Nothing Exists

[The Sum of Awe]

Nobody can be evil, evil doesn't exist, only things that are less happy than another, but even that is subjective. It seems that everything is subjective. There is an objective reality, but it seems that we are living in a dream, and that dream is subjectivity. Subjectivity is the house, objectivity is the world, and we're all living in the house.

Sight is even subjective. The colours we see are just part of the human eye view at the light spectrum, non-humans that can see beyond black and white probably see things in different colour, some may have similar sight, but still it isn't objective.

Emotion, good and evil, perspective, sight, sometimes sound, etc. It's all just in our mind, how our mind interprets it. Yes, there is an objective reality, but basically our subjective mind hides us from it.


I hate when people always talk about good and evil, how to make everyone happy... It's not going to work, the closest we can get is just not being unhappy, though even that isn't happiness, rather it is only possible by not having thoughts on things, equilibrium.

 

[sandandfoam]

Nobody can be evil, evil doesn't exist, only things that are less happy than another, but even that is subjective. It seems that everything is subjective. There is an objective reality, but it seems that we are living in a dream, and that dream is subjectivity. Subjectivity is the house, objectivity is the world, and we're all living in the house.

Sight is even subjective. The colours we see are just part of the human eye view at the light spectrum, non-humans that can see beyond black and white probably see things in different colour, some may have similar sight, but still it isn't objective.

Emotion, good and evil, perspective, sight, sometimes sound, etc. It's all just in our mind, how our mind interprets it. Yes, there is an objective reality, but basically our subjective mind hides us from it.


I hate when people always talk about good and evil, how to make everyone happy... It's not going to work, the closest we can get is just not being unhappy, though even that isn't happiness, rather it is only possible by not having thoughts on things, equilibrium.

I agree that, to us, all is subjective.
That includes happiness. In my subjectivity happiness is real. Matter of fact, I suspect that there is something transcendant about laughter.

 

[Boethiah]

One doubts what they perceive because one perceives with their senses, which can fool the person doing the perceiving. One also doubts what they perceive because he has nothing physical to compare. This how I view reality philosophically.

Evil is tougher to tackle. However, if one looks at good/evil like he does the law, it is much easier. Evil is simply anything that breaks a certain morale code.

If theft is against the law, a man who steals a piece of candy has broken the law. A man who robs a bank breaks the law. Are their crimes the same? Same classification, different level. A court probably wouldn't charge the man who steals a piece of candy as much as the bank robber.

If one morale code does exist, and there is some sort of judging force in the world to say "This is more than that, etc", then it is very easy to say what is evil and good. If more than one moral code exists, it becomes more complicated. If there is no cosmic judge, it becomes even more complicated.

If a government convicts people of crimes in a nation, there is law and order. If there is a God that "convicts" people of "sins" in the world, there is spiritual law and order. When one removes the government from a nation, a state of anarchy exists. It depends on the people to either band together and defend each other, or everything falls apart.

If there is no cosmic judge, people must band together similarly. Evil may not be definable, and it may be subjective and open to interpretation, but there seems to be a consensus of what is generally good and generally bad.

That's how I see it. It is quite early, so I'm sure there are holes in my reasoning.

 

[Onkara]

There is only subjectivity. The problem of evil arises when we take objects to exist objectively i.e. independently.

Nothing has the ability to exist independently of something else. We create a duality if we think that some form of objective truth exists outside ourselves (independent of the subject). With the creation of duality we give room for desire, fear, attraction and replusion to take hold as something real. We then act on these sensation and that action and its reaction is judged as good or evil.

 

[Willamena]

Everything is relative. But even the subjective perspective doesn't disqualify things from existence.

 

[Gjallarhorn]

Nobody can be evil, evil doesn't exist, only things that are less happy than another, but even that is subjective. It seems that everything is subjective. There is an objective reality, but it seems that we are living in a dream, and that dream is subjectivity. Subjectivity is the house, objectivity is the world, and we're all living in the house.

Looking out the windows but never able to go out the door...

Sight is even subjective. The colours we see are just part of the human eye view at the light spectrum, non-humans that can see beyond black and white probably see things in different colour, some may have similar sight, but still it isn't objective.

Well, not "beyond black and white", but see into infrared and ultraviolet. A few humans can as well. (By the way, you're not British :sarcastic)

Emotion, good and evil, perspective, sight, sometimes sound, etc. It's all just in our mind, how our mind interprets it. Yes, there is an objective reality, but basically our subjective mind hides us from it.


I hate when people always talk about good and evil, how to make everyone happy... It's not going to work, the closest we can get is just not being unhappy, though even that isn't happiness, rather it is only possible by not having thoughts on things, equilibrium.

There are ways to make the majority happy, if you exclude the minorities of sadists, masochists, serial killers, and schizophrenics.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

(By the way, you're not British :sarcastic)

Just seems to fit.

There are ways to make the majority happy, if you exclude the minorities of sadists, masochists, serial killers, and schizophrenics.

If you exclude too many minorities, you are soon excluding a majority.

