16

Previously I asked what evidence there was to suggest the existence of esoteric forces that influence our world. Some of the answers pointed to trannies/pedos and the power of globohomo as evidence, which I definitely feel is convincingly suggestive of a great force of evil.

I am continuing to use the term suggest instead of prove because I feel it is very unlikely that the existence of supernatural influences will ever be proven.

I would heap onto this category of suggestive evidence the sort of mass stupidity/foolishness that is so omnipresent that you can barely find anyone in the world who isn't victimized by whatever is causing it. More evil.

I often worry that there's more evidence to suggest a great supernatural evil than there is to suggest a great supernatural good.

Call it God, or the Holy Ghost, or whatever. Maybe there is a pagan equivalent but from what I've seen in those traditions things aren't so dualistic. Do you think that exists? What would you point to as evidence that suggests it does?

Can you believe in Satan (or whatever you want to call it) without God? Though initially it's counterintuitive I would like to hear the argument for why you couldn't...

And now I will ping some people who were involved in the previous discussion: @TheodoreKent @NotHereFor @GoyGenius @Timmy @WaWhite13. My limit is 5 pings so sorry if I didn't get you.

edit: And I should've included this originally, but in the previous discussion we settled on a definition of evil (in people), as basically that which contradicts or disrupts a functioning natural order of things.

Previously I asked [what evidence there was to suggest the existence of esoteric forces that influence our world](https://poal.co/s/AskPoal/133266). Some of the answers pointed to trannies/pedos and the power of globohomo as evidence, which I definitely feel is convincingly suggestive of a great force of evil. [I am continuing to use the term suggest instead of prove because I feel it is very unlikely that the existence of supernatural influences will ever be proven.](#spoiler) I would heap onto this category of suggestive evidence the sort of mass stupidity/foolishness that is so omnipresent that you can barely find anyone in the world who isn't victimized by whatever is causing it. More evil. I often worry that there's more evidence to suggest a great supernatural evil than there is to suggest a great supernatural good. Call it God, or the Holy Ghost, or whatever. Maybe there is a pagan equivalent but from what I've seen in those traditions things aren't so dualistic. Do you think that exists? What would you point to as evidence that suggests it does? Can you believe in Satan (or whatever you want to call it) without God? Though initially it's counterintuitive I would like to hear the argument for why you couldn't... And now I will ping some people who were involved in the previous discussion: @TheodoreKent @NotHereFor @GoyGenius @Timmy @WaWhite13. [My limit is 5 pings so sorry if I didn't get you.](#spoiler) edit: And I should've included this originally, but in the previous discussion we settled on a definition of evil (in people), as basically that which contradicts or disrupts a functioning natural order of things.

Register or login to comment!

69 comments

Good and evil can be seen in this one image!

http://cdn.theatlantic.com/assets/media/img/posts/2014/01/fig_3e_Jim_fallon_normal_vs_psychopath_PET_vs_normals_copy_2/1d4ff4ff3.jpg

It's not supernatural. It's psychological and physiological damage that makes these predators what they are. Satan doesn't exist. It's just a part of their power fantasy.

I think you said what I was trying to in far fewer words.

I will say though, it's possible good and evil can exist in a supernatural way, but the paradigm here clears the muddier waters for saving ourselves from the problems we're having.

[–] Frosty [OP] 2 points (+2|-0)

I would say that my conceptualization of what is evil goes far beyond psychopathy. It is more generally a subversion of natural order -- far more encompassing than just people who kill people willy nilly.

The parents who let their children engage in 'drag kid' performances or start transitioning their son because he 'identified as a girl from age 4' are a good example. Evil, but not psychopathic.

This does not mean the problems are not psychological. However, saying 'it's psychological' implies an underlying assumption that psychological problems and an evil influence are mutually exclusive -- which is something I think you would need to make a case for.

The known tactics of psychopaths, narcissists and pedophiles!

https://files.catbox.moe/87moyx.pdf

They destroy people for narcissistic supply and money. This is the same game that these parents are playing on these trans kids. That's why they kill themselves at such a high rate.

Evil people have destroyed their conscience and their frontal lobes as a consequence. That's why they feel no empathy for their victims.

The whole religion, god, satan topic was created by these monsters as a means of control. Their is no supernatural beings. No God or satan. These people are insane and evil.

That's why the cabal are full of pedophiles that get the black eye of Horus to further destroy their frontal lobes. They think have a conscience is a weakness and limits their power.

When everyone understands this we will be demanding mandatory brain scans for power and influence. This will remove the whole gang of satanists and pedos. The masons will all be gone and won't be able to protect each other from justice.

