What is good is what allows your being to exist. You are a being who belongs to a species, culture, community, family, etc. In order to sustain your own being you have to have good relationships with all of the above aswell as with your own bodily existence. To be good is to be, when you fulfill these prerequisites you will naturally feel happy, fulfilled, every positive affect. Evil is the opposite of being, Nothingness, to be evil is to lead a path of self-destruction. When you turn against your community, turn towards vices, however temporarily enjoyable you will either die miserable in a way you may not even recognize for yourself and leave behind no legacy. Beings that are good continue to exist while evil disappears into the void as quickly as it appeared.In this way we may understand that goodness is inherently tied to being, goodness is the telos of being. The freedom of every being is to be good so that it can be. Another crucial aspect of this is that we must necessarily include the element of time in order to make judgements about whether something is moral. Being exists necessarily in difference, it is always becoming.
>>18015664>we may understand that goodness is inherently tied to beingValid and monism-pilled.
>>18015664One silly rebuttal I found is that martyrdom must also be evil by this logic. It may be the case for some matyrs that they only truthfully seek self-destruction but a good matyrs seeks to use his life for the preservation of some larger being. They might sacrifice their life to address some disgusting injustice in their society, and from this preserve the being of a community. Its not the same as someone who is depressed and seeks to escape his suffering by escaping this world.
>>18015664>Beings that are good continue to exist while evil disappears into the void as quickly as it appeared.Life is evil, random electrons are good.
We have the capacity for morality which already indicates some sort of objective source of it the idea at the very least
>>18015676>Life is evilYou can say that but your words are meaningless if the way you act is to preserve it at all times. If you really believed this you would kill yourself, you won't though and if you did you would not longer exist like I described and no longer have any bearing on being.
>>18015678Your capacity for morality comes from being socialized in a culture that wants to preserve its being. This is why every culture has a roughly shared sense of moral goodness. No culture could survive if it thought that killing your neighbor and raping his wife should be the standard. Some cultures have evil customs but those customs prove their value in time and we know throughout history what happens to them, their rise to glory is swift and just as quickly they fall and disappear.
>>18015680I'll die in a couple of decades, perhaps even years. I am an extremely fragile and fleeting existence that will disappear into the void almost as soon as it appeared. Meanwhile the humble electron has been hanging around since the big bang. Clearly I must be evil and the electron must be good.
>>18015689OP wasn't saying that being is a reward for goodness. He said goodness is a function of being. It would have been better if you hung around longer, yes. It would have been worse if the electron's lifespan was shortened, yes. Having said that, duration is not the key metric.
I think the biggest issue people have with this argument is that their own subjective moral feelings are not fully accounted for in reality. Some things you will feel to be wrong or right are in fact the opposite to what works in reality. You have to be open to accepting that your understanding of morality is incomplete or wrong, it comes from the culture you were socialized into and the knowledge you've accumulated. This is why wisdom is valuable in understanding what it means to be good, you will only know when you dip your toes in the unknown and experience yhe consequences of your actions, moral judjements need time to know because it is about seeing the world become.
>>18015664By all respect for Spinoza, I want to make clear.There a good formal reasons not to allow inferences from fakt to norms. Lookup:https://www.researchgate.net/publication/237384825_Hume's_Is-Ought_Thesis_in_Logics_with_Alethic-Deontic_Bridge_Principles_AuthorDeontic Logic and the Hume-Theorem.
>>18015689>>18015690All being strives to maintain itself and grow, this is not exclusive to life but true for it just as much so. An electron is not a coherent object but a part with its own parts aswell, objects are things that act independent of other things in its own self-detirmination. Life grew out of the universe and gradually realized its own being while interacting with its environment. Everyone dies but you as a being exist as a part of a community and a species aswell as a world, you want to become a part of this and the only way to feel fulfilled in life is to so. The cost of evil isnt just your own life and happiness but legacy and memory.
>>18015668I like this argument because you dont even need to argue for the existence of a God for morality to be objective but it is nonetheless still very compatible with a Spinozist pantheistic God. Most aithest are just pantheists at their core, ive yet to encounter an aithest who doesnt agree with that conception.
>>18015664What if put others down ensuring my own succes makes my existence better?
>>18015818It may not fulfill your psychological being, you are fundamentally a social being who needs others to be fulfilled and thus maintain a healthy relationship with your community. If your needlessly antagonizing other people then you risk making yourself a pariah. Although it may depend on what you mean by putting other down, competition is good, it elevates the people around you, gives them reason to do better. Some antagonism can be good, it allows ypu to devalop and form strong bonds with the people around you.
>>18015858>May notAlso what about the devil. Surely he knew that still decided to be evil.What would god be in that context?
>>18015884>>May notYou have to be more specific with what your saying>Also what about the devilWhat about him?>Surely he knew that still decided to be evil.Im not here to argue for the existence of such a being nor his reasons for doing whatever he did.>What would god be in that context?Im not here to argue for or against the existence of God however you define that. Im simply providing a clear logical proof for the existence of an objective morality. Religion doesnt need to enter the question, you can be an aithest or a religious person and still agree or even disagree with my argument.
