It was me. I did it.
All of humanity's problems, it's crimes, its sins, its stupidity, all of the evil and ugly things produced by human action: it's all my fault. I am the source of these terrible things that make people hate one another, all the little wrongs done and revenged upon everyone.
Hatred, grief, guilt, murder, and pain. All of these and more are my doing, and everything wrong with society can be traced back to me somehow.
I have a million names: Satan, sin, human nature, the Devil, godlessness, blind faith, Jews, Muslims, Christians, Pagans, capitalism, communism, hubris, and ignorance, to name a handful. Ever since humanity first appeared on this Earth it has tried to name me. But a thing cannot be killed by attacking a name given to it, so I persist in what I do, my action amplified a thousand times when humanity lashes out at another one of my labels.
They have never found me, they have never come close to destroying me. Whenever I am sought out, those unfortunates who are in the path of my pursuers see me standing right behind them who would destroy me, guiding them. When they try to flee from me and my influence, they find me standing right in their way. I can do all of this because of one simple fact.
I don't exist.
What, do you want a medal or something?
:fap:
So it was YOU who created marzipan!
Fucker.
coyote
::phone rings::
Hello, Stalin? What's up, it's Adolph. Yeah, fine, fine... Hey, did you hear? Sin and evil don't exist! Yeah, I know. Looks like we're in the clear now!
Ok, see you for cribbage on Saturday? Cool. Ciao!
::hangs up::
Labels are just labels, but just because something is just a label doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
Evil is just a convenient label, but tell that to a mother who's one year old child is kidnapped and murdered.
I got something a little deeper out of it than that... that the label is external, causing people to flail about them "fighting" a nonexistent target, completely missing that the thing they are fighting ISN'T EXTERNAL, and that the very act of fighting of this nonexistent external "evil" perpetuates the real, internal "evil".
Maybe that's not what he meant though?
Quote from: Nigel on February 25, 2008, 10:08:10 PM
I got something a little deeper out of it than that... that the label is external, causing people to flail about them "fighting" a nonexistent target, completely missing that the thing they are fighting ISN'T EXTERNAL, and that the very act of fighting of this nonexistent external "evil" perpetuates the real, internal "evil".
Maybe that's not what he meant though?
I see your point, and to an extent I agree with it. In fact, I do agree with it, but what WOULD we say to the mother in my example? "Sure, your kid is dead, but the 'evil' is just in your internal mind."
Probably not a lot of comfort, despite how "true" it may be. But then, is it our job to give people comfort?
Now I'm not sure if I agree or not. Dammit! Free thought!! :argh!:
Quote from: Nigel on February 25, 2008, 10:08:10 PM
I got something a little deeper out of it than that... that the label is external, causing people to flail about them "fighting" a nonexistent target, completely missing that the thing they are fighting ISN'T EXTERNAL, and that the very act of fighting of this nonexistent external "evil" perpetuates the real, internal "evil".
Maybe that's not what he meant though?
This is probably the closest interpretation.
Quote from: LMNO on February 25, 2008, 05:44:04 PM
::phone rings::
Hello, Stalin? What's up, it's Adolph. Yeah, fine, fine... Hey, did you hear? Sin and evil don't exist! Yeah, I know. Looks like we're in the clear now!
Ok, see you for cribbage on Saturday? Cool. Ciao!
::hangs up::
Congrats. I believe you just made the same mistake as my Xtian friend. Hand over your Pope card nao.
My point was that there is no singular source for evil in the world (whether or not "evil" exists as an absolute is immaterial; bad things are bad things regardless for my purposes). Obviously this piece wasn't written for Discordians, at least not of the PD.com variety. 23PINEALFNORD Discordians might believe that the Curse of Greyface is responsible for all the bad things in the world, Scientologists believe it's thetans, hardcore liberals and conservatives blame each other, etc.