Please stop believing what these delusional psychopaths made up. Learn the truth and we will be able to end this without the Q larp!

Good stuff! I have been trying to find better words as this is a recent understanding for me.

https://files.catbox.moe/87moyx.pdf

Awesome. Added this one to my collection.

I get the sense that you have more time with this paradigm than I have, but I think we have come to the same place. When reading the protocols, you can see the parallels of narcissism and psychopathy right there in each case. This is how I realized the way to defeat this "evil" is to not be subverted by gold (or abstracted virtue) but by real virtue (as they called morality a weakness). Turning the subversion of gold to a realization of survival awakens the virtue again as this has also been something that rhymes throughout history.

What are your thoughts on how to bring victory against this subversion, assuming we agree it's psychopaths and our lack of understanding of them?

I would like to present this excerpt from Phillip K. Dick's "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep." The androids who cut the 4 legs off of the spider have no sense of Logos or morality, and must then experiment to emulate it. All the while, having no sense of the ripple of damage their perversion sends through the natural world.

If someone wanted to do "good" for their kind, and didn't understand the harm their actions yield on another group, then this person might seemingly be OK propagating the perversions our society has been experiencing. It's hard for us to believe that we are capable of it, but also consider the Milgram Experiment. This study shows a "proximity effect" of how easy it is to justify our actions when we logically see the harm. When the subjects were pushed further away from the "victims" they were more inclined to go all the way with the experiment.

The filter bubbles we live in can cause us to justify strange things outside of our purview. We don't see the wake of our boat after we've passed and in the name of survival, or morality may do great harm to a large set of humanity.

In the bible, Jesus spoke of the Synagogue of Satan. In the same passages he describes how they don't worship him (Logos, the truth) but instead worship themselves. It seemed to me that Jesus was talking about a psychopath, or one that lacked the understanding of the morality of their actions on the rest of the world.

[–] Frosty [OP] 2 points (+2|-0)

You know the conversation's getting good when the references to literary works and pre-ethics boards psychological experiments come out!

I am familiar with the Milgram experiment, but will have to add Electronic Sheep to my reading list.

Isn't the most interesting thing about all this evil in the world that it almost invariably claims to be in the name of what is good? Likewise, I think a lot of people (perhaps a majority) would say we are on the side of evil who claim evil is parents enrolling their children in drag shows. Maybe we should take @Colonel_Lingus' suggestion and make everyone get a brain scan. Whoevers' frontal lobes are more damaged has to sudoku.

All I can tell you is that "chaos" and "order" are actual concepts in physics.

Entrophy and lack of entrophy.

Ordo ab chao

Now you know [their] motto.

This is indeed their M.O. As one seeks a different order, they perturb the system to crisis in order to take over the motion and where the system stops.

The question at hand, though, is whether it's inherently evil to operate this way.

[–] Frosty [OP] 1 point (+1|-0)

Do they correspond to good and evil?

Nature is an order that has arisen from a chaotic universe. But I don't necessarily see the chaotic universe as evil. Rather, evil is an order that is opposed to nature. At least in humanity, opposed to our connection with nature and the natural propagation of our kind.

All battles are won or lost inside the human mind.
Many reference the allegory of Mythology representing the human condition.

Not really no as science doesn't have those concepts. Chaos would correspond roughly to death though and order with life.

[–] Frosty [OP] 0 point (+0|-0)

That seems true, except for the way some people live.

It's tempting to say getting buggered and contracting AIDS is not a good example of order in life... but then maybe it's a matter of perspective. It certainly fits into the natural order of the AIDS virus, (though that's technically not alive).

[–] GoyGenius 1 point (+1|-0) (edited )

Recalling the last thread we had about this, and some of the responses I'd like to try a slightly different approach, but will say something similar (but I don't want to get muddled into limitations of science). Last time I offered a paradigm that instead of evil and non-evil, psychopaths (wolves) and non-psychopath innocents (lambs) could explain the guiding subversion that is going on. Further, good and evil messes us up from protecting ourselves in this case, and as a point consider your really nice Uncle who treats you nicely and buys nice gifts at Christmas but also happens to be a serial killer. The paradigm of evil becomes muddled in this case and it may cause us to not see the "evil."

Until you can fully define the mechanism with every step from the local purview, I recommend instead consider Occam's razor and simpler, local paradigms. While good and evil are compartmentalized ideals, the definitions become hazy and non-universal (different definitions for different people) for various perspectives. I'll use a simpler paradigm here.

I can correlate with three different axis natural behaviors of people.

