A Divine quote?

If we abandon the notion of free will, or at least acknowledge that someone’s actions are at least, in part, a product of all their previous experiences, forgiveness, as a notion, becomes moot.

 A conditional statement (also called an If-Then Statement) is a statement with a hypothesis followed by a conclusion. Another way to define a conditional statement is to say, “If this happens, then that will happen.” The hypothesis is the first, or “if,” part of a conditional statement.

 
Free will (at an informationally objective view) is to have two or more potential afforded choices of action and to act (or not act) in light of them.  Most real-world circumstances occur with random events and do offer multiple degrees of freedom, in an ecological context.  So your concluded premise means little without a founded first proposition.

On the other hand, I am very interested in the actions have "products of experience" assertion.  I know what a product is in math or in manufacturing.  I understand coding and organizational plans as products, products composed of documented information objects.

what do mean by a product that influences behavior? and are you talking about peptides and neuro-chemicals?
are you speaking about memes?  

Hi Tim, thanks for your response!

I may not have made my point clearly. The vast majority of humans are complicit in the suffering and killing of millions of animals, every single day. I emphasise every single day, because that is to my mind an unimaginable level of suffering that we as humanity inflict on helpless and vulnerable animals. Any human is complicit in that suffering every single time they buy or eat a product or by-product of that industry of death of suffering.

When I say the vast majority revel in it, again perhaps I didn't make myself clear. Every time someone's eyes light up at a steak, they are reveling. Every time someone says that was lovely after eating meat, they are reveling. Every time someone looks for a sale on meat products, they are reveling. Every time an advert is shown on tv saying death and suffering is "finger licking good", we are reveling. I'm sorry, I've been around for more than 2 or 3 decades, so I know I what I meant when I said it, and I observe this complicit behaviour and reveling in the products of an industry of unimaginable death and suffering every single day and from the vast majority of people.

To imply the "vast majority" are not actually the ones inflicting the suffering and death directly, therefore not "evil" by your own definition, is in my mind no different to saying the person who hires a hit is not culpable for murder, or a despot political leader, like Hitler, is not culpable for murder because he was never at Auschwitz.

Ahh, perhaps this ties in with what Stan was getting it; "Evil" is a matter of perspective, and perhaps from a "higher" or "Divine" perspective, it simply does not exist?

Manjit, note that I didn't make a fuss about your first post (aimed at me) which was quite patronising with added assumptions (to say the least) even if you didn't intend it to be.

I hadn't realised you'd seen so little evidence of any intellect at work in any of my other contributions to the forum, that I would need to point out my position on all this, but rest assured, I am well aware of the ill treatment and suffering of animals and the hypocrisy of people (who might profess to care about it) who still eat burgers and fried chicken and imagine (if they won't admit it) they are not complicit in the whole problem.

However, someone who eats a bucket of fried chicken would not (in my humble opinion) be indistinguishable from someone who dismembers children or puts people into gas ovens alive.  

The problem of the suffering of animals and how we can change the systems that have created it, are complex. Indeed the whole problem of the suffering of everything (if it's caused by mankind alone) is even more complex.

That's why I was debating with Stan about that novelist's quote which I think is too simplistic.

However, someone who eats a bucket of fried chicken would not (in my humble opinion) be indistinguishable from someone who dismembers children or puts people into gas ovens alive.

Sorry Tim, not following here.  Did you mean to say the two examples ARE distinguishable?  I'm confused.

Hi Tim,

Not sure why you found my comment/s patronising, but I have long learnt not to feel guilt at the misunderstanding/misreading of others into my comments, so I will ignore that!

I was simply making the point that "evil" is almost always something "other people" are, whilst we as a society all to easily dismiss or rationalise away our own propensity to similar types of acts as "justified", or as you have here, "complex".  And, that there are or at least maybe other perspectives, beyond that of the conceptual human mind and it's endless litany of incoherent beliefs, which recontextualise notions of "evil", "love", "forgiveness" beyond that what is found in, imo, unsophisticated, limited and limiting religious belief systems.

I find it somewhat amusing you dismiss the quotes Stan provided, one of which was by Khalil Gibran, whom you are certainly the first person I have ever heard say his teachings were "simplistic" (of course, I am certain you haven't actually read any of his material, so that is easy to understand) - whilst apparently defending , imo, extremely simplistic notions of good and evil.

Before I leave, these kind of unduly defensive responses and resort to ad hominem comments to anybody that doesn't believe exactly as I do, that challenges any of my beliefs or concepts or interpretations etc, are the reason I don't care to share too much too often, so I will not comment on this thread again.