Many things may be "evil" or "bad," but they do not have a common source (physical or spiritual). Just like many things are colored purple, but are not all made with the same pigment. I have another piece in the works that may express what I mean more clearly.
Quote from: Cainad on February 26, 2008, 02:19:16 AMCongrats. I believe you just made the same mistake as my Xtian friend. Hand over your Pope card nao.
Those cards are largely meaningless. We all have that authority regardless of what a piece of paper says.
Vaguely reminds me of something I read in a short story once. Might have been Vonnegut but I'm not sure.
Overall though, good point. Keep it up and they might finally figure out that even order and chaos are imaginary bullshit as well.
"Conflicts between good and evil are only sicknesses of the mind."
-- Capt. Obvious
Quote from: Cainad on February 26, 2008, 02:19:16 AM
Congrats. I believe you just made the same mistake as my Xtian friend.
dude. don't use "you came to the same conclusion as a christian" as an argument to point out that somebody is wrong. that's just weak.
Quote from: Vene on February 26, 2008, 04:26:38 AMThose cards are largely meaningless.
WHAT!?!?!?!?! :eek:
:x :x :x
:cry:
:?
dont worry, only largely. the bit where it says it's approved by the house of apostles of Eris is probably true. it might have been more of a sort of implicit approvement, though, perhaps nothing really official got written down as they weren't allowed to believe it if they did anyway.
besides, i'm sure that the one you have actually has magickal powers too! :hosrie:
Whew!
Quote from: Cainad on February 26, 2008, 02:19:16 AM
My point was that there is no singular source for evil in the world (whether or not "evil" exists as an absolute is immaterial; bad things are bad things regardless for my purposes).
Quote from: Cainad on February 23, 2008, 04:52:52 AM
It was me. I did it.
All of humanity's problems, it's crimes, its sins, its stupidity, all of the evil and ugly things produced by human action: it's all my fault.
I don't exist.
In that case, you're in serious need of a rewrite.
The role of the narrator was the fictional "singular problem", which does not exist, as stated in the end of the story.
I think it still makes sense, as is.
Quote from: Hoopla on February 26, 2008, 03:59:42 PM
The role of the narrator was the fictional "singular problem", which does not exist, as stated in the end of the story.
I think it still makes sense, as is.
Agreed/
Quote from: triple zero on February 26, 2008, 12:12:19 PM
Quote from: Cainad on February 26, 2008, 02:19:16 AM
Congrats. I believe you just made the same mistake as my Xtian friend.
dude. don't use "you came to the same conclusion as a christian" as an argument to point out that somebody is wrong. that's just weak.
You are absolutely right. But I am not in the mood to care.
So basically what you are trying to convey is that there's no particular source of badness that makes badness happen, but that bad stuff happens because people do shitty things?
Because it's internal, not external. The enemy is all of us. As is the savior. And etc.
Hail Eris.
Well, fuck, after that post I'm inclined to call you hubris too.
I know, "I" am taking credit for an awful lot aren't I? :mrgreen:
A starving tiger on the island of Gangasagar attacked and ate a young boy. Good for the tiger-organism, because it lived; evil for the boy-organism because it died. The Universe at large did not care. A community of malaria organisms found their way into a vertebrate host and flourished. Good for them, evil for the guy who got malaria. Again, the Universe did not care. A star exploded in the Andromeda Galaxy; a snowflake crystallized in the air 1000 meters above Chos Malal, Argentina; and sharks tore apart a fur seal off the coast of South Africa.
The Universe did not care.
Cainad-the-universal-bringer-of-evil does not exist because evil is not an objective, experimentally verifiable thing which exists in the Universe. Evil has no energy spectrum, field equation, or mass.
Cainad-the-writer-of-moral-fables can exist, though, because good and evil are human constructs. They exist in just the same way as the concepts of beauty, existential angst, and Emma Bovary's ivory-white breasts. (WAIT! Substitute something sensible for that last item.)
