Illusions of Good & Evil

[blü 2]

Good and Evil are Illusions.

If two countries are at war.. The media on one side portrays the other as evil and wrong doing.
...And the opposing countries media shows the former as evil and wrong doing.

So, what's good? What's evil?

Isn't it strictly perception?

There's no ultimate world judge so who is to say? Shouldn't we all embrace our own light and darkness?

Humans have evolved moral tendencies appropriate for gregarious primates. They allow us to live together in tribes, and to benefit greatly from cooperative action. Specifically, they're child nurture and protection, dislike of the person who harms, like of fairness and reciprocity, respect for authority, loyalty to the group, and a sense of virtue/self worth through self-denial. The rest of our morality may be more various, since we get it from our upbringing, culture, education and experience. However, it's all influenced by our ability to feel empathy through our mirror neurons, and our evolved conscience, the feeling that some of our statements are not just personal views but rules of universal application (even though it's rare for any two people to have the same list of such rules.)

So no, there's no ultimate judge, and moral questions can be very complex and involve difficult conflicts, but they exist within evolved social structures with shared tendencies, so it's not all jungle out there.

 

[Jos]

So no, there's no ultimate judge, and moral questions can be very complex and involve difficult conflicts, but they exist within evolved social structures with shared tendencies, so it's not all jungle out there.

Yes but is it objective or just shared subjectivity or furthermore is it all illusory since nature is morally indifferent and morality doesn't exist in nature?

 

[blü 2]

Yes but is it objective or just shared subjectivity or furthermore is it all illusory since nature is morally indifferent and morality doesn't exist in nature?

The tendencies I mentioned are evolved behavioral traits of humans. Being tendencies, they'll be more evident in some people than in others, and in the case of people short on mirror neurons or lacking them, they won't necessarily be present at all.

But in the great majority of individuals the genetic tendencies (as distinct from the moral views that are acquired / learnt) will be objectively present. All mammals, and a great many other species, nurture and protect their offspring. Dislike of the one who harms, and like of fairness and reciprocity, for example, have been demonstrated in experiments with small children, even in preverbal infants. Respect for authority and group loyalty are shown by the sheer number of ways humans organize as groups ─ the one human functioning cooperatively in a family, in a workplace, in a sports club, at a church group, as a volunteer, and so on; and groups of humans as partners, neighbors, communities, businesses, charities, churches, armed services, and so on. It also explains both good and bad leadership. (Other primates organize in family groups, only rarely otherwise.)

So it's not illusory. It's behind the orderliness of our societies ─ and at the same time the examples of disorder, criminality &c, show that human existence isn't that simple.

 

[Jos]

The tendencies I mentioned are evolved behavioral traits of humans. Being tendencies, they'll be more evident in some people than in others, and in the case of people short on mirror neurons or lacking them, they won't necessarily be present at all.

But in the great majority of individuals the genetic tendencies (as distinct from the moral views that are acquired / learnt) will be objectively present. All mammals, and a great many other species, nurture and protect their offspring. Dislike of the one who harms, and like of fairness and reciprocity, for example, have been demonstrated in experiments with small children, even in preverbal infants. Respect for authority and group loyalty are shown by the sheer number of ways humans organize as groups ─ the one human functioning cooperatively in a family, in a workplace, in a sports club, at a church group, as a volunteer, and so on; and groups of humans as partners, neighbors, communities, businesses, charities, churches, armed services, and so on. It also explains both good and bad leadership. (Other primates organize in family groups, only rarely otherwise.)

So it's not illusory. It's behind the orderliness of our societies ─ and at the same time the examples of disorder, criminality &c, show that human existence isn't that simple.

Ok so they're objectively measurable and thus in a sense morality objectively exists but one thing I don't understand is how a mindless process like evolution implanted these traits in humans?

 

[blü 2]

Ok so they're objectively measurable and thus in a sense morality objectively exists but one thing I don't understand is how a mindless process like evolution implanted these traits in humans?

I'd say the way to address that question is to take each tendency and look at how it promotes survival and breeding, the essence of evolution. If tendency A allows cooperation, then a tribe that can eg fight cooperatively is likely to beat one that can't, or does it less well. So respect for authority and group loyalty would on this hypothesis be selected for ie those with the trait would be more likely to survive long enough to have descendants and to pass the trait on to them. And so on through the list.

On the other hand, learnt morality ─ how to behave at a wedding, or naming, or funeral, or dinner, or to strangers &c &c ─ may be as variable as cultures. At the wedding, is a brideprice, a dowry, gifts to in-laws, necessary, such that their omission will draw negative social judgments and consequences down on the one who doesn't conform? May you spit, and if so, in what circumstances? Do you hold your knife and fork in the approved manner, or does failure to do so draw a judgment that you're a social inferior?

