Posts from Good and evil. Auto-translated

Haven't you heard about Hindus, for example? In many pagan religions, statues are just like icons. Idols, images of gods – unfortunately, many icons have become idols. This angered many, and often entire movements arose in Christianity that denied the worship of icons (for example, iconoclasts in Byzantium or Protestants).

An amateur's perspective. Of course, they are similar – they are incomparably closer to each other than, for example, to Buddhism, but they are still very different.

It is not known for sure, of course, but most likely you and Ganymede are right. There is even an entire field in psychology – psychosomatics – that studies the influence of mental state (including faith) on health.

Well, Ganymede, you've gone and split yourself in two:) Why couldn't you just say right away that for you, good and evil are simply pleasure and displeasure?
That is, you didn't understand what it is... Interesting! Probably, the vast majority of those who post here in the style of "good and evil are relative... is a person hunting good or evil? For animals, it's evil, for humans, it's good," etc. (with the exception of Optimal, who wrote about the relativity of moral values - respect!), also simply don't understand what distinguishes good from pleasure.

Ganymede, you say I'm not tired. Is that right? We're discussing goodness. And I thought about good and evil. Okay, let's say it's goodness.
Quote:
"Actually, I think that everything that happens in the world is neither good nor evil, but a natural, inevitable order of things."

That's exactly what I'm saying! Let all the atheists die of the plague, and it will be good for us and for the new world! I will make sure that your posts are neutral and philosophical (there is no good and evil, everything is inevitable).
Question: what is worth living for? What is worth fighting for? What is worth dying for? WHY live? What is the value of human life?

I'll tell you frankly, Ganymede, I don't know if you'll believe it or not. If I could convince myself that there is no God, I would immediately end my life. This desire haunts me to the point of obsession, and only one thing stops me: I can't let go. To suffer on Earth, and then suffer eternally? No. I have to just exist. If I knew that we were just a food chain, a random collection of atoms, I would have left immediately. Without pain, with joy.

Egoism is more of an "external" concept. One person lives in a way that is convenient for them (even if this "convenience" is fleeting). Another person lives in a way that is convenient for them, but if the "conveniences" of two people overlap, a conflict arises, and someone must give way. So, the one who yields usually judges the other as an egoist, but in a different situation, THEY will not yield and will, in turn, become an egoist in the eyes of the one to whom they did not yield their convenience. Everything is relative... relative to the "victory" or "defeat" of someone's convenience.
If someone takes on the care of a seriously ill person, they almost certainly consider the patient to be a "bore," an "egoist," "grumpy," etc., simply because they constantly have to "lose" in their own convenience for the sake of the seriously ill person's convenience. And soon, the person begins to hate this patient with intense hatred inside, although outwardly they may seem like "Mother Teresa."

Well, it seems like you're the one who's "split" here, not me:rolleyes:
How?:eek:

Ganymed;83168Reducing my post to a "state of pleasure" is absurd.

Good is not pleasure; it is GOOD, if you even understand the meaning of this word.

Every being strives for good, and you too, Silvanis, I'm sure of it.

"bashing the brains" of those around you so that their noise doesn't interfere with your work is good (for you, but not for them)

"soothing the soul" in a conversation with someone is good (for you, but not for the opponent)

So, if I reason from your point of view, you live a normal life; if from the point of view of those for whom your actions are not good, then you are an egoist. And where is the good or evil here? In what and for whom?

Now, let's imagine a situation: one person kills another person, i.e., deprives him of the good of life. Is this good in itself for the one who kills? No (since it is not naturally a necessity), and therefore contradicts nature (is unnatural). But if a person kills in a war, defending his homeland, is this good? Yes, because he preserves the good of independence for himself (first of all) and for his country (nation).

Now the question: is money good?

In itself, no - it's just paper.

But you can buy a lot with money - a car, an apartment, etc. Is this good?

Let's imagine a situation: a person robs a bank, killing an armored car guard in the process. He does this in order to acquire money, which can be used to acquire a good that he does not have, but which he needs, possibly. Is this good for the person in a natural sense? No, it's not good, although he has become the owner of a lot of money and can formally acquire the necessary good, but... he committed theft and murder... he needs to hide from the law and live constantly in fear of being caught.

That's why a predator kills its prey in order to feed itself, which is good for it.

If you disagree with everything I wrote, then refute it in essence, and not by profaning the concepts themselves:)