To avoid the Wrath of Chaos every human has to take his gorm firmly into his own hands and declare, "While the Universe knows nothing of good and evil, I am a human and I say that I DO know good and evil. And I will not feed children to starving tigers, because that would be evil...evil because I say so."
Or so I would posit. I am probably veering wildly away from Cainad's vision here, but never mind, my blood's up and there are wasps buzzing in my fingertips.
Doesn't this mean that everyone has their own definition of good and evil? Yes, of course. Isn't that a recipe for madness, anarchy, and vile deeds? No, not at all. With the exception of genuine psychopaths, everyone goes to the same wells when drawing moral truths. You draw your morality from those you admire, from friends, great books, stories, poetry, teachers, even paintings and music.
If you are deeply religious, you follow your holy book. What it says is, by definition, true -- even if it says that a man wounded in the stones can never enter the congregation of God. (Stupid, but there it is.)
If you are an atheist, a humanist, or a discordian, you probably have to consciously evaluate what you learn. To my mind, that's a solid and useful way to arrive at a strong moral structure. Question everyone and everything that tries to tell you what to think! Check their logic, their honesty, their credentials, and the clarity of their eyes.
But unless you are capable of utterly ignoring every cue about good and bad, and capable as well of ignoring what seems to be a built-in mammalian empathy for other beings -- in other words, unless you really are a psychopath -- then you will assuredly attain a working definition of good and evil in human terms. The idea that no one has a moral framework unless god or gods give them one is just a load of old ox bollocks.
The Universe would explode the Sun in a heartbeat and wipe out Earth and all life on it, no regrets and no second chances...if the laws of physics demanded that event. The Universe is not able to tell us about morality.
We have to work that out ourselves, because we are human. May Eris help us.
(preachy, preachy, preachy. I should have gotten drunk before I wrote this.)
~~ Jack of Turnips
Quote from: Jack of Turnips on March 03, 2008, 03:41:32 AM
A starving tiger on the island of Gangasagar attacked and ate a young boy. Good for the tiger-organism, because it lived; evil for the boy-organism because it died. The Universe at large did not care. A community of malaria organisms found their way into a vertebrate host and flourished. Good for them, evil for the guy who got malaria. Again, the Universe did not care. A star exploded in the Andromeda Galaxy; a snowflake crystallized in the air 1000 meters above Chos Malal, Argentina; and sharks tore apart a fur seal off the coast of South Africa.
The Universe did not care.
Cainad-the-universal-bringer-of-evil does not exist because evil is not an objective, experimentally verifiable thing which exists in the Universe. Evil has no energy spectrum, field equation, or mass.
Cainad-the-writer-of-moral-fables can exist, though, because good and evil are human constructs. They exist in just the same way as the concepts of beauty, existential angst, and Emma Bovary's ivory-white breasts. (WAIT! Substitute something sensible for that last item.)
To avoid the Wrath of Chaos every human has to take his gorm firmly into his own hands and declare, "While the Universe knows nothing of good and evil, I am a human and I say that I DO know good and evil. And I will not feed children to starving tigers, because that would be evil...evil because I say so."
Or so I would posit. I am probably veering wildly away from Cainad's vision here, but never mind, my blood's up and there are wasps buzzing in my fingertips.
Doesn't this mean that everyone has their own definition of good and evil? Yes, of course. Isn't that a recipe for madness, anarchy, and vile deeds? No, not at all. With the exception of genuine psychopaths, everyone goes to the same wells when drawing moral truths. You draw your morality from those you admire, from friends, great books, stories, poetry, teachers, even paintings and music.
If you are deeply religious, you follow your holy book. What it says is, by definition, true -- even if it says that a man wounded in the stones can never enter the congregation of God. (Stupid, but there it is.)
If you are an atheist, a humanist, or a discordian, you probably have to consciously evaluate what you learn. To my mind, that's a solid and useful way to arrive at a strong moral structure. Question everyone and everything that tries to tell you what to think! Check their logic, their honesty, their credentials, and the clarity of their eyes.
