Do you believe in EVIL?

[Dexter Sinister]

That is what I mean, you don't know me, on this board I have said the when it suits God ...

And that's what I mean, I know you well enough to know that's exactly the kind of answer you'd give, based on your reading of a book you believe to be absolutely true, correct, and consistent, which it demonstrably is not.

About what?

Everything. A perpetual motion machine is a very fundamental violation of the rules I understand about how the world works, so if you can build one, I will concede that your understanding of reality is superior to mine.

 

[Cliffy]

I believe I better build a brake for that perpetual motion wheel before I build the wheel and I believe that brake should be overbuilt
And you?

Lots of stuff. Like, "democracy is a movie they play to entertain us while they go about doing whatever they please" and "trying to get spiritual nourishment from a two hundred year old book is like trying to suck milk from the breast of a woman who has been dead that long" - Cliffy

 

[Dexter Sinister]

How do I know what evil is, UNLESS I know what good is?
And how do I know what good is, UNLESS there is an objective source of such thing?

Why does the source have to be objective? And what does that really mean anyway? I would assume you mean the source must be something outside of or beyond ourselves. Would you also require that there be an objective source of evil? By requiring an objective source for one or both, you're already biasing the terms of the discussion in a way that limits the arguments you'll accept as legitimate. Implicitly, you're claiming that mere humans are incapable of distinguishing good and evil by themselves; you need to justify that claim before you can justify closing off that part of the discussion, otherwise you're just begging the question.

 

[MHz]

And that's what I mean, I know you well enough to know that's exactly the kind of answer you'd give, based on your reading of a book you believe to be absolutely true, correct, and consistent, which it demonstrably is not. Everything. A perpetual motion machine is a very fundamental violation of the rules I understand about how the world works, so if you can build one, I will concede that your understanding of reality is superior to mine.

I thought some French guy had one spinning already, it was really, really tall and had many small devices, same principle just a slightly different power ratio. The one he built looks quite delicate actually, a more brute-force approach would be better if it is to actually be useful with the minimal expense in materials and maintenance.

 

[MHz]

I believe I better build a brake for that perpetual motion wheel before I build the wheel and I believe that brake should be overbuilt
And you?

Lots of stuff. Like, "democracy is a movie they play to entertain us while they go about doing whatever they please" and "trying to get spiritual nourishment from a two hundred year old book is like trying to suck milk from the breast of a woman who has been dead that long" - Cliffy

You still have a ways to go if you are trying to write like your friend LMAO.

Were you in there? either one?

 

[L Gilbert]

I know there is evil running amok. But then my definition for evil = bad = antisocial = malicious = malevolent. In my books there is nothing mystical about it: no demons infiltrating us.
And then there are degrees of "evil": is someone stealing a can of tuna more evil than oil companies' price fixing fuels? Yet one is legal and the other isn't.

 

[ahmadabdalrhman]

What do you think of the notion of ''evil''?

Is evil relative? Is it a matter of personal opinion? Are some things evil no matter what?
Is ''evil'' a human construct that has no existence whatsoever outside the human mind?

Allah tells us He is Pure, Loving, and absolutely Just in every respect. He says He is the Best of Judges. He also tells us the life we are in here is a test. He has created everything existing and He created whatever happens as well. There is nothing in this existence except what He has created. He also says in the Quran He created evil (although He is not evil). He is using this as one of the many tests for us.
Consider people who do so much evil in the earth and then live to a ripe old age in the splendor and wealth of their ill-gotten gains and die without ever being taken to task for their deeds. Where is the justice or fairness in this? Allah provides a clear answer for us in Quran as to what is in store for these most evil of people
Reward and punishment are definitely a part of the Next Life on a very permanent basis. Those who suffer in this life and seemly have nothing to show for all their hard works, good deeds and sacrifices and maintaining the faith can look forward to a far greater reward in a place where these things will not be temporary but rather they will be for eternity. Those who corrupt, violate, injure and do evil and destruction seem to escape any justice here, yet in the Next Life they too will see the fruits of their labors, and certainly they will be paid according to what they have done as well.
As regards oppression, this is something Allah forbids for Himself to do to anyone and He hates it when anyone oppresses someone else. He does have absolute power over everything. He allows sickness, disease, death and even oppression so we can all be tested in what we do.

 

[Cliffy]

Then there is karma. What goes around comes around. Those that are responsible for oil spills that kill millions of birds and sea life, i hope come back as a cormorant choking on an oil slick, but that could be wishful thinking or karma. Who knows? I am leary of anyone who thinks they know because the self righteous are dangerous.

Books are written by men and interpreted by men and men are dickheads (that is they think with their dicks more than their brains - at least until their prostate gives up the ghost. By then their brains aren't in any better shape.)

 

[MHz]

A perpetual motion machine is a very fundamental violation of the rules I understand about how the world works, so if you can build one, I will concede that your understanding of reality is superior to mine.

You don't have to go that far. If you are mechanically inclined a simple description should be enough that you can fill in the banks. I don't believe what is common knowledge is patentable.