>>18015913>May not fulfill my beeingWhat if it does?
>>18015926Ifnit fulfills you in the longevity of yoir existence then it is good.
>>18015934This is the problem with this, you just said me shoving others in theyr locker would be good because i like it. This makes morals arbitrary.
>>18015664>In order to sustain your own being you have to have good relationships with all of the above aswell as with your own bodily existence.Does this mean no more telling anons to "enjoy hell" ???
>>18015963>you just said me shoving others in theyr locker would be good because i like itNo lul. Thats not what your said in your first post. You refused to clarify what it is you meant by putting others down, if you are going to use this example then the answer is no.Someone who bullies others will naturally make himself a pariah and only make friends with those who are as self-destructive. He will cultivate a group who has no loyalty or love for one another. This will mean that you will not be able to fulfill your psychological being and possibly turn towards other self-destructive vices.
>>18015972If its serious probably yeah, I always thought that response was pretty funny though.
>>18015975Ok ok, what about people who wan't to kill themselves. Are they considered evil?
>>18015982It depends on the reason, i addressed this in another post >>18015675 but if your doing it selflessly then you are fulfilling your being in a good way. If your depressed and suicidal you are doing it in hopes of escaping your suffering because of your arrogance in thinking you know what the future holds for you. It is evil, not in the way that person can even know as they die but the end result is that your memory becomes tainted in your suicide and you risk losing all you have provided for your community.
>>18015975What if someone is so powerful he is untoucheable?
>>18016011And what if he is? What does that have to with what I said
>>18016015He can do whatever he wants, he knows there will be no consequences.Als there are people out there who are evil for the sake of it, they go out of theyre way to hurt others for no reason, not even for personel pleasure.>then why be evilIdk thats why i am asking you you seem smart
>>18016054>>then why be evilThats not what I would respond at all if you've been paying attention. Is being a bully going to fulfill your psychological being? Who is going to be your friend when you act that way, surely not somebody you can place your trust and love in. When you act such a way to other people for nothing then who's to say you will remain good to a friend just because your on good terms with them at any particular moment. >but I dont need friends or peopleYour not a human being then, or even an animal. All life desires and needs an other to be fulfilled. We dont just pop out of existence, we are born to a mother and we need to be raised by someone otherwise we won't survive, human babies are especially underdeveloped in this way where they cant even leave to go anywhere without the help of a guardian. This is absolutely something essential to our being.
>>18016080I get that,I am asking if there are people who know this universal truth.Yet do not care (for example the devil)and have the power to not care. We would be fucked living in literall hell. Where one guy can do whatever he wants.Wich according to this monistic view of reality would not be possible.Also like i said i have met people so evil, they would not be able exist vaporizing into nothing
>>18016101Why i am saking is because i know someone you would consider evil incarnate, i know it sounds dramatic but its the truth. Wich i turn would mean nothing incarnate wich makes no sense.
Is it good for me to peep at my neighbor without ever getting noticed?
>>18016080Also what even is existence, imagine a person so large he is bigger that the all others together. Would his his survival be priority since he is physically larger thus there exists mire if him? Call me crazy
>>18016134Is it bad?
>>18016101Hell or the devil is not relevant here. Someone who is "powerful and evil like the devil" as a being does not have the capacity to exist for the reasons I described above. Existence entails determinacy, you have determinate lines drawn of where your being begins and ends and that detirminacy entails your limits aswell as what you are for. Goodness for humanity is not just good for humans but for the totality of existence around us, we strive to meet these detirminations in our engagement with nature and nature produces beings that inturn fulfill its momentary determinations. Nature could not produce a being like the devil that could exist and reproduce itself. That doesnt mean something as destructive couldn't have existed, but just like a volcano as quickly as it erupted it disappeared and life went on.
>>18016134No, its voyeuristic and enables unhealthy behavior
>>18016135Im sorry but your going to have to produce a sentence thats comprehendable. I dont take pleasure in shitting on ESL's but your post makes no sense.
>>18016161What is existence?I think therefore i am. So is existence counciousness?
>>18016172Self-determancy
Next qestionA kid falls into the gorilla enclousure.You can choose to shoot the gorilla.Here is the catch.The gorilla is beloved by everyone.Shooting him would causs a literal great depression, at least for some time. Will you shoot and save the kid?
>>18016246Utilitarian problems like these dont really apply here because the health and growth of being doesnt necessarily follow from what people find enjoyable. If a society would rather see a child get mauled by a gorilla then shoot it than that society is an objectively sick society that values entertainment over human lives. Their are many things that dont elevate your pleasure but are still good for you like brussel sprouts and vegetables. Pleasure does connect to this but not a one to one.
>>18016294What is it that makes the childs live more important than the gorillas?
>>18016329It doesnt matter if the gorilla is more or less important than the child here in an objective sense, if you could measure that. If a society does not value its own over others, especially its own species, then that society is fundamentally sick. Its not pursuing the growth and maintainance of its being.
>>18016383Do you pull the trigger?