Finally, I have found not taking oneself too seriously and having a sense of humour to be a Divine quality in itself. I only wish more humans would share in that sentiment.

All the best, and apologies for being "patronising".

PS, re. free will, I'm with Ramana Maharshi on that one. Pretty sure it's not too simplistic 

"19. Arguments about destiny and free-will are carried on by those who have not realized. Those who have, are free from both. . ."

Verse 19, 40 verses on reality.

Ramana Maharshi

Sorry Tim, not following here.  Did you mean to say the two examples ARE distinguishable?  I'm confused.

No worries. Eating a burger is not comparable (atrocity wise) to putting someone into a gas oven (Auschwitz) . I presume you would agree with that?

No worries. Eating a burger is not comparable (atrocity wise) to putting someone into a gas oven (Auschwitz) . I presume you would agree with that?

Certainly.

I recently watched a rather horrific and dark Netflix series titled "The Trials of Gabriel Fernandez".  It brought the question of evil to the forefront for me.  It was also a highly emotionally charged thing to watch as I am a parent.  While there was an entire, long chain of adults who ultimately failed to protect Gabriel, I kept coming back to the question of evil and by extension the question raised in this thread of forgiveness.

I currently (meaning my views are subject to change) see a stark contrast between actions I would label as evil and those I might not.  Taking pleasure and solace in the systemic torturing of a child is just evil.  Failing to do your job as a social worker, while contributing to the same end result, may not be evil but may just be human fallibility; something that may be forgiven.

Again, I'm not 100% certain on this but I can not rule out the concept of evil, separate and apart of negligence, cowardice, apathy, etc.  I realize all those things can lead to really horrible things happening to other beings, but it feels to me that there is a difference.

Otherwise, using this Netlix series on child abuse as an example, wouldn't all people in the same circumstances as Gabriel's mother and step-father resort to systemic torture?  No, feels like there was something more at work there.

Hence, my question which basically asks is evil to be forgiven?

Hi Tim,

Not sure why you found my comment/s patronising, but I have long learnt not to feel guilt at the misunderstanding/misreading of others into my comments, so I will ignore that!

I was simply making the point that "evil" is almost always something "other people" are, whilst we as a society all to easily dismiss or rationalise away our own propensity to similar types of acts as "justified", or as you have here, "complex".  And, that there are or at least maybe other perspectives, beyond that of the conceptual human mind and it's endless litany of incoherent beliefs, which recontextualise notions of "evil", "love", "forgiveness" beyond that what is found in, imo, unsophisticated, limited and limiting religious belief systems.

I find it somewhat amusing you dismiss the quotes Stan provided, one of which was by Khalil Gibran, whom you are certainly the first person I have ever heard say his teachings were "simplistic" (of course, I am certain you haven't actually read any of his material, so that is easy to understand) - whilst apparently defending , imo, extremely simplistic notions of good and evil.

Before I leave, these kind of unduly defensive responses and resort to ad hominem comments to anybody that doesn't believe exactly as I do, that challenges any of my beliefs or concepts or interpretations etc, are the reason I don't care to share too much too often, so I will not comment on this thread again.

Finally, I have found not taking oneself too seriously and having a sense of humour to be a Divine quality in itself. I only wish more humans would share in that sentiment.

All the best, and apologies for being "patronising".

PS, re. free will, I'm with Ramana Maharshi on that one. Pretty sure it's not too simplistic 

"19. Arguments about destiny and free-will are carried on by those who have not realized. Those who have, are free from both. . ."

Verse 19, 40 verses on reality.

Ramana Maharshi

This was the first paragraph of the post which I found patronising, Manjit.

You said > Hi Tim,

"The vast majority of human beings put countless billions of sentient beings (animal beings) through unimaginable torture, suffering and other abominations, and countless millions upon millions of sentient beings are killed every single day, just to satiate the appetites of human beings. We, as global humanity, not only do not do anything about it, we actually revel in it."

And I thought that was patronising because you appear to be assuming I'm not, or wasn't aware of it and you're enlightening me. Cheers ! Is it any of my posts in particular... or all them perhaps, that actually led you to believe that I was a fucking idiot? Don't worry, I'm not angry, I'm just bemused.

