depends on dissenting voices.

As far as morality goes, it's better to just rely on your own reason and intuition. I have my principles too. For example, sometimes, it happens that a shopkeeper will give me too much change and I will give the money back not because it's morally wrong and a sin to do otherwise, but because I know that if I don't give her money back, she will have her income reduced, and she has expenses too and family too, and she works her *** off to keep her children fed.

1137 · May 29, 2015

Red Economist said:
Thanks. that is some good advice.

How do you overcome the peer pressure btw? is it to do with knowing yourself and what you want? it takes alot of guts to be the rebel.

We are magicians, if peer pressure is occurring then we are likely the cause. I prefer to let people make their own decisions.

This is somewhat my dillemma. as on the one hand I can agree that good and evil are subjective, but you can't rid yourself of the authority without creating new objective ethics which are independent of the will of the maligned authority. A subjective ethic is only a rebellion because it cannot create a new revolutionary order. Or is the power to challange the authority the objective basis for the ethic? it is real because we make it real?

If all opinions on good and evil are truly subjective, then how can you really challenge that or rebel against that? You simply are aware of it. If you work better with pseudo-objective morals then make a pantheon and command your morals through your gods.

Laika · May 29, 2015

Quintessence said:
Firstly, @Nakosis made an excellent post on this matter in forwarding that the idea is to be who you are. I'd like to add to that the possibility of rejecting a dualistic framework entirely. In my path, this isn't even a valid question because of that. Just be who you are. Toss moral-based ethics into the trash bin and pick up virtue-based ethics. IMHO, they work better anyway because they're not so... contrived. Further, one can ascribe to virtue-based ethics regardless of adherence or lack thereof to a "higher authority."

That is a really good point. I'll have to think on that one as virtue-ethics has always appealed in terms of realising some of my better qualitities.

Infinitum said:
I don't believe in any absolute rules and am pretty convinced it's impossible to find any. However I've picked secular humanism as my own ethical framework. I don't believe in evil, but I find "good" to be a helpful term. For me "good" is anything that increases happiness and well-being, not just for us humans but for other living creatures as well. I rely on empathy and knowledge to recognize that good, and my good might well be different from someone else's idea of how things should be.

All any of us have in the end is our inner moral compass. Everything else is just an attempt to justify it.

AnnaCzereda said:
It does take some guts to be the rebel. Dunno if a lot. That would depend on a situation which you find yourself in. It's easier to stand out from the crowd in a democratic society than in a totalitarian regime and it's easier to speak your mind at home than in public. However, it's a fact (it's even scientifically proven) that nonconformity is painful. Resisting group pressure causes emotional discomfort. It doesn't have to be the big deal but still it's easier and more emotionally gratifying to conform. You have to pay the price for non-compliance. It's often called the pain of independence.

I found this short and inspiring blog about endurance in the face of social pressure:

Do you feel ‘the pain of independence’ sometimes? | Len's Blog

Yesterday, big raindrops began to fall. The rain fell slowly at first; and then with some vigour. I loved the way the rain painted the wooden pillars of our patio; painstakingly drop by drop till finally the pillars were completely drenched. This morning, the pillars were dry again!...
Peer pressure, can be unpleasant and can actually change one’s view of the world. Yet, sometimes we remain uninfluenced and then feel ‘the pain of independence.’ And for all this we don’t often realise that the health of society, depends on dissenting voices.

As far as morality goes, it's better to just rely on your own reason and intuition. I have my principles too. For example, sometimes, it happens that a shopkeeper will give me too much change and I will give the money back not because it's morally wrong and a sin to do otherwise, but because I know that if I don't give her money back, she will have her income reduced, and she has expenses too and family too, and she works her *** off to keep her children fed.

that is actually really helpful as I get that alot of time. the contradiction between our social nature and the need for dissenting voices for a society to grow is one that is hard to solve. the conflict between our own individual standards of good and the 'society's standards of good is very painful as these aren't abstract problems but relationships.

1137 said:
We are magicians, if peer pressure is occurring then we are likely the cause. I prefer to let people make their own decisions.

If all opinions on good and evil are truly subjective, then how can you really challenge that or rebel against that? You simply are aware of it. If you work better with pseudo-objective morals then make a pantheon and command your morals through your gods.

Whilst the experience of our morals may be subjective (the mind?), they have very real consequences in our social relationships. We have a certian ability to chose what our beliefs are but there are constriants on what we can believe, can do and behave. We can chose to break these constriants and rebel, but they still exist regardless as to whether we want them to.
The point you make about peer pressure is intresting, as it is true that our own level of confidence acts as an unconscious que for other people's behaviour.

Adramelek · May 29, 2015

Red Economist said:
How do you overcome the peer pressure btw? is it to do with knowing yourself and what you want? it takes alot of guts to be the rebel.

The more mature and advanced Left Hand Pather has outgrown peer pressure. He knows his self, his mind, his will and doesn't give a damn about what most others might think about him. He has neither the time nor the patience for that kind of mundane nonsense.

"Red Economist" said: This is somewhat my dillemma. as on the one hand I can agree that good and evil are subjective, but you can't rid yourself of the authority without creating new objective ethics which are independent of the will of the maligned authority. A subjective ethic is only a rebellion because it cannot create a new revolutionary order. Or is the power to challange the authority the objective basis for the ethic? it is real because we make it real?[/QUOTE]

Some might say that ethics and virtues are self-determined. I am sort of old fashioned and chivalric, I believe in opening doors for women and helping old ladies across the street.