 

[Gjallarhorn]

If you exclude too many minorities, you are soon excluding a majority.

Therefore we should cater to the mentally unstable when defining what is best for us all. Brilliant!

 

[The Sum of Awe]

Therefore we should cater to the mentally unstable when defining what is best for us all. Brilliant!

They also know what is best for us all (in their mind) therefore what is best for us all is subjective also.

 

[Many Sages One Truth]

I would argue that what we experience here does exist to an extent, but it's an illusionary existence. It's like being in a house with a projector on, so you think the house is beautiful, but when someone turns off the projector the house is old and dirty. This reality is a projection of our minds, but the house is real. '

As to rather or not good and evil actually exist, evil may not exist in the highest reality, but it's a necessary term in this existence by which we describe something that is damaging to life as a whole. When we damage something, we're damaging ourselves and God, as we're all one in God, which is the true reality.

 

[Gjallarhorn]

They also know what is best for us all (in their mind) therefore what is best for us all is subjective also.

Subjective, but not as valid. People with testable mental disorders are not on par with someone with an unblemished psyche. By your logic, there is no difference between a blind person leading people through rough terrain and someone with perfect sight leading.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

Subjective, but not as valid. People with testable mental disorders are not on par with someone with an unblemished psyche. By your logic, there is no difference between a blind person leading people through rough terrain and someone with perfect sight leading.

Rather, by my logic, there is no such thing as perfect sight leading.

 

[Gjallarhorn]

Rather, by my logic, there is no such thing as perfect sight leading.

Which is obviously not the case. There are ways of testing vision. There are ways of testing mental capability. If given the choice, you will take the one that had better results and use them.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

I would argue that what we experience here does exist to an extent, but it's an illusionary existence. It's like being in a house with a projector on, so you think the house is beautiful, but when someone turns off the projector the house is old and dirty. This reality is a projection of our minds, but the house is real. '

As to rather or not good and evil actually exist, evil may not exist in the highest reality, but it's a necessary term in this existence by which we describe something that is damaging to life as a whole. When we damage something, we're damaging ourselves and God, as we're all one in God, which is the true reality.

Let's say a man has a censor built around his heart that once it stops for five seconds, the core of the earth expands from a magnetic force attracting it toward the Sun.


He just wants to get what he wants, when he wants it. He turns the world into slaves, and the slaves were going beyond what he forced them to do to keep him alive longer, because once he died, they all did.

He cut down science and education so they could not glitch him, along with communication so they did not have plans.


Would it be good to let him die or would it be good to let the world suffer?


The answer is subjective. Some people prefer suffering over death, others prefer the opposite.




If I am supporting homosexual rights, a conservative is against my case and is really depressed by it... Am I doing the right thing? That is also subjective. According to the conservative, I am not doing the right thing. According to the homosexual, I am doing a good thing.



The problem is, there are different groups, one chooses one thing over another, and the other group choose the another over the one thing.

 

[Requiem]

It's not going to work, the closest we can get is just not being unhappy, though even that isn't happiness, rather it is only possible by not having thoughts on things, equilibrium.

If you accept that happiness is subjective why are you theorising a collective way for everyone to reach it, are you aware your view itself is subjective? Embracing subjectivity would imply accepting all its different forms and you're talking about happiness like it is objective :sarcastic

Subjective, but not as valid. People with testable mental disorders are not on par with someone with an unblemished psyche. By your logic, there is no difference between a blind person leading people through rough terrain and someone with perfect sight leading.

Your methods of testing are conditioned and so are you. You can choose to believe it has objective validity but it really depends on you and other people who share your view. I'm guessing that's his point?

 

[Gjallarhorn]

Your methods of testing are conditioned and so are you. You can choose to believe it has objective validity but it really depends on you and other people who share your view. I'm guessing that's his point?

True, but they are better than walking around claiming "Everyone's right!"

It's the problem of modern art and philosophy.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

If you accept that happiness is subjective why are you theorising a collective way for everyone to reach it, are you aware your view itself is subjective? Embracing subjectivity would imply accepting all its different forms and you're talking about happiness like it is objective :sarcastic

I'm not finding a way for everyone to reach it.

It isn't really subjective, it isn't stating opinions.

Happiness is not objective, therefore does not exist.

 

[Gjallarhorn]

I'm not finding a way for everyone to reach it.

It isn't really subjective, it isn't stating opinions.

Happiness is not objective, therefore does not exist.

That's false. Just because something isn't objective in the universal sense, doesn't mean it isn't subjectively real. What I mean is, just because someone finds pleasure in something that others do not, it doesn't mean they aren't experiencing happiness.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

That's false. Just because something isn't objective in the universal sense, doesn't mean it isn't subjectively real. What I mean is, just because someone finds pleasure in something that others do not, it doesn't mean they aren't experiencing happiness.

I mean objectively real...

Subjectively real is just a state of mind, basically like an illusion.

 

[Gjallarhorn]

I mean objectively real...

Subjectively real is just a state of mind, basically like an illusion.

Happiness is the release of endorphins in the brain. This is objectively true. The methods of releasing them is not.