Is There Really An Equal Amount Of Good And Bad In Everything?

[Jack D Ripper]

If we're not sure whether slapping or ignoring is the opposite of hugging it's probably best to randomly switch between hugging, slapping and ignoring your children. That way, over the long term, it'll even out.

If there really were an equal amount of good and bad in everything, then it would not matter what you do, because no matter what you did, the result would be equally good and bad.

[popeye1945]

relative to one biology.

[impermanence]

Yes, this is exactly the sort of BS I was talking about.
Case closed.

Of course it's BS. Are you expecting THE TRUTH?

Sculptor1, you should try to relax. It's just a friendly discussion.

[impermanence]

I think this topic is one example of the very common phenomenon of taking an empirical, descriptive law/theory/principle, creating a metaphorical extrapolation from it and then forgetting that it's a metaphorical extrapolation. It happens with such things as Newton's laws ("every reaction has an equal and opposite reaction") Einstein and Galileo's principles of relativity ("there are no privileged frames of reference") and the theory of evolution ("survival of the fittest"). But there are probably other examples too. Those three examples have all, at various times, been extrapolated from the realm of descriptive science to the realm of prescriptive human ethics. Obviously the first example is the one that is most relevant to this topic.

I think one reason for this being such a common thing is simply that most people are naturally much more interested in human relationships than they are in dry, descriptive science. I've noticed many times in the past, when discussing some scientific principle or other, that many people want to find some way to relate it to the behaviour of human beings so as to make it interesting to them.

Actually, it's a very simple concept [and as we all know, Simplicity is Truth].

I wish I could transcribe it into a mathematical formula that would satisfy the need to have everything "add-up," but it's just not that way.

Let me try this again...

Using light and dark [although you can use anything], it is light that makes dark and dark that makes light. They can not exist without each other. You might say, "How is that possible?" Consider the following...

First off, is light not the absence of dark and is dark not the absence of light? Can either of these states exist? Can there be Absolute light or Absolute dark? Seems unlikely. Then they co-exist [and as a whole, and, in proportion].

[impermanence]

If we're not sure whether slapping or ignoring is the opposite of hugging it's probably best to randomly switch between hugging, slapping and ignoring your children. That way, over the long term, it'll even out.

If there really were an equal amount of good and bad in everything, then it would not matter what you do, because no matter what you did, the result would be equally good and bad.

DING, DING, DING, DING, DING!!

We have a winner!!!!!

[impermanence]

It simply "suggests" that [intellectually] in order for x to arise, so must its opposite, y [in equal proportion].

If x and y are not quantifiable, they cannot exist "in equal proportion", a form of words which says that there is an equal quantity of good and bad. How much does a litre of bad weigh?

Pc, you want everything to make sense in your world where nothing really makes sense [it's just accepted]. After all, what does "proportional" really mean when all matter is in constant flux?

Everything we know has been made-up. There is no Truth in any of it. This is NOT a bad thing and is not necessarily nihilistic if you can realize the possibilities this notion gives life to. All things are transitory and like the proverbial herding of cats, impossible to intellectualize. Things just are [whether we like it or not].

[Sculptor1]

Yes, this is exactly the sort of BS I was talking about.
Case closed.

Of course it's BS. Are you expecting THE TRUTH?

Sculptor1, you should try to relax. It's just a friendly discussion.

"Truth", no.
Friendly or not you have no idea what you are having a discussion about.
I am perfectly relaxed. People speak BS all the time. I am relaxed all the time.

[baker]

I am perfectly relaxed. People speak BS all the time. I am relaxed all the time.

Aww, BS and a permanently relaxed sphincter.

[impermanence]

Friendly or not you have no idea what you are having a discussion about.

I knew you would eventually understand!

[Sculptor1]

I am perfectly relaxed. People speak BS all the time. I am relaxed all the time.

Aww, BS and a permanently relaxed sphincter.

Indeed. SO I can sh1t on your stupid comments.

[Pattern-chaser]

If x and y are not quantifiable, they cannot exist "in equal proportion", a form of words which says that there is an equal quantity of good and bad. How much does a litre of bad weigh?

Pc, you want everything to make sense in your world where nothing really makes sense [it's just accepted]. After all, what does "proportional" really mean when all matter is in constant flux?

Now I'm confused. You're questioning the meaning of the term ("proportional") that you introduced by way of explanation? And what is this BS about me wanting to make sense of the world? Our world is uncertain, and its behaviour is often less than intuitive to us. This is empirically verifiable. But back to the topic in hand.

Good is a verdict. It is the result of a (moral) human consideration about something. So when you assert that good and bad exist in equal quantities, you assert that human considerations resulting in a judgement of good or bad take place so that they balance numerically? I'm sorry, but that simply isn't so.

[Pattern-chaser]

Friendly or not you have no idea what you are having a discussion about.

I knew you would eventually understand!

Are your contributions to this topic intended to derail discussion, then? Is that what you're about? I don't understand.

[impermanence]

Pc, you want everything to make sense in your world where nothing really makes sense [it's just accepted]. After all, what does "proportional" really mean when all matter is in constant flux?

Now I'm confused. You're questioning the meaning of the term ("proportional") that you introduced by way of explanation? And what is this BS about me wanting to make sense of the world? Our world is uncertain, and its behaviour is often less than intuitive to us. This is empirically verifiable. But back to the topic in hand.

What I am suggesting is that these ideas we have of things have little to no basis in reality. We just make them up so we can communicate with each other, but language is not reality. It's not even close. Many people speak as if they are conveying some kind of truth.

Good is a verdict. It is the result of a (moral) human consideration about something. So when you assert that good and bad exist in equal quantities, you assert that human considerations resulting in a judgement of good or bad take place so that they balance numerically? I'm sorry, but that simply isn't so.

It is exactly because good and bad are created by humans that they exist in proportion. How can it be otherwise. Think, "For every action there is an opposite and proportional reaction," kind of thing.

[impermanence]

I knew you would eventually understand!

Are your contributions to this topic intended to derail discussion, then? Is that what you're about? I don't understand.

No, I am just attempting to display another way of looking at things. IOW, most folks really believe [well, not really] the non-sense they put out there even though they know it makes no sense what-so-ever. It's like everybody using the phony [fiat] currency. We [those who have a bit of education in the matter] all know it's worth-less, but we use it anyway [in this case, to transact, in the previous, to communicate].

[Sculptor1]

There is no good or bad in ANYTHING.

What is determined as good and bad is based on out relationship with those things.
A bloody beef steak is good as far as I am concerned; it is bad as far as my vegetarian partner is concerned.
The goodness and badness does not consist IN the steak.
The entire thread is meaningless.
Those that thing the thread makes sense would do well to try to understand this simple truth. It may well transform the way they look at the world. Because right now they have no idea what the **** they are talking about.
They are living in a seriously confused state and conceive the world in a fundementally wrong way.