So these don't appear to be traits that are selected for. They instead reflect other aspects of how humans interact, create their space, obtain status or lose it, and so on. That is, humans are gregarious and capable of cooperation so are tribal; and questions of interaction and of status will inevitably arise ─ in these examples there isn't a single best way to act, but there's likely a local one.

 

[74x12]

Good and Evil are Illusions.

If two countries are at war.. The media on one side portrays the other as evil and wrong doing.
...And the opposing countries media shows the former as evil and wrong doing.

So, what's good? What's evil?

Isn't it strictly perception?

There's no ultimate world judge so who is to say? Shouldn't we all embrace our own light and darkness?

Propaganda and disinformation from world governments is not a reason to conclude that good and evil is only perceptional. The fact is that both sides can be wrong and they are most of the time. People have to stop looking to their own or any other world government as the arbitrator of right and wrong or even as the solution/savior.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Good and Evil are Illusions.

No they aren't.
They are words used to label certain types of behaviour.

The types of behaviour these words refer to, are very real.

If two countries are at war.. The media on one side portrays the other as evil and wrong doing.
...And the opposing countries media shows the former as evil and wrong doing.

So, what's good? What's evil?

Isn't it strictly perception?

Sure. Perception isn't necessarily the same as illusion though.

There's no ultimate world judge so who is to say?

There is no need for one to make sense of the words "good" and "evil".

Shouldn't we all embrace our own light and darkness?

No idea what you mean by that.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

How am I to know what's evil if nothing to base on?

What makes you think there is nothing to base it on?

I just have thoughts. A lot of serial killers don't think what they are doing is wrong

And the reason for that is because they tend to be sociopaths and/or psychopaths.

so they are their own judge yet murder is considered bad by most. So how can that work?

Well... your statement about serial killers, kind of implies that you agree they do evil.
So clearly you don't think it's an "illusion" yourself, since you seem perfectly capable of recognising the evil done by serial killers.

So what's that about? It seems you just contradicted your own OP.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

A group of pedophiles wouldnt say it was bad..

Wouldn't they?

Pedophiles in particular, oftenly are very ashamed and consumed by feelings of guilt for the actions they've done.

Why would they have such feelings, if in their opinion they didn't do something bad?

Do you get to choose the thoughts that come in your head?

No. But I do get to choose what I do with those thoughts.

Thoughts aren't things that are labeled as evil. Actions are. You can't control your thoughts (not really anyway), but you certainly can control your actions, unless you are completely drugged out or something similar.

To me is naive to say I was told one thing is bad and another is good so ill believe what I was told.

Only psychopaths require being told what is good and bad.
Normal people with empathy, can usually figure it out on their own.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

You can't control your beliefs. You can perceive whether your beliefs are rational, and control how you act in response to them.

Good and evil are moral labels humans put on behaviors or people as a social species since we are interdependent on one another to survive and thrive. If we agree on that as a goal, then we definitely cannot just do whatever we feel like no matter who it harms.

If you don't agree on that as a goal, then you're just arbitrarily using the words good and evil differently - like arbitrarily deciding you're going to call cats dogs. I don't necessarily care, until your idiosyncrasy interferes with my life or the lives of others - in which case your life is unlikely to be pleasant for long, because we won't tolerate it.

I have to say, that was beautifully articulated.
Kuddos to you!

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Good is what is convenient to the person and Evil is what is not convenient to the person. This works on any level.

False. Morality is not about individuals only. And especially not your own person.
Au contraire. Morality is about how your actions affect other people and/or society at large.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Yes but is it objective or just shared subjectivity or furthermore is it all illusory since nature is morally indifferent and morality doesn't exist in nature?

Both.

Pseudo-objective if you will.

The subjective part, is the set goals. What kind of society do we collectively want to live in?

Once the subjective goal is set, you can objectively evaluate actions in terms of morality.
An action with moral implications will either bring you closer to the goal or get you further removed from it.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Ok so they're objectively measurable and thus in a sense morality objectively exists but one thing I don't understand is how a mindless process like evolution implanted these traits in humans?

Necessity of social interdependence. It helps surival rates.

A social interdependend, cooperative society where nobody has any duties or responsabilities to one another, where things like stealing, murder etc are all fine and dandy, will not be prospering. In fact, it will not be existing very long.

This isn't even unique to humans. Every social species has "rules of conduct" concerning how to behave within such social settings. Breaking those rules will have consequences.

Take wolf packs. There's "rules of conduct" there too. And pack members that break those rules, suffer the consequences. Those consequences might be getting attacked and killed by the rest of the pack. Sometimes they are just chased away from the pack. Expelled, if you will.

Humans have the most complex social structure of all species. It's only logical that we also have the most complex "rules of conduct".

 

[BilliardsBall]

Good and Evil are Illusions.

