http://members.tripod.com/~lithien/pixiedust.html
-----Original Message-----
From: Lithien <Lithien@ix.netcom.com>
To: moq_discuss@moq.org <moq_discuss@moq.org>
Date: Monday, January 18, 1999 9:19 AM
Subject: Re: MD AN HOLISTIC EVIL
>Dear David:
>
>i would like to answer and comment on some of your fine points regarding
>evil. but first, let me concur with you that i have always seen the
>hurricane as a symbol for Dynamic Quality and said so in other posts.
>anything that is uncontrollably active and causes change from life to death
>to rebirth and so on, is in my opinion symbolic of DQ. and when it comes
to
>hurricanes Miami is the place to experience one first-hand. remember
>Andrew?
>
>you say:
><. I've spent alot of time trying to understand Hitler.
>
>lithien:
>to understand Hitler, one has to read about Hegel. you are right when you
>say :
>
><In Hitler's case, a man who claimed to be the very embodiment of the
>German national spirit, maybe we could say he confused the social level
>values for intellectual values.
>
>lithien:
>that is exactly right. Hegel believed in the state as an organism (much
>like Pirsig describes the static social level btw) which superseded an
>individual's rights. only an individual who encompassed the state's mythos
>was important...like Napoleon, and of course, Hitler himself.
>i see this as giving higher value to the social level than the intellectual
>level. i think therefore it was doomed to failure since as we see in the
>MOQ the intellectual level is more advanced and had more value as a result.
>although, at different ends of the continuum, communism is based on Hegel's
>ideas too, giving the state the right to supersede any individuality. in
>both these systems the individual is to be crushed like an insect unless it
>becomes a part of the social order and supports it. so interpreting these
>events in terms of the MOQ, Hitler and communism are evil because they have
>less value and try to circumvent a higher level: the intellect.
>
>you add:
><I see the current impeachment trial of Clinton in this
>light.
>
>lithien:
>i dont mean to start a political argument because each of us formulates
>their own opinion regarding politics and religion, but if we follow Hegel's
>premise that i stated above. then, the democratic party which believes
that
>govt. should be an integral part of people's life, social security,
>pensions, welfare, etc. would be more in line with Hegel than the
>republicans who believe in laissez faire or the hands off policy where
govt.
>is concerned. btw, im an independent voter so im not tryng to score
brownie
>points for any party.
>
>i do agree with you in that conservatives see clinton as the embodiment of
>the "evil" 60's.
>
>you ask:
><Did you see my last post where "sin"
>is redefined as a misunderstanding or misconception?
>
>lithien:
>yes, i did and being a lover of words enjoy seeing their origins and how
>their meanings change over time. im not sure if i agree that evil is only
>misunderstanding or ignorance though.
>
>david, you also mentioned:
><It interesting that Jeffrey Dhamer said he ate his victims because, "I
>wanted them to be a part of me." Think of that comment in the light of
>Maggies post on the cognitive stages in our evolution and the primary
>culture where the dead are eaten by friends and relatives as an act of
>honor. Maybe Jeffrey's evil was the result of some kind of was the result
of
>some kind of confusion of an earlier form of consciousness with his normal
>modern existence.
>
>lithien:
>funny you should mention that since i was doing some rereading on Jung and
>came across his Answer to Job. maybe because i have been thinking so much
>about the provenance of evil, i think i found what i was looking for.
>Jung writes:
>"God as a morally evolving personality is the extraordinary conception of
>Answer to Job."
>in other words, he sees God as being affected by the changes in our
>unconscious...as mankind changes so does God. (btw, it is very interesting
>what this does to the idea of Christ as a savior)
>now, this would fit in with the MOQ admirably since it is based on
perpetual
>changes of value and morality. if Jung saw God as the dynamic process of
>the collective within us, then Dynamic Quality is the same thing. only now
>it explains evil too. for as Jung puts it:
>
>"The importance of consciousness is so great that one cannot help
suspecting
>the element of meaning be concealed somewhere within all the monstrous,
>apparently
>senseless biological turmoil, and that the road to its manifestation was
>ultimately found on the level of warm-blooded vertebrates possessed of a
>differentiated brain--found as if by chance, unintended and unforeseen, and
>yet somehow sensed, felt and groped for out of some dark urge."
>
>this dark urge which sometimes destroys and causes what we call "evil" may
>be as you say:
>
><that we all recapitulate the evolution of consciouness
>in our own cognitive development. Sometimes the natural unfolding of the
>mind is interrupted by sickness or trauma and the person gets stuck there.
>
>anyway, im starting to get a clearer idea of evil after reading Jung. what
>do you think?
>
>finally you mentioned:
><I was strangely riveted to the scene in Lila where
>the author conducts a ritual to put Lila's doll to rest. The ritual itself
>fascinates me, although I'm not sure what it means...
>
>lithien:
>it fascinated me too. that is why i wrote about it in my essay which you
>can read at the url below. please, tell me what you think about it.
>http://members.tripod.com/lithien/Lila.html
>
>i have enjoyed discussing this with you,
>
>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