Submitted by BernardJOrtcutt t3_zvnq0i in philosophy
Danix2400 t1_j1s37vq wrote
Is there a philosophy of life where evil is the answer? Not that I want to follow lol, but this question came to me. There are many philosophies with an optimistic (or virtuous) conclusion to view life, and other more pessimistic views, but I've never seen one that being evil is the answer.
Aimfri t1_j1s71an wrote
You might be interested in what some fans call "metaphysical satanism", which is a kind of gnostic pessimism developed in the works of the band Deathspell Omega. Think Georges Bataille throwing a party with Schopenhauer and Jon Notveid. They take Satan as figuring a cosmic principle of destruction, and then infuse that thought into every aspect of theology and politics. In a manner of speaking, evil is their conclusion, yet not in a monolithic, edgy teenager kind of way.
If you're interested, check out the lyrics to their two most recent albums, The Furnaces of Palingenesia and The Long Defeat.
bumharmony t1_j1ttt2f wrote
Satan is not evil per se. There is no water proof explanation of evil in the Bible. He does not just obey and serve God. It would be circular to think that everything diverging from the status quo is automatically evil.
Break the loops and fill the pig holes.
Aimfri t1_j1tz6ey wrote
Yeah, you definitely read what I wrote.
bumharmony t1_j1u17dy wrote
Destruction of what? Pinatas? improbable societal orders? What? To destruct is a verb that requires a subject and an object.
It is so silly that theology can not take even rudimentary ethical critique. I guess that is why it is called belief. But even belief must be feasible on the level of following a coherent set of rules.
Aimfri t1_j1u86m5 wrote
I can't have a civil discussion with you if you keep attacking half-baked strawmen and not reading anything others say. I haven't even started making a point, I just provided some references as a conversation starter with a very succinct summary, and you already are trying to burn everything around you to the ground. There are inevitable generalisations in a Reddit comment of a few hundred characters. Have you considered they could be just that - simplifications for the sake of brevity - and not fallacies left open for you to play such a childish game of refutation?
bumharmony t1_j1u8jkt wrote
Lately there have been several threads about evil in ways that do not at all tease the whole conception. This is one of them. I was replying to the thread, not your personal reply.
Aimfri t1_j1ugld6 wrote
The fact that you pinpointed the words "destruction" and "theology", in a second answer to a short comment that featured them prominently, says otherwise. Reads more like you tried an easy jab and don't feel like owning to it if taken seriously.
infestedgrowth t1_j1smxuz wrote
Evil as a nature is itself, evil. The opposite of perceived good. So in itself, evil, can never be good. They are opposing ideologies, literal opposites. As long as you’re a good person with morals, evil will never be the answer. Evil may be the answer for an evil person, it may be the most logical/reasonable solution, but it’s still wrong.
bumharmony t1_j1undk3 wrote
So if a person assumed to be evil and a person assumed to be good did the same deed would the deed itself be affected by the person doing it or would the deed in itself be good or bad, or morally right/wrong?
infestedgrowth t1_j1v7foq wrote
I don’t believe a person is involuntarily evil or good, what you do is what I would consider evil or good. A good person can do something evil and they’re less of a good person. Just like an evil person can become good.
bumharmony t1_j1vglu6 wrote
Is it the deed or the essence of that person good? Becoming good refers to the latter. Right?
infestedgrowth t1_j1vgwnj wrote
Both but the essence of the person is fluid and can be changed by any number of personal experiences. Deeds themself are or are not, they can’t be fluid. It’s either a good thing you’re doing or bad. Really it depends on the motive of the person.
bumharmony t1_j1vui62 wrote
In the case of satan his persona seems to be fixed to be evil. So I was asking if satan can do good deeds and would it make any sense to call him evil then.
As far I remember satan is most importantly an accuser not doing so much evil deeds. So he is being his own advocate huh?
wolfe1jl t1_j1ssxt4 wrote
It’s called capitalism lol
Danix2400 t1_j1stvr8 wrote
I think I see capitalism more as pessimistic rather than evil, but I get it lol
poopyhead234 t1_j216amp wrote
how is it evil?
wolfe1jl t1_j217d8b wrote
It’s main mechanism is the pursuit of profit. This done via the exploitation of things. Cheap labor cheap raw materials etc etc. This model will consistently produce evil.
Relative_Lock4958 t1_j1tfkx6 wrote
Schelling’s Freiheitschrift ‘freedom essays’ touches on evil in deep and I’d say, rather unconventional ways. He elevates evil to a status, unlike any philosopher before him in the western canon. While, evil, is not ‘the answer’ for him. It’s a part of the equation that in the least must be accounted for, if not incorporated into, the very idea of freedom itself. This work isn’t what I would call a ‘philosophy of life’, however, because the question of evil having absolute importance to the possibility of freedom in his eyes, then it might qualify. Although, as a warning, this work is enormously complicated and obscure. From the scale of the book, being, I don’t know, 60-75 pages? It’s probably the most dense book I’ve come across.
machinbakin t1_j1sccji wrote
It depends what you mean by evil. Many people have a different concept of evil. But I would say that yes it does work, for some people being evil works. But I would say that being evil is not an absolute thing just like being good all the time is not one either.
senorDerp911 t1_j2dsbr4 wrote
Evil is not a scientific aspect. It’s a religious aspect.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments