Is it possible to do good things?

[Flavus Aquila]

Thinking we are separate separates us from it.

Hence the prevalent "I am me and you are other" and to suggest otherwise will often get a disagreement, and people quite regularly poopooing the idea that self is an illusion.

Individuality seems a red herring topic here.


So the major premise is that our ability to think makes it possible to distinguish ourselves from nature?
Is this just an illusion, or is a real separation possible?
ie. Are we just insisting that we are somehow different from nature, even though we are not?

 

[sprinkles]

Individuality seems a red herring topic here.

It isn't, because without it, the question of 'possibility to do good things' never arises, nor would it need to.

So the major premise is that our ability to think makes it possible to distinguish ourselves from nature?

That's one premise.

Is this just an illusion, or is a real separation possible?
ie. Are we just insisting that we are somehow different from nature, even though we are not?

It's an illusion, real separation is not possible.

This isn't to say that you don't exist, or aren't individuated. But rather it means that your internal state would not be caused without an external state. The fact that one can even ask how to do good in the first place should indicate that something is off. If all was fine then this question would not arise, because the stress that leads to the asking of the question would either not be present in the first place, or would itself be accepted as nature being itself.

 

[bagelriffic]

Yeah well look this all seems fun enough but aren't we just swapping stories here? Believing in non duality doesn't resolve anything, we might as well start worshipping the giant turtle who holds the earth up for the amount of good its doing anyone. And really this seems like a pretty detached and theoretical way of explaining something as personal as identity, somehow i doubt these theories of a dead man are going to resolve the ops dilemma in any sort of integral or honest way.

 

[Flavus Aquila]

Yeah well look this all seems fun enough but aren't we just swapping stories here? Believing in non duality doesn't resolve anything, we might as well start worshipping the giant turtle who holds the earth up for the amount of good its doing anyone. And really this seems like a pretty detached and theoretical way of explaining something as personal as identity, somehow i doubt these theories of a dead man are going to resolve the ops dilemma in any sort of integral or honest way.

Great...
So, have you actually got anything you want to say about the topic itself... you know, to help resolve the OP dilemma. (It can be as integral, or honest as you like).

 

[sprinkles]

Yeah well look this all seems fun enough but aren't we just swapping stories here? Believing in non duality doesn't resolve anything, we might as well start worshipping the giant turtle who holds the earth up for the amount of good its doing anyone. And really this seems like a pretty detached and theoretical way of explaining something as personal as identity, somehow i doubt these theories of a dead man are going to resolve the ops dilemma in any sort of integral or honest way.

I think I answered the question quite well, but let me translate it:
Can you do what one might call good? Yes.
How do you do it? Get above the system.
How do you get above the system? I outlined it previously.

Seems pretty straightforward and integral to me.

 

[sassafras]

Do you think a child molester is doing a good thing if, as a direct result of his actions, one of a his victims goes on to help other victims of child molesters? We're talking about an act that has produced a lot of (relative) good for a lot of people here... so maybe child molesters should be helped to molest the 'right' children so that we can have more counselors. Your tax dollars could help see this become a reality, and we could save the world.

Not that it qualifies in the grand cosmic scale of things (in which nothing at all qualifies because the universe is probably indifferent), but I really don't think you can just take the 'it's all subjective' argument all of the time... in the scenario I just described, the molestation was a catalyst for good, but not an inherently good act... and even the counselor isn't doing 'good' so much as repairing 'bad'-- and there's a difference between actively contributing value and bringing a deficit back to zero.

I think my point was that I'm not sure if the human race is ever going to be capable of escaping this undeniably destructive identity it has built for itself.

I also think it is possible to recognize good and evil... maybe not in a rational sense-- but probably in an intuitive one.

Um, what? Clearly there is difference between intent and inadvertent consequence. You started off by saying that it's impossible to do good in the absolute sense because bad things inadvertently ripple out from those good actions, so my counter-argument was that good outcomes inadvertently ripple out from bad actions. There, absolutism dissolved. I don't see how that takes a leap towards " go out to do bad things in hopes of bringing about good outcomes." Clearly, that's not what is happening with the destruction of the environment. This isn't an episode of Captain Planet. Mining corporations aren't doing the things they do because they hate nature; they're doing what they do because they're contributing to an economy, they're creating jobs, they're searching for new energy sources, etc.

