Is bad required to have the good?

[Retro Rob]

A close freind of mine was relating a discussion to me that he had with a woman some time ago, and the topic of world peace came up.

Long story short, she was saying that we only recognize the good in the world because of the bad, and if it weren't for evil, there would be no good, if there wasn't disoroder, there would be no order, and so on. Then she finally said that having evil in the world gives us much needed balance.

He then asked if she'd be willing to move into a bad neighborhood to get this "balance" because she lives in a relatively peaceful environment, and she said no. He said he wasn't serious, but wanted to expose a flaw in that line of reasoning.

I think it absurd to say we need evil in the world to have the good, when time and time again, evil causes pain and suffering to lots of people, and people are good even when it isn't "needed".

I've struggled understanding the logic behind this kind of reasoning, and I personally don't need people breaking into my home to find out how good and helpful my neighbors are. Most times, people are nice without a bad thing having to happen, it just so happens we have evil in the world and good people trying to combat it.

This is probably more of a philosophical topic, but I was just wondering if anyone else feels like this woman.

Thanks.

 

[DaveSimmons]

I think it absurd to say we need evil in the world to have the good.

I agree. The most I'd say that holds true is that people would take good for granted in the absence of evil, just as they'd take health for granted in the absence of sickness, truth in the absence of lies, and so on.

In other words, if a species had no ability to lie then honesty wouldn't be a virtue, it would just be.

 

[moonbogg]

I see good and evil as nothing more than variability in conditions. If things were only good, there would still have to be levels of goodness, otherwise there would be nothing to experience. Things would have to be frozen in a constant, timeless state of perfect goodness. Anything other than that and you get variability, or a goodness gradient and that's what we live in.

 

[woolfe9998]

No, we don't need evil in the world to have good. Good would exist without evil. It's just that good would cease to be defined as a thing, because the idea of good only exists in contra-distinction to the idea of evil. Nonetheless, balance is not required in the real world. We can do without people behaving badly. I think the woman you're describing is confusing two different things.

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

I've struggled understanding the logic behind this kind of reasoning...

Stop, there isn't any.

 

[piasabird]

There must be opposition in all things. We dont have to have evil or good they just are. It is like ying and yang. To be born and live you have to accept that there is also pain misery and death. This is the world we live in. You can deny death but it will happen. You can argue about it but it exists. You planning on changing the universe?

Have you met a person that is perfect yet?

 

[moonbogg]

There must be opposition in all things. We dont have to have evil or good they just are. It is like ying and yang. To be born and live you have to accept that there is also pain misery and death. This is the world we live in. You can deny death but it will happen. You can argue about it but it exists. You planning on changing the universe?

Have you met a person that is perfect yet?

I think it doesn't need changing. Personally, I think that our relationships with other people are headed to a better future. I expect humanity to blossom like a flower, and right now we are just starting to bud. So its too early to judge the nature of what we have here until it is mature. If all you saw was the early stem of a rose, complete with thorns, would you say it was a nice flower? What about waiting for it to show its petals?
The problem is that we are self centered, so when we die we say we lived in a world with evil. We are an early part of something better which is developing. We are a necessary part.

 

[Retro Rob]

No, we don't need evil in the world to have good. Good would exist without evil. It's just that good would cease to be defined as a thing, because the idea of good only exists in contra-distinction to the idea of evil. Nonetheless, balance is not required in the real world. We can do without people behaving badly. I think the woman you're describing is confusing two different things.

Agreed.

I sometimes think it's a psychological thing, meaning, that people have to make "evil" some sort of normal requirement to add more comfort to their individual lives.

I may be stretching a bit, but hating evil means wanting it to end one day and if evil has to end in some shape or form, then their lives probably will have to be disrupted and/or drastically changed, and some simply don't want the inconvenience....so not do they only accept evil, they actually welcome it, granted, everyone else has to deal with it -- according to the disposition of the woman in my OP.

Eh, I dunno... just wondering why someone would feel like evil is necessary.

 

[Oyeve]

There can be good and there can be better, you dont need bad to have either.