>>18016405Foh sure
>>18015705>There a good formal reasons not to allow inferences from fakt to normsLet's say I concede that you cant make a completely reasonable judjement about something from what it is. Their is still a practical level where I must act as though their are necessities to my being insofar as they prove to be necessities in the reaction my being has to it. If i am thirsty I know I need to satiate that itch with water until either my body responds in a satiated way, if let's say my body still thirsts and my hands dry up I may come to discover that water no longer satiated my particular being and I will either come to discover what does or no longer be able to be. I still stay true however that their is a logic to being that we can make observations and judgements overall, that even if my particular being necessititated something not particular to my species being, their is still an evident reality to the species that is much more stable and evident.
Who is more evil he who wants to destroy everything or the one who wants to maximise suffering
>>18018169Thats a stupid question, they're the same person
>>18018873Wanting to erase you and putting you on a torture device for eternity is not the same
>>18018873Also is killing an animal thats suffering evil?
>>18018890It depends on if the animal is already dying of its suffering. Otherwise no
>>18018888Perpetual suffering does not exist, if you live in reality and dont believe in silly concepts like hell then you'd understand that it literally does not make any sense. So I can only assume that both of these people just want to destroy everything.
>>18015738Depending on how "God" is defined, virtually no atheist will tell you they think the universe is God. Or alternatively will say that "God" isn't the right word under the Spinoza model.
>>18019041If you define God as the highest source of being and if you believe that reality is the only thing that their is and that the universe is self-detirminate then it logically follows that God exists and it is the universe. This is the oldest conception of God historically actually, its not the personal God that we know in Christianity or any of the Abrahamic religions but it is the omnipotent omnipresent being. And it doesnt really say anything about us which is what makes it such a ubiquitous concept that aithests dont care to challenge but I do think its an important reframe if we talk about the history of "religions" and cosmology. Alot of aithest will make really stupid claims that the origin of God is some stragety to control people or to explain away the unknown but in reality it just came about from a simple observation of the world.God is simply Obvious
>>18015664>What is good is what allows your being to exist.but why?
>>18019134That is where your moral intuitions come from. You were socialized into a culture that valued its being, otherwise you would not exist nor that culture.
>>18015664According to this, what is good for one specie is bad for another as in what might sustain the existing of one would lead to the nonexistent of another, this is even more evident in cultures, and family where it's most obvious, a simple example of this can be observed in nature. Therefore, if it's good to do what allows your existence and sustain it, it must be evil to to do the opposite which leads to you doing good while doing evil as well. The only way out of this is to maintain that this goodness is only relative to oneself as it's only concerned with your existence first as a specie and then as country, family, and finally as self, even if we grant this, there would be conflict between these four. Thus I don't think it's wise to connect existence and self-preservation with goodness.
>>18019487*Species Apparently there it is both singular and plural.
>>18015664Easily refuted by the absolutely safe capsule.
>>18015664Morality stems from encouraging vs disparaging human flourishing. You as an individual have the right to the pursuit of your own happiness. This is reciprocal, meaning you can't just use it as an excuse to destroy that of someone else, as they have their right too. Our human reasoning is our raison d'etre, so to force your way through the reasoning of someone else is to treat them inhumanely. Consent is king.
>>18019015Don't you mean otherwise yesas in it would be evil>>18019018Thats a bold claimAnyways it doesnt matter.Imagine someone is able to live for hundred of years, but ever breath is anony. Isn't putting him out of his misory better.
>>18019571Your happiness IS the happiness of everyone. The freedom of an organism, the determinant freedom that is, is to maintain and grow your being and everything connected to that being which includes the things out of your control. Of you dont consume the right amount of nutrients for your body, you will feel depressed, lethargic and hopeless. As a consequence of that you become a burden for your family, friends, co-workers, community, you bring down their spirit and subsequently their creative potential. The health of your being, both psychologically and bodily is intrinsically tied to the collective socias, which is tied to a larger human species, which is tied to the well being of the planet.>>18019487With the above in mind, I come to your question that the species being may be at odds with other species or maybe even the whole ecosystem is at odds with the species. In this case the whole of being itself is apart of some transformation, that is reciprocal. One species changes to overcome a barrier and inturn challenges the being of another, a species will only cease to exist when it no longer has a reason to. That is, the niche it fulfilled is no longer necessary to complete the whole of being.Its wrong to compare this to the relationship between human beings within society. We dont exist to fulfill niches within a society, we create niches to fit in. If getting along with your extended family comes at the expense of your well being then you can form nuclear families to get away from them and the test of how strong that extended family is proves itself with time and if it doesnt then that form of social organization will just collapse. If a larger society has this structure that only allows for the goodness of one being at the expense of another then that society on a structural level and will meet its destruction if it does not change.
>>18021105>>18019487Cont.As an individual you are still indebted to this society and your duty, if you recognize the ills, would be to rally the people and lead them away from these social ills. Just like if you as a self-concious organism remember to take your medicine when you recognize that your body is going ill, you are not exempted from acting just because its not your fault. I believe ignorance and indecisiveness are also a type of evil.
