So in terms of my way of approaching morality, my rule of thumb is in the prayer:
The Inclination to keep on Inclining forever be the ultimate winner of everything in all realities all variables of transformations forever Truthfully.
Things that are good would be propagated forever while things that are bad will be solved. Eventually we will get to True Justice, everybody gets whatever they wanted and needed whenever they wanted and needed them forever.
Therefore we can now what evil is, the misallocation of resources. Because evil prevents True Justice from taking place.
The tricky part is that evil sometimes plays out in various different forms in reality. What is sustainable and what is not sustainable sometimes is not easy to triangulate.
This is another way to relate to the whole thing:
It is evil if applied to itself it changed direction, it's good if applied to itself it propagates forward.
So:
- False Lies, changes direction / beats the purpose of lies
- Loving Love, propagates / enhances
- Violating violence, changes direction
- Bad badness (I don't know about this but it seems one could say that it means good)
- Kind kindness, propagates / enhances
etc...
Maybe I'm wrong about this, maybe there's something that's not so in reality... but if people found this to be accurate then it's assured
----------------------------
Ok if you apply it to conflict that means conflicting conflict (change of direction), I'm ready to accept that. I like conflict but maybe I'm wrong. But then Heating Heat (enhancement), Chilling Coldness = Heat up (change of direction) ---> This I'm likely wrong, how could coldness always be bad.
I do think that this thing is something though. So I wouldn't use it to separate good and evil, but it's a distinction of adjectives that might be good for something.
Another thing doubting doubt is an enhancement. Doubting doubt is good because it promotes skepticism and increases the demand for processing power to be allocated to assurance services in order to be able to afford increase in doubts. It seemed that doubt could ultimately be a good thing... however in reality there's such thing as too much doubt.
Maybe it's actually right, maybe doubt if we could afford it would ultimately be good, maybe ever increasing heat if we could afford it is the way to go, but also maybe not. Balancing balance
----------------------------
If I use the point of view of Inclinations I get a better grip on it.
For example if you darken the darkness then it'd amplify the darkness. Given the premise that positive words are synonymous with good, then darkness is good. But if you say darken the inclination to darken, then this darkness would branch out from the previous darkness because now it means lack of sensoric sensitivity. So if you darken the spirit of darkness then the spirit would had harder time to achieve it's goal which means things would become brighter. In this sense this darkness is negative.
So when things are not penetrable by light it's positive, but if it means that it would imperil the flow of information it's negative. It's good to be dark as long as it doesn't hinder the utility of senses.
Of course not forgetting to mention lighting the light would amplify it (positive), as well as enlightening the inclination to brightens (+).
----------------------------
Something wrong again about my perception previously. If you cool the inclination to cool it might not expand but it would intensify within / internally. If you see the reality of the universe within the field of gravity, the earth is heating up while the universe is expanding (cooling). Yes there's nothing to cool in space so it's hard to say that coldness expanded its territory, but such pattern is similar to what I said before, if the inclination to cool itself was cooling then the outside would be less cool but the inside would be cooler. Makes me think that if the inclination to heat up was invigorated, then the manifestation might be that it would spread heat while losing intensity per "pixel".
Such dynamism, the interplay between heat and coldness shows that they are "neutral". Which is an amazing phenomenon because it might speak of a constant. There the answer to what are the first things needed to be considered before making a reliable plan could be found.
------------------------
This is so weird, its still not usable yet
If you say justice is the state when everyone gets whatever they wanted and needed whenever they wanted and needed it forever (except for those who are against it)... then,
To treat the inclination to be unjust "unjustly" would amplify the injustice. Yes, because it doesn't mean that the spirit would not get what it wanted and needed, but it would just mean that it would be treated in a way that cause everyone to be harder (sorry...) in getting what they wanted and needed whenever they wanted and needed them, forever.
So Justice is positive, Injustice is also positive but both of them are the opposite of each other.
What is this?
It's true that the definition of justice itself is not logical, definitely the reason why this weirdness take place, but maybe there's logic behind this that would wrap this up sensibly.
- Side note : Even though the definition of justice is not logical but as human beings we could somehow relate to the meaning of it. I'm not saying that this is the best definition of justice, in this context I'm focusing on figuring out this conundrum.
------- Continued
So there's a better definition of Justice:
Justice is when The Inclination to keep on Inclining forever Truthfully gets whatever He wanted and needed whenever He wanted and needed them forever (and being the ultimate winner of everything in all realities and in all variabes of transformations forever Truthfully).
Now this definition is logical in my opinion, better than before but still Justice and Injustice both positive while the opposite of each other.
So maybe its just Justice, somehow Justice is special in a way
Edit 14 April 2022: Justice injustice is to me like an ultimate either or or, absolute binary. To just just is just Justice, to add into justice is just justice, injustice is the same. Crossing the two polars, to just injustice would mean Justice, to unjust the just means injustice, whichever is the doer / the operator is the one that would make the future... the one that would realize.
To not do injustice, self restraining, requires knowledge of justice or a sense of justice. In that sense, a just self restrain is operating Justice. This, is the most abusable for us as creatures of Justice.
Edit 15th of April 2022:
Now the question arise if once upon 3 seconds of your life you're neither adjusting for justice nor "unjusting" for injustice, would you be a part of the system that's productive or not productive? Let's say you were not being strategic about your idleness.
Since Justice is an inherent binary in existence the way the second law of thermodynamics apply to the concept or the inclination itself should be like "the only thing that doesn't change is change itself".
Ok now back to the first problem, we couldn't say that being idle would always be subjected to demeanings because we are talking about justice here. So my answer is if the level of availability of mutual solutions in the world increased the idle guy would be a part of the increase, if they decreased then the idle guy would be a part of the decrease.
To give you an example let's say a baby is being abandoned and she/he defecated on him/herself. Obviously the baby would suffer and that's injustice. However the baby himself/herself weren't in control, couldn't restrain herself couldn't bring herself to communicate with anybody. She's not a part of the negative, injustice. When her body keeps on trying to survive, she became a part of the positive.
Maybe a bad example that one, let's say you just sit idly without knowing what to do. You've done your work, your health routines, your hygienes, and you just sit there... adjusting nothing, changing nothing, just letting things go by, not sensing, not observing, not experiencing any evil desires and restraining them. Would you be deserving of UBIs for that particular moment? Would it be appropriate to say that you've also helped?
Really hard to say, referring to what Jesus said don't do to others what you don't want others do unto you, I couldn't really tell whether that's just about self restrain or also including being idle. But one thing that I believe is right, whether your world is improving or it is not, ultimately it is improving in the long run. Why? Because if it's not then this thought would not matter then.
No comments:
Post a Comment