Either way, you still haven't answered my question. How do you measure good? How do you define good? Or is it your point that, no matter what we intend to do, we will destroy the environment. If this is what you're getting at, then yes, I would agree with you and that this indeed qualifies as bad. However, I will disagree with you in the sense that it is impossible to do good ever, just because the environment is getting destroyed.

 

[bagelriffic]

Throwing beliefs at a problem doesn't fix it, if anything its escapism. And howtf should I know what the answer to his problem is if there even is one. Maybe I should tell him to go to church on sundays, read the koran or release his accumulated karma. Look I'm not knocking beliefs but the way we use them as some sort of band aide for our real life issues instead of getting real with ourselves about the situation were in. Otherwise you're just running away.

 

[sprinkles]

Throwing beliefs at a problem doesn't fix it, if anything its escapism. And howtf should I know what the answer to his problem is if there even is one. Maybe I should tell him to go to church on sundays, read the koran or release his accumulated karma. Look I'm not knocking beliefs but the way we use them as some sort of band aide for our real life issues instead of getting real with ourselves about the situation were in. Otherwise you're just running away.

This isn't belief. He even answers his own question.

Just being a human being with an average western lifestyle already makes you a liability.

Well, STOP BEING THAT WAY.

That's not belief, that's fricking logic bro.

 

[sprinkles]

Also it's exactly like this:

Decisions and ambivalence and pain all come from physics and stuffs going on in my brain as a result of previous things that happened. Obviously the things that happened to make me react in these ways are complex but it's not like normal physics doesn't keep its place..

This is karma! It's cause and effect.

For example, if I am the cause of 'previous things that happened' for [MENTION=3998]niffer[/MENTION], then that is my karma, I've attributed to a cause and the effect in niffer. Very much based on physics!

In fact 'karma' is to 'cause and effect' as 'inertia' is to 'an object's tendency to rest'. There are no karma tokens. There's no do-good rewards. If I blow shit up, shit is blown up. If I cause people to feel bad, people are caused to feel bad.

Why does a Western lifestyle cause you to do all this stuff? It's the karma of the corporations, the parties, the bullies, and the ignorant. If you want out of it you have to free yourself from the system! Will that fix the world? No. That's not something you can do anyway. However, if by fixing yourself you show that it's possible, others may follow you.

 

[ThisIsWhoIAm]

I get what you're saying, but if you're looking at this from such a broad, interlocking perspective, wherein every act of good inevitably brings about bad consequences, wouldn't it be also true that for every bad there is also an inadvertent good that comes about too?

In the end, life--and indeed nature-- is just the check and balance of various consequences. We assign certain values to consequences and develop creeds which dictate our actions; we may resolve to do more to bring about x and to counterpoint y, but whether the intended or inadvertent outcome is positive or negative largely depends on the perspective you're viewing it from. There's no true inherent value in anything that we do. What is good and what is bad is entirely limited to your perspective... which by the way, happens to evolve from and build upon the perspectives of others.

If we accept that good and bad are just values, and we accept that there is a ripple effect of our actions that result in numerous outcomes that can be labelled "good" and "bad" depending on perspective, then there is no absolute good and there is no absolute bad. Therefore, depending how you want to look at it, yes, it's impossible to do all good... but it's just as impossible to do all bad.

Free from the burden of that absolutism, we have a choice. Do we sit around and do nothing because no matter what we do we're going to fuck up somehow, or do we take deliberate action that we know and believe will directly benefit someone and trust that, even if there are inadvertent bad outcomes, there will also be inadvertent good outcomes in addition to the intentional good that we set out to do.

I believe that each person has a different perspective, and that each person can choose all the time between what seems in his eyes, thoughts and feelings as good and bad. As our perspective as individuals and even as a species is limited, we can not know all the consequences of our actions. And as you said, the question is, when keeping this in mind, do you reject the idea of morality altogether, or do you hold a value for good and a value for bad beyond the basic level of feeling good or feeling bad?
When it comes to human society, i believe we can all live a good life with mutual respect and harmony, theoretically. I think most moral systems are built on that ground.
By the way, we are part of this world, part of nature, even though many of us try to alienate themselves from nature. And as part of nature, i believe we bring the discussion of good and bad to being legitimately part of nature as well.

Edit: Sorry if my reply is unrelated to the conversation, i just noticed there are 3 pages ^^