If two countries are at war.. The media on one side portrays the other as evil and wrong doing.
...And the opposing countries media shows the former as evil and wrong doing.

So, what's good? What's evil?

Isn't it strictly perception?

There's no ultimate world judge so who is to say? Shouldn't we all embrace our own light and darkness?

Paedophilia is evil, period. Jesus judges paedophilies incredibly harshly, extra punishment in Hell IMHO!

"There's no ultimate world judge" makes no sense--universally even ATHEISTS love to talk about morals and moral judgment, and love to judge others for morality.

 

[Road Less Traveled]

False. Morality is not about individuals only. And especially not your own person.
Au contraire. Morality is about how your actions affect other people and/or society at large.

Very great points.

How deep can this go? Say someone works for a gas company and they are instructed to shut off a poor family with children’s gas in zero degree weather. They feel remorse, regret, empathy yet in their actions they do it anyway because they were told to do so.

Or a soldier at war who was given instructions. They feel remorse, regret, empathy yet in their actions they do it anyway because they were commanded to do so, that led to killings of other common folk who had every right to try and defend an invasion. Yet if they refuse to act due to the moral faculty... they will be the wolf kicked out of the pack.

Also, can this moral faculty within humans be fleeced? There are a lot of very subtle guilt trips that coerce humans into doing things, yet the human being fleeced feels every bit of remorse, guilt the same way they would for any other action. It would be like triggering that faculty in another to coerce them, even if they are ignorant to what’s going on because they feel the same guilt and remorse if they don’t partake. It’s too easy to trip/trigger the guilt switch inside of a human to get them to do, think, or believe many things. Make them think what’s good is evil and what’s evil is good, etc.

 

[Left Coast]

Very great points.

How deep can this go? Say someone works for a gas company and they are instructed to shut off a poor family with children’s gas in zero degree weather. They feel remorse, regret, empathy yet in their actions they do it anyway because they were told to do so.

Or a soldier at war who was given instructions. They feel remorse, regret, empathy yet in their actions they do it anyway because they were commanded to do so, that led to killings of other common folk who had every right to try and defend an invasion. Yet if they refuse to act due to the moral faculty... they will be the wolf kicked out of the pack.

Also, can this moral faculty within humans be fleeced? There are a lot of very subtle guilt trips that coerce humans into doing things, yet the human being fleeced feels every bit of remorse, guilt the same way they would for any other action. It would be like triggering that faculty in another to coerce them, even if they are ignorant to what’s going on because they feel the same guilt and remorse if they don’t partake.

Check out the Zimbardo obedience to authority studies from several decades ago; very eye opening.

I also remember watching a documentary on the My Lai massacre that interviewed soldiers who did it, as well as one or two who refused to obey orders. Fascinating stuff.

 

[Road Less Traveled]

Check out the Zimbardo obedience to authority studies from several decades ago; very eye opening.

I also remember watching a documentary on the My Lai massacre that interviewed soldiers who did it, as well as one or two who refused to obey orders. Fascinating stuff.

Sounds intriguing, will do. Thank you.

 

[sealchan]

Good and Evil are Illusions.

If two countries are at war.. The media on one side portrays the other as evil and wrong doing.
...And the opposing countries media shows the former as evil and wrong doing.

So, what's good? What's evil?

Isn't it strictly perception?

There's no ultimate world judge so who is to say? Shouldn't we all embrace our own light and darkness?

Good and evil are relative which is a big grey area between truth and illusion or falsehood.

Chances are, in any great conflict between two groups there is common ground that is being ignored and THAT is the evil in the situation, not the terms under which the conflict is framed.

 

[sealchan]

How am I to know what's evil if nothing to base on? I just have thoughts. A lot of serial killers don't think what they are doing is wrong so they are their own judge yet murder is considered bad by most. So how can that work?

There is an important distinction between having a strong psychological compulsion to take action and the ability to know the moral quality of that action. Certainly the serial killer doesnt him or herself want to be a victim of another serial killer.

The serial killer has the special burden of needing outside assistance in order to curb their compulsion when left to themselves they will not choose to prevent their immoral action. Their psychological condition imposes this problem on their moral awareness. We could say the same for other pathologies of the mind like child sex abuse and addiction.

Just because one feels compelled by forces outside their conscious volition doesnt mean thei sense of morality is cut free from common ground.

 

[Road Less Traveled]

Check out the Zimbardo obedience to authority studies from several decades ago; very eye opening.

I also remember watching a documentary on the My Lai massacre that interviewed soldiers who did it, as well as one or two who refused to obey orders. Fascinating stuff.

Just checked a lot of the Zimbardo obedience studies in prison out, and oh the profound irony and truth on many scales.

https://www.simplypsychology.org/zimbardo.html