I’ve written over 200 posts! Thank you to everyone who’s followed my journey thus far! I look forward to seeing you all for another 200 posts! 🙂
Now to the topic at hand. I’ve gotten into yet another really awesome, stimulating conversation about my spiritual views, and thought I would share a little, namely share my current analysis of the concepts of good and evil, as well as why I believe the neutral is god.
To begin, a recap. My belief is that god is neutrality, the perfect serenity between the conflict of good and evil. I believe that god has sent us here, in this life, to experience. We live this life to experience good and evil, experience conflict (the opposite of peace and serenity) in order to truly appreciate and better understand neutrality after this life is over. With this in mind, I’ll try to define what good and evil mean to me.
When we look at the Webster dictionary definition of ‘good,’ we get, “virtuous; morally excellent.” Contrarily, evil is defined as, “immoral; offensive.” So we move to the definitions of moral and immoral, which lead to what is ethical and unethical, what is right and wrong. This revolves back to the words of good and evil again, and so we find that, in trying to define these words, we simply end up using alternative words which all mean the same thing, and yet we still don’t know what that meaning is. I find the only way to break this cycle is to use the words positive and negative. Something good involves a positive outcome, while something evil involves a negative outcome. Simple, yes?
Not really. Now we need to figure out in whose perspective must the action or event or thing be to determine if it is good or evil, positive or negative. This becomes a huge problem. When analyzing events, actions, things, and the effects on those involved with them, we find that there is really no point where all peoples involved in any action, event, or thing would 100% agree upon the positivity or negativity of it. There will always be an optimist or pessimist in the group who will point out that, in some way, there will be a positive or negative repercussion to any action, event, or thing. No matter how horrible the atrocity of the Holocaust, there were those who, for some amount of time, benefited from those atrocities. This does not make them good events, but shows that good can come from evil events, just as evil can come from the most good intents, such as the atrocities of the Crusades.
This is not to say there is not some dividing line, as I have referenced before. With so many perspectives, however, on what is moral and immoral (or whatever terms you’d like to use), I do not believe it is possible to know truly know, in this life, definitively, where the line truly lies. We each determine where the line is for each of us as individuals. This is why some people don’t care if they step on a bug, but others feel bad and contemplate the death of the bug. It is why some agree with the right to homosexual marriage and others consider it a moral injustice. It is why people of the same religion argue about the right to abortion. Guidelines may be presented to steer us in a favorable direction, in order for us to understand the most grandiose extremes of good and evil, but it is up to us to personally determine where we stop moving toward the middle. It is not, I believe, a fear of the other side, but more a fear of when the line is truly crossed, since we do not really know where the true dividing line is. We must determine our own line, hope and personally believe it is the right line, and restrict ourselves to it. No matter where we personally put the line, however, we will inevitably cause evil as well as good in our lives. Our good-intentioned actions will cause negative repercussions for others. In the same way, evil actions do have positive repercussions for some people involved. We can look outward, to some outer power, to show us the true line, but if we get an answer, there is no way to prove that answer to all other people. We are so fixated on our own personal lines that we cannot trust others’ opinions of where our line lies, no matter what their proof or opinion may be. There are those with sense enough to be open to change, to others’ opinions, but generally, we shut down when told our idea of good and evil is wrong. And so all we can rely on is our own interpretation of good and evil, our own experiences of positive and negative results due to certain events, to determine what actions and events are right and wrong to us.
So why does this all matter? I bring back my idea of god, the neutral, the center peace. With good comes evil, and with evil comes good, all according to each individual’s perspective of an event, action, or thing. In this, we see a constant conflict, the conflict between good and evil, always balancing back and forth. With every Hitler, there is a Gandhi, as it were. Looking at this need for personal perspective on good versus evil, I come to the question of what would we be if one of these two sides did not exist? Certainly there would be no conflict without one or the other? Yet as I think about it, even within the sole realm of good can there be a pessimist, and in the sole realm of evil there can be a ray of hope. Again, the balancing act of conflict continues. What is the opposite of conflict? Peace. Only if both were to not exist, if they were to nullify, would true peace be obtained, true neutrality.
Through this I say that, if there is a god (and as I’ve stated before, I believe there is), then god must exist in the neutral, in true peace. God, as the origin of all, is non-conflict, and conflicts with nothing, and therefore cannot be good nor evil. The neutral is the final balance of good and evil, where there are no positives and no negatives, just calm. Neutrality, true god, is the dividing line of good and evil, where neither good nor evil reigns. This is why the dividing line is such a grey area for us as humans, because it is beyond us. Living in the world of conflict, we cannot truly understand neutrality in this life. We are too bombarded by the conflict to have enough time to love the neutral.
This, in essence, is the reason we are here. If the world was only good, with no evil, and they were not to balance out, but for one to conquer the other fully, would we not be so surrounded by goodness, positivity, so much that we would lose appreciation for that goodness? If you eat your favorite ice cream every night for a year, it gets boring. If we did not acknowledge what would happen in the absence of gravity, would we still appreciate our ability to stick to the earth so much? For me personally, I could not appreciate what I have without understanding, in some capacity, the opposite of it. Therefore I believe we are here to experience the opposite of god, conflict, in order to truly understand and appreciate god and neutrality after this life is over.
I could certainly keep going to explain my belief that god created both good and evil, created the nature of conflict, in order for us to experience it and learn from it, but it is getting very very late and I am tired. Questions? Comments below, please! 🙂