Posts from Good and evil.

Forgot to mention – the nuclear bomb also came from there...

Although, if you look at the nation only from the point of view of what they invented, then the fascists will simply be the engine of science – it was they who invented the stabilizer for tank guns, which allows firing on the move, night vision devices, rocket launchers (V-2), and mass-produced jet bombers, etc. However, this does not mean that the fascists were good, but these inventions are used in every army in the world.

What do you think of this controversial statement: the line between good and evil is law?;)
Personally, I believe it is (at least in most cases).

I can say for sure that the law serves as a boundary between good and evil, but the ultimate distinction is morality (including justice). Morality is higher than the law, and the law should essentially depend on morality, although this is often not the case: morality, for example, believes that it is fair to execute someone for murder (an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth) - the law either corresponds to this or it doesn't.
Sometimes the law directly contradicts morality, for example, eviction from a dwelling: the law allows me to evict my parents, children, or spouse onto the street, but morality does not!
Even Solovyov (the philosopher) in his philosophy of all-unity moved from the law (rights) as a lower form to morality (justice) and from the latter to love.
And in England, courts of equity still exist. In general, when resolving an issue based on justice, unwritten law works better than our laws written on paper)).

I wanted to say nothing about the USA, but I can't resist((.
The fact that computers and the internet were invented in the USA may be a lie, or it may be true, I don't know. But I do know that in the 1950s, computers (the size of apartments) were used in our research institutes (forensic science). And the internet appeared in the army a long time ago - in the 80s and 85s. It was just not available to the average person.
We must give them credit; they are indeed driving the IT industry forward, but quoting the words of one person, they spend much more on cosmetics. And imagine if they spent as much on developing IT - we would have been exploring the vastness of space long ago)))

What do you think of this controversial statement: is the line between good and evil defined by law?

That's exactly what I was saying.

And about computers... Computers didn't just originate in the USA. We had our own. The Soviet Union also developed computers (MESM, etc.). Mostly, they were the size of an apartment, as Draco said, and they were used for complex mathematical tasks. But let's not talk about that. It's completely off-topic.

And besides, let's stop talking about the USA (in general) and avoid this topic. Draco and I had a pleasant discussion, but we didn't come to any conclusion.

Rather, this is more of a philosophical debate, as the concept of good and evil differs for everyone, and one could discuss it endlessly.

Nowadays, no one uses Soviet-made computers the size of a wardrobe. I didn't say that the USSR never had computers. As for processor production, I don't think we can create a company like "Intel" for another 50 years. Unless, of course, we develop our own technologies instead of just assembling Intel (or AMD) processors at their factory located in our country (building such a factory and training the necessary personnel would take about 10 years, in my opinion).

Added 3 minutes later
And regarding law and morality. Take Vitaly Kaloev as an example. Morally, he might be right, but legally, he's wrong. What if all the deceased passengers had also been "avenged"? What would happen then?:confused: Mass killings of the airline's personnel?:eek:

IMHO: Some believe that Light is alive. They are mistaken. Light is too fragile to survive in this world. What calls itself Light is not Light, but merely pretends to be. Darkness can only be defeated by Darkness. Or by a mixture of Light and Darkness.

And if we delve into broader philosophical reflections, we might arrive at the same conclusions as Felix Kirsanov, who expressed them in his newsletter. But I won't provide links to the article right now; instead, I'll just quote a passage that's particularly relevant: (excerpt from issue 25, "The World is Woven from Contradictions")
Perhaps there is no such thing as pure evil... there are only the negative aspects of human nature and a lack of intellect, and sometimes, a lack of foresight. Do you think scientists were doing good or evil when they created the hydrogen bomb? Good must be considered on a larger scale; for one person, an action might be good, while for another, it might be evil, just as it can be for a single nation, or for all of humanity, or for the entire galaxy, and so on.

Many firmly believe that the whole world can be divided into black and white, but that is not the case. The world is diverse, with millions of colors, but they are all either cold or warm (those who have even a little experience in visual arts will understand me). There are also neutrals, but no one likes them. One day, each of us will have to make our choice. We must choose which side we are on, Good or Evil. Because staying on the sidelines is IMPOSSIBLE!

Many firmly believe that the whole world can be divided into black and white, but that is not the case....
He will have to choose which side he is on, Good or Evil. Because staying on the sidelines is IMPOSSIBLE!

???
I think you've led yourself into a dead end.
P.S. Frodo, if there is no evil, then there is no good... but is that really the case, as you think? I agree that there are two sides to every coin, something for good, something for harm. Take the example of the atomic bomb; here, the weapon of destruction is evil, the engine of progress is good. For Americans, it's evil; for Russians, it's good. In my opinion, it's difficult to say definitively, as everything has its pros and cons, but there is still evil in the world in many different forms: war, in terms of destruction, is always evil; love is always good, even if only for the short moment before separation.
However, comparing these two concepts will always be different; everyone chooses their own ideals of good and evil.

I'll put it this way: what is white, fluffy, and soft isn't always good, and sometimes the most harmless thing turns out to be true evil, just as something terrible can turn out to be noble and honest. But I think that if there were no evil, there would be no good either... people cannot live without one or the other.

Reply to the first post. The struggle between good and evil is what life is all about, and individually, these two substances won't tell you which is life and which is death, because there's nothing to compare them to...

Generally, are you sure that good and evil are concepts used to define the world? There is no good and evil; good and evil are evaluations that the mind assigns to something. Good and evil did not exist before humans appeared. Our minds could not understand the world without associations; it wanted to organize everything. That's where these concepts come from.

This applies to the world, but with humans, it's a completely different story: for a person, "good" and "bad" (in relation to another person) are things that have a positive or negative influence on them.

I especially like the map "Good versus Evil".
There are 6 zones, each with castles of the corresponding type, and good and evil factions live there.
After the war, they all remain, but under the flag of a single alliance. :)

If a person has lived an exemplary life and has never broken the law, it doesn't necessarily mean they are good. To become truly good, one must experience evil, commit an act they cannot forgive themselves for, and then look at it from the outside and choose what is best for them. But once you experience evil, it can be like a drug, drawing you in. It attracts people because every person is inherently cruel (either they don't realize it, or they believe the opposite), and every cruel being is tempted by what we call "Evil." And after going through this entire cycle, can a person still remain good? The answer is no! No person today can be truly good!

Even the kindest person can commit bad deeds; the question is whether they are aware of it. A villain is someone who intentionally commits evil acts and enjoys it. There are very few such people. Most people are good, and even if they consciously commit bad deeds, their conscience torments them (the torment may manifest in different ways; some suppress it with substitute principles and stereotypes, such as the idea of Nazism, religious terrorism, etc., but in any case, everyone suffers for the evil they commit). The problem is that modern society does not provide a strong education, which leads to many problems. The less life experience a person has, and the fewer different situations they have encountered, the greater their desire for destruction and violence. The desire for negative things is also fueled by people who are weak in spirit, who have been confused or, due to various circumstances, have not been able to find the strength to be honest with themselves and those around them, and who may have ended up in an environment where immoral things are the norm. Goodness is different for everyone, and in any case, each person acts as they believe is right; everyone has an internal moral compass; you just need to know how to awaken it. In summary, I assert that all people are good! There are just some people who have gotten lost and taken the wrong path, but I think that life will eventually lead everyone to where they are meant to be. p.s. Since there is an exception to every rule, it is possible that 1 in 6 billion people may truly be unkind, but this is already considered a serious mental disorder.