But unless you are capable of utterly ignoring every cue about good and bad, and capable as well of ignoring what seems to be a built-in mammalian empathy for other beings -- in other words, unless you really are a psychopath -- then you will assuredly attain a working definition of good and evil in human terms. The idea that no one has a moral framework unless god or gods give them one is just a load of old ox bollocks.
The Universe would explode the Sun in a heartbeat and wipe out Earth and all life on it, no regrets and no second chances...if the laws of physics demanded that event. The Universe is not able to tell us about morality.
We have to work that out ourselves, because we are human. May Eris help us.
(preachy, preachy, preachy. I should have gotten drunk before I wrote this.)
~~ Jack of Turnips
tl/dr, got up to "the universe did not care" and got the point.
The Tao treats all as straw dogs.
Quote from: Lysergic on March 03, 2008, 05:26:38 AM
Quote from: Jack of Turnips on March 03, 2008, 03:41:32 AM
A starving tiger on the island of Gangasagar attacked and ate a young boy. Good for the tiger-organism, because it lived; evil for the boy-organism because it died. The Universe at large did not care. A community of malaria organisms found their way into a vertebrate host and flourished. Good for them, evil for the guy who got malaria. Again, the Universe did not care. A star exploded in the Andromeda Galaxy; a snowflake crystallized in the air 1000 meters above Chos Malal, Argentina; and sharks tore apart a fur seal off the coast of South Africa.
The Universe did not care.
Cainad-the-universal-bringer-of-evil does not exist because evil is not an objective, experimentally verifiable thing which exists in the Universe. Evil has no energy spectrum, field equation, or mass.
Cainad-the-writer-of-moral-fables can exist, though, because good and evil are human constructs. They exist in just the same way as the concepts of beauty, existential angst, and Emma Bovary's ivory-white breasts. (WAIT! Substitute something sensible for that last item.)
To avoid the Wrath of Chaos every human has to take his gorm firmly into his own hands and declare, "While the Universe knows nothing of good and evil, I am a human and I say that I DO know good and evil. And I will not feed children to starving tigers, because that would be evil...evil because I say so."
Or so I would posit. I am probably veering wildly away from Cainad's vision here, but never mind, my blood's up and there are wasps buzzing in my fingertips.
Doesn't this mean that everyone has their own definition of good and evil? Yes, of course. Isn't that a recipe for madness, anarchy, and vile deeds? No, not at all. With the exception of genuine psychopaths, everyone goes to the same wells when drawing moral truths. You draw your morality from those you admire, from friends, great books, stories, poetry, teachers, even paintings and music.
If you are deeply religious, you follow your holy book. What it says is, by definition, true -- even if it says that a man wounded in the stones can never enter the congregation of God. (Stupid, but there it is.)
If you are an atheist, a humanist, or a discordian, you probably have to consciously evaluate what you learn. To my mind, that's a solid and useful way to arrive at a strong moral structure. Question everyone and everything that tries to tell you what to think! Check their logic, their honesty, their credentials, and the clarity of their eyes.
But unless you are capable of utterly ignoring every cue about good and bad, and capable as well of ignoring what seems to be a built-in mammalian empathy for other beings -- in other words, unless you really are a psychopath -- then you will assuredly attain a working definition of good and evil in human terms. The idea that no one has a moral framework unless god or gods give them one is just a load of old ox bollocks.
The Universe would explode the Sun in a heartbeat and wipe out Earth and all life on it, no regrets and no second chances...if the laws of physics demanded that event. The Universe is not able to tell us about morality.
We have to work that out ourselves, because we are human. May Eris help us.
(preachy, preachy, preachy. I should have gotten drunk before I wrote this.)
~~ Jack of Turnips
tl/dr, got up to "the universe did not care" and got the point.