  1. Politicians

  2. Police

  3. Mafia

Consider the neither good nor evil interactions between such groups/types. I'm not saying this is how it is, per se. Just saying that if you take that idea it is actually more useful to traverse our society (which is the point). Further, one can consider each of the three "variables" something to tweak for each situation. Some days you need to act more like the police, sometimes you need to act more like a politician.

With this idea, all you need to add to the formula is the concept of "survival."

[–] Frosty [OP] 0 point (+0|-0) (edited )

As for Occam's razor:

Is it really a simpler argument that our society is being driven insane by the coordinated efforts of a group of psychopaths (who may or may not mostly be members of a tribe that evolved to be that way similar to the way a virus evolves to attack its host)? It's an explanation, for sure, but hardly a simple one.

By contrast, "muh devil" is much simpler. It could still be wrong, but isn't that explanation like the Occam's razor ideal?


Still, I think it is important to consider alternative possibilities.

I supposed another possibility is we're much more sensitive to the seemingly coordinated efforts of an omnipresent evil actor than we are to the omnipresent good actor. Those "possessed" by this evil are more viscerally disgusting than those possessed by good.

On muddling:

If we are to believe in both the evil entity and the good entity, they are probably both acting on the same people at the same time. (Your well meaning boomer uncle who is all about faith and family, but maintains diversity is our strength and "there are only two genders -- people just need to pick one or the other.")

edit: so while I would agree with you that good and evil or muddled in people, that doesn't necessarily disprove any actors that might be the cause of one or the other. There could be The Great Evil possessing people, who resist somewhat and still do some good things. There could be Great Good and Great Evil, or just Great Good (and people with their self-interested nature resist its influence), or no influencers at all.

[–] GoyGenius 1 point (+1|-0) (edited )

I just came across this quote somewhere else which kind of sums it up in a different way and thought it would be fitting to share it here. It has to do with simplicity, and the strange subversion that "accounting" has on our moral actions.

Believers in religion teach us that God will reward men for good actions, but mean who are intellectually free, know that the reward of a good action can not be given by any power, but that is the natural result of the good action.

The free man, guided by intelligence, knows that this reward is in the nature of things, and not in the caprice even of the Infinite. He is not a good and faithful servant, he is an intelligent free man.

-- Robert G. Ingersoll

EDIT: Check out this video

I think the force for good has been subverted. That force is Altruism, once we direct it away from those that harm us we will prosper, they will wilt and the subversives will have diminished influence.

It's more like harmony flanked by counter balances.

"Good" and "Evil" are archaic frame through which to view the world.
I'm making no excuses for pieces of human garbage that do inhumane things, things that could make any of us fly in to a fit of rage. Instead, I'm suggesting that our fits of rage are the counter balance to the world.

Each of us needs a damsel in distress, a burning building with a screaming infant in it, a cat stuck in a tree, etc.
If those situations never arose, we'd have no heroes.
Instead, the pendulum is in the process of swinging and, like it or not, it's going to slow down eventually.

You don't need a "Good" vs "Bad" frame. Instead, you need one that recognizes that no one has ever gotten what they wanted by taking something, but by giving something.
Do you want more money? You're going to have to trade some time for it.
Do you want that girl? You're going to have to trade some attention for it.
How badly do you want to eat tonight? You're going to have to expend some energy to acquire it.
Do you want to be wealthy? Be prepared to give away a fortune.

[–] Frosty [OP] 0 point (+0|-0)

I really enjoy when you share your thoughts. unironically

kek
You can be honest. I know I'm a polarizing dick.

But I'm not here to give anyone what they desire.

[–] Frosty [OP] 0 point (+0|-0)

For what it's worth my original comment was going to something about your insufferable personality, but it's better to recognize the good in people every once in a while too.

[–] GoyGenius 0 point (+0|-0) (edited )

Each of us needs a damsel in distress, a burning building with a screaming infant in it, a cat stuck in a tree, etc. If those situations never arose, we'd have no heroes.

Boom! I think this is an important grain of the idea OP (@Frosty) is maybe looking for insight in.

If I may: all of the subversion in this world can be explained in this nugget, but as being a series of externally manufactured false emergencies. Life used to be simple and survival required us to act or we would perish. Now, we have digital accounts, taxes, meetings, deadlines. We have strayed from life and been groomed to misalignment from the natural order.

These external forces can be aligned with nature or misaligned. The definition of Sin (found elsewhere) is something like "missing the mark."

