The Way, The Truth, The Life

[poorAtlas]

Would it be true to say that light enables life, therefore is synonymous with Good. And therefore darkness must be synonymous with Evil?

 

[BSM1]

Would it be true to say that light enables life, therefore is synonymous with Good. And therefore darkness must be synonymous with Evil?

Maybe you don't understand the premise of panenthism.

 

[poorAtlas]

Maybe you don't understand the premise of panenthism.

I would go with pantheism over panenthism. Maybe your too presumptuous, and slightly insulting. Reality and Divinity being one in the same, the intention of the of the thread would be to establish the nature of right and wrong, and wether it is synonymous to light and dark

 

[Brickjectivity]

Would it be true to say that light enables life, therefore is synonymous with Good. And therefore darkness must be synonymous with Evil?

I like the avatar symbol. What is that called?

Good can be in the dark. For example I can take a walk at night, and its about the same as walking in the daytime. Lets say that light exposes what is good in the dark already.

 

[poorAtlas]

I like the avatar symbol. What is that called?

Good can be in the dark. For example I can take a walk at night, and its about the same as walking in the daytime. Lets say that light exposes what is good in the dark already.

Stoicism is the symbol. I like the night, I like it better with moon"light". But as all of must have experienced a person or being that seem to be inherently evil\dark. Is this natural order of the universe? If so how can we be absolute about what is right or wrong? Or virtuous.

 

[Brickjectivity]

Stoicism is the symbol. I like the night, I like it better with moon"light". But as all of must have experienced a person or being that seem to be inherently evil\dark. Is this natural order of the universe? If so how can we be absolute about what is right or wrong? Or virtuous.

If I stick a pin into a picture of a donkey it hurts nobody in this universe, but there could be a universe where I am doing harm. Take a kind action out of its sentence, put it into another; and it may be unkind.

 

[Jumi]

Too much light isn't that good, better have a good amount. The brightest light is not something we want... so light isn't "good" on it's own. Some light is great.

This laser beam is the brightest light ever produced on Earth | WIRED UK

 

[Treks]

Would it be true to say that light enables life, therefore is synonymous with Good. And therefore darkness must be synonymous with Evil?

Life is an indifferent - a preferred indifferent. But it's not "good" in a moral sense. Likewise darkness is not "evil" in a moral sense. It just is what it is.

Also some critters are adapted to life in darkness (deep sea life, for example).

 

[SalixIncendium]

Would it be true to say that light enables life, therefore is synonymous with Good. And therefore darkness must be synonymous with Evil?

No.

I perceive good and evil to be human constructs that do not exist outside of our egos. Neither is necessary for life to exist.

 

[Treks]

I like the avatar symbol. What is that called?

Good can be in the dark. For example I can take a walk at night, and its about the same as walking in the daytime. Lets say that light exposes what is good in the dark already.

Hey Brick, here's a link to the graphic designer who made the Stoic fire emblem and his page where he explains in detail what all the elements mean - he sure packed a lot of detail into such a slick image.

The Humanist Contemplative Blog: The Stoic Emblem

 

[BSM1]

I would go with pantheism over panenthism. Maybe your too presumptuous, and slightly insulting. Reality and Divinity being one in the same, the intention of the of the thread would be to establish the nature of right and wrong, and wether it is synonymous to light and dark

If I'm not mistaken, both pantheism and panentheism would make questions of 'good' and 'evil' having value as moot. Also, I've always learned the most by not taking things so personally. When you lose the ego, the answers seem to magically appear.

 

[Windwalker]

Would it be true to say that light enables life, therefore is synonymous with Good. And therefore darkness must be synonymous with Evil?

This assumes Evil is a thing. It is a dualistic perspective. In reality, there is no darkness as a thing. There is only light and degrees of light. There is no opposite of light. An absence of light is nothing at all. Darkness is simply the absence of light. You cannot measure nothing. There are no degrees of darkness. All it takes is one single ray of light, no matter how dim, and darkness is becomes light. As the saying goes, "A single candle can illuminate an entire room."

 

[Quintessence]

Would it be true to say that light enables life, therefore is synonymous with Good. And therefore darkness must be synonymous with Evil?

It is as true as you believe that it is.

I very much reject dualism. It doesn't gel well with my being, nor my theology. To be more blunt about it, it wouldn't be inaccurate to say that I hate dualism.

 

[poorAtlas]

If I'm not mistaken, both pantheism and panentheism would make questions of 'good' and 'evil' having value as moot. Also, I've always learned the most by not taking things so personally. When you lose the ego, the answers seem to magically appear.

Assuming lack the understanding of a definition is an insult. And had your statement had nothing to do with the thread

 

[poorAtlas]

It is as true as you believe that it is.

I very much reject dualism. It doesn't gel well with my being, nor my theology. To be more blunt about it, it wouldn't be inaccurate to say that I hate dualism.

I didn't state what I believe. It's not dualism it's the comparison between day and night, to what a dualist religion might refer to as good and evil

 

[poorAtlas]

This assumes Evil is a thing. It is a dualistic perspective. In reality, there is no darkness as a thing. There is only light and degrees of light. There is no opposite of light. An absence of light is nothing at all. Darkness is simply the absence of light. You cannot measure nothing. There are no degrees of darkness. All it takes is one single ray of light, no matter how dim, and darkness is becomes light. As the saying goes, "A single candle can illuminate an entire room."

That light is from fire or heat. Reality is that without heat\fire\light our existence would not be possible. To argue that you or any living in the known universe can survive or exist without it is ludicrous?

 

[poorAtlas]

This assumes Evil is a thing. It is a dualistic perspective. In reality, there is no darkness as a thing. There is only light and degrees of light. There is no opposite of light. An absence of light is nothing at all. Darkness is simply the absence of light. You cannot measure nothing. There are no degrees of darkness. All it takes is one single ray of light, no matter how dim, and darkness is becomes light. As the saying goes, "A single candle can illuminate an entire room."

Hang on " in reality there is no darkness" have you ever turned off a light switch or watched the sun go down?I'm sorry but if that made sense for you to say I'm baffled

 

[poorAtlas]

No.

I perceive good and evil to be human constructs that do not exist outside of our egos. Neither is necessary for life to exist.

 

[poorAtlas]

No.

I perceive good and evil to be human constructs that do not exist outside of our egos. Neither is necessary for life to exist.

Agreed good and evil are human constructs. Are they based in the reality of polar opposites?

 

[poorAtlas]

The reason for the title of this thread and the question asked is to bring into question that the way things are labeled and said could be based in reality and lost in how we misinterpret them. If anyone here thinks they could live without a heat source(this includes your body heat), I would say try it I bet you make it a day before you conclude you need fire. Without the light all we know would parish including deep sea critters and cave dwellers.