Manjit said > "I find it somewhat amusing you dismiss the quotes Stan provided"

Stan provided ONE quote from Evelyn Waugh (he said, I'm not sure it is from him, uniquely). The quote "To know all is to forgive all"

I didn't dismiss it, I made a post to give my (opinion) reasons why it was flawed. Should I just automatically agree with it ? I wasn't rude or controversial but if you think I was out of order for jumping in, why did you jump in on me ? 

Manjit said >" Khalil Gibran, whom you are certainly the first person I have ever heard say his teachings were "simplistic" (of course, I am certain you haven't actually read any of his material, 
  
There you go again, Manjit. Firstly, I never mentioned "The Prophet" and mysticism. I only referred to the Evelyn Waugh quote.
Secondly, how do know what I've read and haven't read ? How patronising is that (again) ?

 Manjit said > "Finally, I have found not taking oneself too seriously and having a sense of humour to be a Divine quality in itself. I only wish more humans would share in that sentiment.

Bong! ....got any more ? 

Manjit said > "Before I leave, these kind of unduly defensive responses and resort to ad hominem comments to anybody that doesn't believe exactly as I do, that challenges any of my beliefs or concepts or interpretations etc, are the reason I don't care to share too much too often, so I will not comment on this thread again."

Don't leave on my behalf, Manjit. WTF !

Certainly.

I recently watched a rather horrific and dark Netflix series titled "The Trials of Gabriel Fernandez".  It brought the question of evil to the forefront for me.  It was also a highly emotionally charged thing to watch as I am a parent.  While there was an entire, long chain of adults who ultimately failed to protect Gabriel, I kept coming back to the question of evil and by extension the question raised in this thread of forgiveness.

I currently (meaning my views are subject to change) see a stark contrast between actions I would label as evil and those I might not.  Taking pleasure and solace in the systemic torturing of a child is just evil.  Failing to do your job as a social worker, while contributing to the same end result, may not be evil but may just be human fallibility; something that may be forgiven.

Again, I'm not 100% certain on this but I can not rule out the concept of evil, separate and apart of negligence, cowardice, apathy, etc.  I realize all those things can lead to really horrible things happening to other beings, but it feels to me that there is a difference.

Otherwise, using this Netlix series on child abuse as an example, wouldn't all people in the same circumstances as Gabriel's mother and step-father resort to systemic torture?  No, feels like there was something more at work there.

Hence, my question which basically asks is evil to be forgiven?

Hence, my question which basically asks is evil to be forgiven?

Good points, Silence but I can't answer it. I wouldn't personally forgive the above (crimes mentioned), if that's what you're asking, no.

[Ninshub]

Can we make it a collective deal that no one abandons the forum because something is upsetting them... if at all possible?

Goodness knows there's been enough of that already just in the last week, and we're not that many here to begin with.

This was the first paragraph of the post which I found patronising, Manjit.

You said > Hi Tim,

"The vast majority of human beings put countless billions of sentient beings (animal beings) through unimaginable torture, suffering and other abominations, and countless millions upon millions of sentient beings are killed every single day, just to satiate the appetites of human beings. We, as global humanity, not only do not do anything about it, we actually revel in it."

And I thought that was patronising because you appear to be assuming I'm not, or wasn't aware of it and you're enlightening me. Cheers ! Is it any of my posts in particular... or all them perhaps, that actually led you to believe that I was a fucking idiot? Don't worry, I'm not angry, I'm just bemused.

Hey Tim. I'm sorry, but it is quite evident that you have indeed responded in an emotional way and are not actually making any logical sense.

For example, you now aggressively & massively contradict yourself with the above comment, which is completely different to your original response to my first comment here. You clearly did NOT agree with my point you quote above, saying it was actually untrue which is why I wrote the 2nd comment to clarify my point (which, btw, had absolutely nothing to do with you personally, or your imagined sense of identity on this forum. I have no idea about anything about you, and you may well be a vegan activist and that would not have changed my impersonal point, but hey-ho). It was in response to that clarification that you claimed I was being "patronising". Now here you are claiming you knew that my first comment was true all along and I was being patronising for rebutting your original crystal clear statement that it was wrong?

When the discussion becomes so emotive, value, coherency, meaning etc flies out the window. Discussion becomes all noise and no signal. Whatever has caused you to get that way, and so very rapidly, I suggest is worthy of further examination by your own self. I could speculate on several possible motives, but it is of no real interest or concern to me. To each their own.

Yes, I have now decided to enjoy the appearance of patronisation. When in Rome. 

PS - Stan also posted a quote from Khalil Gibran in this thread. Apologies if you were not referring to that one specifically.