The Tao treats all as straw dogs.
Too bad. It's pretty damn good stuff.
"tl/dr" ----> The reason they fuck you in the ear and
get away with it.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 03, 2008, 05:32:54 AM
Quote from: Lysergic on March 03, 2008, 05:26:38 AM
Quote from: Jack of Turnips on March 03, 2008, 03:41:32 AM
A starving tiger on the island of Gangasagar attacked and ate a young boy. Good for the tiger-organism, because it lived; evil for the boy-organism because it died. The Universe at large did not care. A community of malaria organisms found their way into a vertebrate host and flourished. Good for them, evil for the guy who got malaria. Again, the Universe did not care. A star exploded in the Andromeda Galaxy; a snowflake crystallized in the air 1000 meters above Chos Malal, Argentina; and sharks tore apart a fur seal off the coast of South Africa.
The Universe did not care.
Cainad-the-universal-bringer-of-evil does not exist because evil is not an objective, experimentally verifiable thing which exists in the Universe. Evil has no energy spectrum, field equation, or mass.
Cainad-the-writer-of-moral-fables can exist, though, because good and evil are human constructs. They exist in just the same way as the concepts of beauty, existential angst, and Emma Bovary's ivory-white breasts. (WAIT! Substitute something sensible for that last item.)
To avoid the Wrath of Chaos every human has to take his gorm firmly into his own hands and declare, "While the Universe knows nothing of good and evil, I am a human and I say that I DO know good and evil. And I will not feed children to starving tigers, because that would be evil...evil because I say so."
Or so I would posit. I am probably veering wildly away from Cainad's vision here, but never mind, my blood's up and there are wasps buzzing in my fingertips.
Doesn't this mean that everyone has their own definition of good and evil? Yes, of course. Isn't that a recipe for madness, anarchy, and vile deeds? No, not at all. With the exception of genuine psychopaths, everyone goes to the same wells when drawing moral truths. You draw your morality from those you admire, from friends, great books, stories, poetry, teachers, even paintings and music.
If you are deeply religious, you follow your holy book. What it says is, by definition, true -- even if it says that a man wounded in the stones can never enter the congregation of God. (Stupid, but there it is.)
If you are an atheist, a humanist, or a discordian, you probably have to consciously evaluate what you learn. To my mind, that's a solid and useful way to arrive at a strong moral structure. Question everyone and everything that tries to tell you what to think! Check their logic, their honesty, their credentials, and the clarity of their eyes.
But unless you are capable of utterly ignoring every cue about good and bad, and capable as well of ignoring what seems to be a built-in mammalian empathy for other beings -- in other words, unless you really are a psychopath -- then you will assuredly attain a working definition of good and evil in human terms. The idea that no one has a moral framework unless god or gods give them one is just a load of old ox bollocks.
The Universe would explode the Sun in a heartbeat and wipe out Earth and all life on it, no regrets and no second chances...if the laws of physics demanded that event. The Universe is not able to tell us about morality.
We have to work that out ourselves, because we are human. May Eris help us.
(preachy, preachy, preachy. I should have gotten drunk before I wrote this.)
~~ Jack of Turnips
tl/dr, got up to "the universe did not care" and got the point.
The Tao treats all as straw dogs.
Too bad. It's pretty damn good stuff.
"tl/dr" ----> The reason they fuck you in the ear and get away with it.
Ok, fine, I went and read it.
And it was nothing I didn't already know, all good, all correct, all that I agree with, but I was right when I said "got up to "the universe did not care" and got the point."
Just Sayin.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 03, 2008, 05:32:54 AM
"tl/dr" ----> The reason they fuck you in the ear and get away with it.
Bullshit.
Not THINKING is the reason for that. Not READING someone else's long-winded twaddle has nothing to do with it, if you're already thinking. Even if it's YOUR twaddle, Roger.
The point of the twaddle is to get people who aren't already thinking to start, isn't it?