Currently, those who lack alignment with nature would subvert us to their own ideas of what order is for them (or how they think order should be). A psychopath cares less about natural alignment than of arrangement, or accounting (to name a few examples). Since we are naturally wanting to be "heroes" the false emergencies placed before us by those missing the natural order would have us align ourselves in a way that makes them feel comfortable, rather than how things universally should be for our survival.

In most ways, the psychopath vs non-psychopath analogy fits this paradigm.

The only real paradigm that exists is freedom vs slavery.
Be aware, without a master, a slave is free and without a slave, a master is also free.

There's a reason we use "right" or "wrong". Like I've told you, words have meaning.
Think of "right" as being accurate and "wrong" as being inaccurate.

I still really enjoy the way you think. You should get back to me on that puzzle I gave you sometime.

[–] GoyGenius 0 point (+0|-0) (edited )

Freedom is an illusion. Empowerment is what to strive for. There are always constraints in a system, and a natural order in a system. It's what we can do with and as a part of that system that makes us empowered.

In a sense, we are always both "slave" and "master" to the system, and universe. But we are also in it, and part of it. In this way, we are never master (independent) or servant (dependent) but perhaps both. One must seek interdependence with all to achieve empowerment.

There's a reason we use "right" or "wrong". Like I've told you, words have meaning. Think of "right" as being accurate and "wrong" as being inaccurate.

This is apt. Right, as in righting the ship, or being "on target". Anything that puts "the ship" on a path of not hitting the target is the "wrong" direction and is literally the definition of Sin. This definition of sin you can get from old biblical translations and I realize the true Gnostics were talking about this deeply. "Follow me, I am the way." "The word was Logos" ... This is why being with, and believing in Jesus is our "salvation" which is our empowerment in the universe. For many reading this, I am afraid to say, this means Jesus is not really a person but refers to the natural order. In the new testament is the personification of Logos, which can perhaps also be called THE ALL, or other names.

We are to pursue this Logos, which means to become interdependent with nature, and empowered by it. This is how to defeat (((them))), as (((they))) have rejected Logos and instead seek a bastardized form of order that only fits in a construct of one that lacks purview of nature ... hence (((their))) order is a misalignment, or a SIN from true virtue. This is why they must use GOLD and urgency to herd us to a false morality. This battle will always wage, as what is in (((them))) is also in us, but we are not yet corrupted by it. This is why (((they))) are driven not by love of themselves, but a hatred of an order (((they))) can not understand hence will never have interdependence with. If only (((they))) can remove the data of what is, then the lie that we, goyim are animals untouched by Logos may not be challenged. However, in fact the reverse is true. This is why (((their))) propaganda is still necessary.

I still really enjoy the way you think.

I don't want to be so metaphysical here, but I feel what I am about to say is important for people to read. We found each other because our journeys require us to have friction. This friction yields strength in our psyche. This strength yields empowerment of our souls.

Many years ago I practiced combat arts and I practiced on many teams. The teams that always did the best were the ones that did a great deal of "free wrestling." This iterative friction was agitating and pushed the "cognitive" process of what to do into the "heuristical" effect of pure instinct, until you moved like water. This is part of our journey. There is no "enjoy" per se, but there is salvation. The "great battle" being waged requires this effect to move through as many as possible. Our friction here, is what is necessary to build our power to see beyond the subversion of GOLD and harness the denounced weapon of VIRTUE.

This power is real and as I explained it manifested physically, I have also done the same cognitively through debate and practice. Now I am learning to focus on the potency of my words and of my mind.

You should get back to me on that puzzle I gave you sometime.

I lost track of what the puzzle was... I probably should go back and re-read again. Something comes to mind about the rhyme of a mantra or two ... I may not know the words, but I am starting to pick up the rhythm. WIth refinement (friction!) the words will come.

No, the existence of a supernatural evil does not necessitate the existence of a supernatural good. Why would it?

Everyone thinks mosquitos are bad. They steal your blood and make you itch.

Is their an anti-mosquito that gives you blood and moisturizes your skin?

This human idea of balance is so fucking overrated.

[–] Frosty [OP] 1 point (+1|-0)

Well put. I suppose the great tranny demonlord Baphomet has put that in our heads as well.

[–] 0K 0 point (+0|-0) (edited )

Saying mosquitos are bad is like saying tigers are bad

They aren't. Bad for what? Bad for who?

Are they evil? Is the tiger inherently evil?

>This human idea of balance is so fucking overrated.

If there were no balance there wouldn't be equilibrium, if there's no equilibrium everything falls appart, if everything falls appart you don't get order

"Mosquitos are bad", give me a fucking break

Remove them entirely from the earth, see what happens, and tell me how bad they were, lol

>This human idea of balance is so fucking overrated.

