struan says:
<an insistence upon the reality of evil as well as an insistence that,
'Quality is all,' requires Quality to be (at least in part) evil and with
that admission we enter
into all sorts of coherence problems which have plagued most religions for
thousands of years.
lithien:
that is exactly my point. but then you go on and say there is no evil only
good and give the rather benign problem of two boys being in love with the
same girl. lets examine true evil please. something like the intentional
destruction of human life without a purpose or need of self-preservation.
something like the examples i have given already: the mass extermination of
a people based on certain criteria like ethnicity, religion or race. or a
cold blooded act like the ambush of children in a schoolyard by other
children, or the killing and cannibalizing of others like jeffrey dohmer.
where does this "evil" reside? where does it come from? what is its
nature? surely you dont deny its existence?
roger, you say:
<Struan, I agree that evil is not separate to quality; the duality is an
intellectual construct. The oppositional forces are necessary to drive the
advancement to more complex and dynamic patterns
lithien:
in this statement it seems to me you are saying the opposite of struan. you
believe that the duality of good and evil is illusory and that they are the
one and the same. then Dynamic Quality is the provenance of evil (as
perceived by us at the intellectual level) in order to produce the changes
required to advance to more complex and dynamic patterns.
peter, on the other hand, says:
<When everyone knows good as goodness, there is already evil."
and
<Good and evil are inextricably intertwined. Once you start to see that a
lot of things fall in to place. Such a view does not imply dualism but
rather allows for complementarity as discussed in Pirsig's '95 paper
"Subjects, Objects, data and Values".
and:
<The yin-yang principle is not, therefore, what we would ordinarily call
a dualism, but rather an explicit duality expressing an implicit unity."
lithien:
this is what the words above made me see. a figure half female, half male,
half dark, half light, when it turns to the right in profile i see the
light male half and no other. it is as if the other side did not exist.
when it turns to the left, i see the dark female side. it is as if the
other side did not exist. when it turns into a frontal view i see that they
are both connected down the middle therefore one. the half that is dark and
female is the principle of creation. the half that is light and male is the
principle of destruction. things and events happen in temporal time as
cycles of life, death, rebirth in an eternal dance. the active process that
perpetuates this cycle is Dynamic Quality.
this roger, is my Heart of Darkness. although, it doesnt answer the
questions that i posed above that is why i keep asking them. to reject them
because one cannot explain them is only avoidance. one may argue why the
male is the destructive side, the answer to that is that the female
definitely creates life and that cannot be argued. the only other place for
the destructive principle by default is the male. but i may be wrong about
that.
Lithien
homepage - http://www.moq.org
queries - mailto:moq@moq.org
unsubscribe - mailto:majordomo@moq.org with UNSUBSCRIBE MOQ_DISCUSS in
body of email
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:02:49 BST