 

[smackababy]

There can be good and there can be better, you dont need bad to have either.

This is sort of my idea. You don't need evil for their to be a good, because you can still have a neutral. Good and evil also aren't just black and white. There are many shades of grey.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

To say that there cannot be good without evil is like saying that an apple can't have a top without a bottom, while failing to realize that they are just two sides to the same thing.

 

[Zodiark1593]

Good and evil are mere perceptions, nothing more, and nothing less.

 

[Moonbeam]

I think that duality exists, particularly in the left hemisphere of the typical human brain, as a result of the development of symbolic representation via language. We have invented concepts that exist in our thinking and nowhere else in reality. The imaginary existence of good and evil are examples of things that have no reality except in our thinking.

But, just because such ideals may have no existence in reality does not mean that we can't have powerful emotions associated with them, or that we can't have experienced powerful brainwashing regarding their reality. We have a tremendous potential to have been persuaded that we, ourselves, are evil, and experience tremendous emotional suffering as a result.

For the mystic who has realized the essential delusion of duality, that there is only the direct experience of reality as a oneness or unity. Good and evil and all the considerations about them are replaced by the manifestation of divine love, our original natural state of being.

 

[ShagglestheLion]

Perhaps, it is best to look at the spirit and likeness of humanity.

I'd like to think that there is a spirit, moderating us into a higher state of being.

As long, as we destroy every Apple and every Apple product.

The world, will come into an understanding.

Then we PC Brains, will be able to exist on a plane of existence, where we make
up the rules.

...and tell the Apples, do you even know how to build a PC?

That will get their heads rolling?

Yeah yeah yeah, good vs. evil.

-ShagglestheLion - your loving lion friend.

 

[homebrew2ny]

If there was no 'bad' and you helped an old lady across the street, you still would have done a 'good' deed. But as alluded to, without the 'bad' to balance out the 'good' then it would become overshadowed as a norm. So, in a nut shell, we do not need 'bad' to have 'good', but we seemingly need 'bad' to pat ourselves on the back for the 'good' we do.

 

[Moonbeam]

If there was no 'bad' and you helped an old lady across the street, you still would have done a 'good' deed. But as alluded to, without the 'bad' to balance out the 'good' then it would become overshadowed as a norm. So, in a nut shell, we do not need 'bad' to have 'good', but we seemingly need 'bad' to pat ourselves on the back for the 'good' we do.

You make, I think, a number of unproven assumptions. Why is it good to help an old lady across the street. How does that differ, as far as the universe cares, from running her down. What do norms have to do with good or evil and why would anybody need to pat themselves on the back?

If you can't prove to me what is good or evil, how can you claim they exist? Do they not exist only because you have been programmed?

 

[homebrew2ny]

You make, I think, a number of unproven assumptions. Why is it good to help an old lady across the street. How does that differ, as far as the universe cares, from running her down. What do norms have to do with good or evil and why would anybody need to pat themselves on the back?

If you can't prove to me what is good or evil, how can you claim they exist? Do they not exist only because you have been programmed?

Your first mistake is avoiding a cardinal rule of a philosophical ideal, and that is you removed the context. In this case the context is humanity, a race that is hardwired to evolve based off of chance and reward. This is literally the precursor to 'good and bad' as we know it. So, now you can see how the notion of good and bad with regards to the human race is separate from your cosmic conclusion. Thus, good = reward and does not rely on 'bad' to exist.

My original post was made assuming we all understood that.

 

[bononos]

......
I think it absurd to say we need evil in the world to have the good, when time and time again, evil causes pain and suffering to lots of people, and people are good even when it isn't "needed".

I've struggled understanding the logic behind this kind of reasoning, and I personally don't need people breaking into my home to find out how good and helpful my neighbors are. Most times, people are nice without a bad thing having to happen, it just so happens we have evil in the world and good people trying to combat it.

This is probably more of a philosophical topic, but I was just wondering if anyone else feels like this woman.
Thanks.

This meme is going to be around because its similar to something in the bible about the poor always being around. Conservatives have seized on it as explaining the natural order of things and that is why you cannot change social patterns via big govt programs.