And what to say about anything starting with "Everyone thinks mosquitos are bad.", hm?

Most retarded assumption ever, that's all there's to say

I believe we are all ultimately responsible for our own actions.i paraphrase"one son of an alcoholic father could be asked"why dont you drink? He would reply "I watched my father." His brother if asked why he drinks could reply "I watched my father"". It is my belief that the universal creator is neither evil or good, but has potential of both. I do not believe in chaos only the subjective perspective of it. The inability to see order from a smaller scale. Wars in the middle east seem like chaos on the ground, but to the men funding both sides it is perfect order. Nature creates no waste, therefore no chaos. Only humans created waste. Only we offset the balance. We all wait for that here to save us yet the refusal to abide lies within us all. We just tuck that shit away and ignore it and keep waiting for salvation. However the fat lady has not yet sang. Could that little voice in my head telling me to make a stand not be the good force? Could an action of rebellion not crumble the best laid plans? The elites envision a one world government controlling a world of slaves and rulers. Envision a world of a single unified people and the potential of such. I dont mean a single race of people but of all races unified. Both outcomes are still a potential possibility at the moment. The question is which outcome do we as individuals apply our intent towards. As long as we stand devided we are doomed to become slaves. Unification would require we set aside our petty and I do mean PETTY differences. However the elites have done a good job of teaching us good goyem to think of our superior personal needs and ideals before those of the people. Divided we fall. With all that said, I do find it interesting that the bible talks of a spiritual war of Angel's and demons while ancient histories speak of wars between gods or between aliens or interdimensional beings. Maybe complete bs but I think would be ignorant to simply dismiss. Even if this were the case, in the end the only person we can control is ourselves. I resist because I choose.

[–] 0K 0 point (+0|-0) (edited )

Third law of motion suggests so https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton's_laws_of_motion#Laws

Law I: Every body persists in its state of being at rest or of moving uniformly straight forward, except insofar as it is compelled to change its state by force impressed.[14][b]

Law II: The alteration of motion is ever proportional to the motive force impress'd; and is made in the direction of the right line in which that force is impress'd.[15][c]

Law III: To every action there is always opposed an equal reaction: or the mutual actions of two bodies upon each other are always equal, and directed to contrary parts.[d][e]

...

If you only have one of the two, you get imbalance, the universe/nature is all about balance, there's no good or bad for planets and stars, however there's gravitational force

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_of_thermodynamics#First_law

The first law of thermodynamics is a version of the law of conservation of energy, adapted for thermodynamic systems.

The law of conservation of energy states that the total energy of an isolated system is constant; energy can be transformed from one form to another, but can be neither created nor destroyed.

...

You have light and you have absence of light

You can't have a hole without borders

You are on to something with this analogy. Consider 1&2 are conservation of momentum and 3 is balance of reaction. 1&2 are states, and 3 provides a hint of how to change the states.

Kirchoff (hated by Newton, and vice-verse) had two laws which were conservation and balance. In that 1) if you start at a place the sum of all effects back to the same place is zero (conservation), and 2) the sum of things flowing into a node equal that which flows out of a node (balance).

Anyway, I believe you're touching on the two concepts laid out. There is a discussion elsewhere in a different thread that mentions Ordo ab Chao which seems mysteriously close to what you're touching on.

[–] Frosty [OP] 0 point (+0|-0) (edited )

This is an argument to answer the question of whether platonic evil can exist without platonic good. What you're arguing is correct, but that is not an answer to the question I'm asking.

I am asking about the forces of evil and forces of good.

We can argue there is evidence to suggest a great evil power. What I am asking is whether there is evidence of a great good power OR if a great good power must exist because a great evil one seems to. We are talking about entities, not concepts.

That evil exists (as a concept) and good is definitionally that which is antithetical to evil is irrelevant.

If there was no force pushing the other way, the force in question would push all the way to the ultimate end of the spectrum.

If the force for good was taken away, the force for evil would immediately push the universe into an absolute entropic state.

Everything is cyclical, like a pendulum. This law is universal. The 2 forces push back and forth against each other.

The further we go into entropy, the more powerful the force for good becomes, but it's effects won't become very apparent until we have some momentum in the other direction.

[–] Frosty [OP] 0 point (+0|-0)

How do you deduce this?

Who's to say the force in question (the evil one) desires a completely entropic state. Maybe it simply desires the suffering of the weak at the hands of the strong.

Good or evil is what you choose to do, first and foremost

Start here before looking elsewhere

The main difference between good and evil ultimately, is that you can choose to stop doing good anytime you want