I cannot stand to see a child or helpless animal suffer, I find murder, rape, thievery to be wrong or "evil", unethical, non-virtuous. I wasn't taught this by some religion, it just seems to be a natural feeling for me, or perhaps it was the way I was raised, I'm really not sure. "Challenging the authority"? I'm not sure what you mean. If your speaking of God, there is no God, so there is no authority, at least in a spiritual sense to challenge or rebel against. Gratification of the ego and rebelling against/rejecting socially established and religious norms i.e. antinomianism are only the first steps into the much larger Universe of the "Dark Side", the Path of the Left-Hand.

Laika · May 29, 2015

Adramelek said:
The more mature and advanced Left Hand Pather has outgrown peer pressure. He knows his self, his mind, his will and doesn't give a damn about what most others might think about him. He has neither the time nor the patience for that kind of mundane nonsense.

Well said.

Adramelek · May 29, 2015

Red Economist said:
Well said.

Hey Red, over the years I have been called by my peers an "*******", as well as, a "genuinely great guy". I think both opinions are accurate.

crossfire · May 30, 2015

Red Economist said:
hey everyone, . I'm an atheist but I keep finding myself coming to the view that 'bad is good and good is bad'. This is particuarly to do with being a materialist and therefore placing physical and psychological needs as being more important than 'moral' restriants and this is nihilistic.
In Christianty, a great deal of our natural desires (particuarly sex) are demonised as sinful- yet really this has little to do with the nature of the act and instead more to do with it challanging authority and social norms. pleasure is sinful, but thats no fun.
This view is basically inherited into Liberalism that human nature is inherently selfish and must therefore be subject to checks in competition and limits to power. I'm steadily rejecting a great deal of the 'traditional' morality which is submission to an authority and entertianing some fairly nihilistic ideas as a result given that what 'the powers that be' say is wrong is precisely what they do. The confusion over the sense of right and wrong gives me a lot of headaches and trying to seperate between caring what happens to people and what people think is pretty tough.

Of course, I realised the Left-hand path has been here before and I'm just a late commer to these problems. You probably know better than answers to these questions, so I wanted to ask;

When you accept no higher authority to judge your actions and to rebel against such power, what do you believe constitutes 'good' or 'evil'? And how is that different from the moral perscription of the authority?

Here's my subjective 2 cents worth from a heretical LHPer:
It's good to explore your dark side.
It's bad if you don't learn from this exploration.
It's good to examine your mental hang ups.
It's bad if you let your mental hang ups overcome your mind.
It's good to know yourself.
It's bad if you can't handle yourself and become your own master.

Mindmaster · May 30, 2015

Red Economist said:
When you accept no higher authority to judge your actions and to rebel against such power, what do you believe constitutes 'good' or 'evil'? And how is that different from the moral perscription of the authority?

Everyone wants to answer the question in some spooky way but the reality is that anyone that is truly on the LHP has replaced their useless moral filter with one governed by a good dose of pragmatism. That's to say social problems are solved in the most reasonable manner by the LHP-type as can be done based on the the relevant information. Of course this leads to the dilemma mostly of what motivates ones character such as hedonism or pleasure seeking, intellectual challenges, or power over others. All of these are allowed within the scope of the LHP because the LHP largely neglects to specify them and allows one to be liberal as possible in that interpretation. Ultimately, it is not that the Lefties will be valueless and immoral people -- it is just where they decided to break the rules it was done because it suits their fundamental nature or is completely necessary; they are not conflicted. They know no cosmic boogieman is coming to settle the score and no karma will come to collect, but they are also aware most people are happy being sheep and without rules they would perish -- not lacking the mental facilities to properly make these decisions. These same sheep are useful as tools to the would-be left-hander so there is no reason to make their lives miserable when they can be useful resources and most of the cruelty in this regard is rather childish. We should help the people who surround us be better sheep or better wolves... Whatever they can handle.

Anton LaVey summed it up pretty nicely:

“When a Satanist commits a wrong, he realizes that is it natural to make a mistake―and if he is truly sorry about what he has done, he will learn from it and take care not to do the same thing again. If he is not honestly sorry about what he has done, and knows he will do the same thing over and over, he has no business confessing and asking forgiveness in the first place.”
― Anton Szandor LaVey, The Satanic Bible

Ultimately, I think this is largely the draw of the left-hand-path past the larval stage (teenagers) in that it is internally consistent -- it is able to co-exist with science and other rational ideas. Your rationality of the matter just indicates that you are breaking free of the dogma that you were supposed to be buying into. Now you are faced with the choice of just denying that fact and going back to sheepville or going further down the rabbit hole. You are aware of the dichotomy you will start to naturally gravitate in this direction more likely than not. When I came to the LHP it was because I was tired of being deceived... Now that being said I think there is great deal of puffing present in The Satanic Bible and generally the types that hit that book overly for information develop inferior character traits. They read Machiavelli's The Prince, and think it's his greatest work -- and fail to realize it is satire and he's making fun the of the De Medici for ruling with an iron fist, and was written after they broke both his arms. His other work was about increasing the rights, power, and freedom of his fellow man. Similar errors reside with Thus Spake Zarathustra by Nietzsche in people cherry picking or twisting it into something cruel and insensitive to justify their character deficits. There is a lot of this going on with the left-hand path... people think this means there are no rules -- no it means the rule of reason... and being unreasonable excludes you from the path..

-Mind

The Dark Side

Laika

Well-Known Member

Nakosis

Non-Binary Physicalist

Adramelek

Setian

Laika

Well-Known Member

Quintessence

Consults with Trees

Infinitum

Possessed Bookworm

AnnaCzereda

Active Member

1137

Here until I storm off again

Laika

Well-Known Member

Adramelek

Setian

Laika

Well-Known Member

Adramelek

Setian

crossfire

LHP Mercuræn Feminist Heretic ☿

Mindmaster

Well-Known Member