First the theory, if I hold tow equal weights away from my body and one is further away it will 'appear' be be a greater weight'. If the other weight is held close to the body it will 'appear' to be lighter.

A schoolyard playground, a teetertotter, two equal weights, two unequal distances from the fulcrum, you have mass and movement. Now dig a hole so the 'balance beam' can go full circle, if the 'weights' could walk back and forth sot that 'on the right' was always close to the center and 180degrees later he was far from the center. Would the wheel continue to turn.

Distance and weight should have a maximum potential. (ie, 10 lbs is best suited by a distance of D1, 100lbs is best suited by D10)

A force of 4 in one direction is greater than 4 forces and 4 directions, so the heavier these things become the more important it is to have them running with forces equally opposed, thgis is part of the braking system.

Now that you have something spinning you need an axel that does not turn attached to a gear that does not turn. You then need two disks that are attached to this same axle but these do torn and they are paralle to each other. They have 4 axels at each 90deg point, there is a bearing on each axel and an arm attached to each bearing along with a gear the same as on the stationary axel. those two gears mesh (in a practical unit belts are used as they create less friction over-all) so that as the main disk trrms the outer gear goes in the opposite direction, same ratio turn after turn after turn.

At the end of these arms are weights, very heavy weight that are limited only by what the framework will sfely hold. Viewed from the side the weight would be far away from the center when on the right, (because of gearing the arm will always be in that direvtion relatibe to the bearing (it will always point to the right) and when on the left it will be closer to the center so it will noot have as much force on the disk as it dis 180deg ago, the disk will turn anti-clockwise.

That should get you started. LOL

 

[Cliffy]

Allah tells us He is Pure, Loving, and absolutely Just in every respect.

If I told you I was a good and just god, would you believe me? Why should you believe him. Mohammad was pimping for god. The bible writers were pimping for god. Why do you believe their sales pitch and not mine? What is the difference, besides your own personal prejudice?

 

[MHz]

I think that is his free will that is resisting your sales pitch, I see it more as a comedy show.

 

[islandboi]

My long dead grandmother used to say, "A little schadenfreude never hurt anyont".

Did this make her, bless her departed soul, inherently evil?

 

[MHz]

Well if she has been saying it for so long after she's been dead, why did she stop, maybe she doesn't believe it anymore.

 

[Francis2004]

How do I know what evil is, UNLESS I know what good is?
And how do I know what good is, UNLESS there is an objective source of such thing?

This thread completely ties in with my recent argument in the Does God Exist?

Of course ones belief in Evil will tie in with ones belief in God.

Why does the source have to be objective? And what does that really mean anyway? I would assume you mean the source must be something outside of or beyond ourselves. Would you also require that there be an objective source of evil? By requiring an objective source for one or both, you're already biasing the terms of the discussion in a way that limits the arguments you'll accept as legitimate. Implicitly, you're claiming that mere humans are incapable of distinguishing good and evil by themselves; you need to justify that claim before you can justify closing off that part of the discussion, otherwise you're just begging the question.

Either way it is bias.. Everything has to mean something.. How can it mean nothing ?

Objectively you can question the subject with as much of an open mind as possible without having a conclusion but either way it will have a bias from the start.. That does not mean you cannot change your opinion. It will only determine how much it will require you to change that opinion..

 

[Cliffy]

I think that is his free will that is resisting your sales pitch, I see it more as a comedy show.

It was meant to be. I am a god though, but only to me. You are too but you don't believe it.

 

[MHz]

How do your rules to yourself differ from the last 9/10 commandments?

 

[Cliffy]

My god doesn't have any rules. He wouldn't stifle my creativity in any way. And I can have sex or masturbate without feeling guilty.

 

[MHz]

My god doesn't have any rules. He wouldn't stifle my creativity in any way. And I can have sex or masturbate without feeling guilty.

That's what i mean when I say that some answers should just be kept to the owner alone........
Does that give you the right to masturbate while sitting on a park bench? Something like that would come under a rule or no rule. Murder would also need a ruling, that sort of stuff. It's gibberish to say no rules.

 

[Dexter Sinister]

A schoolyard playground, a teetertotter, two equal weights, two unequal distances from the fulcrum, you have mass and movement. Now dig a hole so the 'balance beam' can go full circle, if the 'weights' could walk back and forth sot that 'on the right' was always close to the center and 180degrees later he was far from the center. Would the wheel continue to turn.

Yes, but that's not a perpetual motion machine, moving the weights back and forth requires a constant input of energy. Without an energy input, friction in the bearings the weights ride on, and in the axle the device rotates around, will bring it to a halt. The other design you described won't work for the same reasons. A perpetual motion machine cannot be built.

 

[Cliffy]

It's gibberish to say no rules.

We are born with an innate knowledge of right and wrong. We learn how to do things that hurt others through the examples and attitudes of others. Good and bad are judgments, not rules or laws. Laws are for people who have had their innate knowledge twisted by society.

I live by a simple principle: if it feels good, it is in tune with my higher purpose. If it feels bad, I am not living up to that purpose. Eventually, by elimination, I will come to know my purpose, if I don't die first. Then I might have to come back and pick up on where I left off.