Go read my goddamn stories in Bring & Brag if you think they're fucking you in the ear for tl;dr. AHA! GOT YOU THERE, DIDN'T I BROTHER?
Quote from: Nigel on March 03, 2008, 05:53:16 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 03, 2008, 05:32:54 AM
"tl/dr" ----> The reason they fuck you in the ear and get away with it.
Bullshit.
Not THINKING is the reason for that. Not READING someone else's long-winded twaddle has nothing to do with it, if you're already thinking. Even if it's YOUR twaddle, Roger.
What's reading got to do with it? I was referring to the ATTENTION SPAN deficiency.
Quote from: Nigel on March 03, 2008, 05:53:16 AM
The point of the twaddle is to get people who aren't already thinking to start, isn't it?
Go read my goddamn stories in Bring & Brag if you think they're fucking you in the ear for tl;dr. AHA! GOT YOU THERE, DIDN'T I BROTHER?
They're fucking ME in the ear because I write blatantly threatening things about the prez.
So, to sum up this thread:
Good and evil is only in the mind of the beholder.
See, didn't need a long ass story to explain that.
Quote from: K-Scar on March 10, 2008, 05:55:24 PM
See, didn't need a long ass story to explain that.
No, but it would have helped make your post less LAEM.
:lulz:
Quote from: K-Scar on March 10, 2008, 05:55:24 PM
So, to sum up this thread:
Good and evil is only in the mind of the beholder.
See, didn't need a long ass story to explain that.
Zen koans are a niche market.
Quote from: Ratatosk on March 10, 2008, 08:00:24 PM
Quote from: K-Scar on March 10, 2008, 05:55:24 PM
See, didn't need a long ass story to explain that.
No, but it would have helped make your post less LAEM.
:lulz:
True, but if I had any delusion that I wasn't lame, I would have made the effort of caring.
Quote from: K-Scar on March 11, 2008, 02:56:03 AM
Quote from: Ratatosk on March 10, 2008, 08:00:24 PM
Quote from: K-Scar on March 10, 2008, 05:55:24 PM
See, didn't need a long ass story to explain that.
No, but it would have helped make your post less LAEM.
:lulz:
True, but if I had any delusion that I wasn't lame, I would have made the effort of caring.
Well, at that point you should have saved the effort of even posting... I mean if it weren't for long ass stories that restate what we all know over and over, what content would there be on PD.com?
:fnord: :lulz: :fnord:
Quote from: Ratatosk on March 11, 2008, 03:35:52 PM
Quote from: K-Scar on March 11, 2008, 02:56:03 AM
Quote from: Ratatosk on March 10, 2008, 08:00:24 PM
Quote from: K-Scar on March 10, 2008, 05:55:24 PM
See, didn't need a long ass story to explain that.
No, but it would have helped make your post less LAEM.
:lulz:
True, but if I had any delusion that I wasn't lame, I would have made the effort of caring.
Well, at that point you should have saved the effort of even posting... I mean if it weren't for long ass stories that restate what we all know over and over, what content would there be on PD.com?
:fnord: :lulz: :fnord:
Err...good point. Sorry 'bout that, folks.
Quote from: Ratatosk on March 11, 2008, 03:35:52 PM
Quote from: K-Scar on March 11, 2008, 02:56:03 AM
Quote from: Ratatosk on March 10, 2008, 08:00:24 PM
Quote from: K-Scar on March 10, 2008, 05:55:24 PM
See, didn't need a long ass story to explain that.
No, but it would have helped make your post less LAEM.
:lulz:
True, but if I had any delusion that I wasn't lame, I would have made the effort of caring.
Well, at that point you should have saved the effort of even posting... I mean if it weren't for long ass stories that restate what we all know over and over, what content would there be on PD.com?
:fnord: :lulz: :fnord:
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v711/Marburger/STFU/scrid-stfu.jpg)