01-07-2012, 12:02 AM
Diamond Unicorn wrote:Gonzo wrote
erhaps you could define "absolute goodness" for me.
Perhaps something along these lines:
Plato(B.C.427-347) said that there were absolute justice, absolute beauty
and absolute goodness, and there were absolute greatness(as the essence or
nature of everything), health and power. The above-mentioned absolute
justice, absolute beauty and absolute goodness can be considered absolute
values, but at the present time truth in logic, goodness in morality,
beauty in art and holiness in religion are generally considered absolute
values. Thus it can be said that absolute truth, absolute goodness,
absolute beauty and absolute holiness constitute the system of absolute
values as the highest values.
On the highest goodness or absolute goodness, Immanuel Kant (1724-1804)
said that the highest goodness as the inevitable highest goal of the will
as morally prescribed was the genuine object of practical reason. He also
said that the highest absolute goodness could be found in the will of the
rational being. It would be difficult to realize absolute goodness, which
could be found only in the will of the rational being. Absolute truth,
absolute beauty and absolute holiness could be found in the will or the
mind of the wise, artistic or noble being.
http://www.bu.edu/wcp/Papers/Valu/ValuMin.htm
---
Maybe absolute goodness can be defined or thought of as that which is
before or beyond the duality of good and evil, ie. the eternal
'goodness' that exists before the potential of evil manifests (thereby creating the relative duality of good and evil).
The whole Platonic teaching is based upon the concept of Absolute
Goodness. Plato was vividly conscious of the immense profundity of the
subject. "To discover the Creator and Father of this universe, as well
as his operation, is indeed difficult; and when discovered it is
impossible to reveal him." In him Truth, Justice and the Beautiful are
eternally one. Hence the idea of the Good is the highest branch of
study.
http://www.theosociety.or...8_teachings-of-plato.htm
Thanks for the definitions.
Far be it from me to disagree with the
likes of Plato (and others), but I shall, to an extent.
Your original question was, “Absolute
goodness does not exist? If so how do you know that for sure?” In
my opinion, Absolute Goodness equates to what Jung called
“archtypes”. That is, it is something apparently inherently
known by all human beings, something that therefore will appear in
each culture's myths, something at the basis of most culture's
moralities. I don't say it doesn't exist, I say it does not conflict
with the quote I provided, namely “There is no good and there is no
evil, outside of what makes us happy and what makes us unhappy.”
The universe is a matter of a series of
events, and that includes all human activities, of course. I say it
is not possible to label any event as good or evil...it is merely an
event. What makes it good or evil is purely in the eye of the
beholder. The events truly have no value until we apply one,
archtypes or no.
Further, there are times when an act is
considered good by the one acting, and perhaps by others involved,
however, that evaluation is limited to the ones acting and
witnessing. It is conceivable the act may have dire consequences to
some other life form. That sort of thing is occurring world wide.
erhaps you could define "absolute goodness" for me.Perhaps something along these lines:
Plato(B.C.427-347) said that there were absolute justice, absolute beauty
and absolute goodness, and there were absolute greatness(as the essence or
nature of everything), health and power. The above-mentioned absolute
justice, absolute beauty and absolute goodness can be considered absolute
values, but at the present time truth in logic, goodness in morality,
beauty in art and holiness in religion are generally considered absolute
values. Thus it can be said that absolute truth, absolute goodness,
absolute beauty and absolute holiness constitute the system of absolute
values as the highest values.
On the highest goodness or absolute goodness, Immanuel Kant (1724-1804)
said that the highest goodness as the inevitable highest goal of the will
as morally prescribed was the genuine object of practical reason. He also
said that the highest absolute goodness could be found in the will of the
rational being. It would be difficult to realize absolute goodness, which
could be found only in the will of the rational being. Absolute truth,
absolute beauty and absolute holiness could be found in the will or the
mind of the wise, artistic or noble being.
http://www.bu.edu/wcp/Papers/Valu/ValuMin.htm
---
Maybe absolute goodness can be defined or thought of as that which is
before or beyond the duality of good and evil, ie. the eternal
'goodness' that exists before the potential of evil manifests (thereby creating the relative duality of good and evil).
The whole Platonic teaching is based upon the concept of Absolute
Goodness. Plato was vividly conscious of the immense profundity of the
subject. "To discover the Creator and Father of this universe, as well
as his operation, is indeed difficult; and when discovered it is
impossible to reveal him." In him Truth, Justice and the Beautiful are
eternally one. Hence the idea of the Good is the highest branch of
study.
http://www.theosociety.or...8_teachings-of-plato.htm
Thanks for the definitions.
Far be it from me to disagree with the
likes of Plato (and others), but I shall, to an extent.
Your original question was, “Absolute
goodness does not exist? If so how do you know that for sure?” In
my opinion, Absolute Goodness equates to what Jung called
“archtypes”. That is, it is something apparently inherently
known by all human beings, something that therefore will appear in
each culture's myths, something at the basis of most culture's
moralities. I don't say it doesn't exist, I say it does not conflict
with the quote I provided, namely “There is no good and there is no
evil, outside of what makes us happy and what makes us unhappy.”
The universe is a matter of a series of
events, and that includes all human activities, of course. I say it
is not possible to label any event as good or evil...it is merely an
event. What makes it good or evil is purely in the eye of the
beholder. The events truly have no value until we apply one,
archtypes or no.
Further, there are times when an act is
considered good by the one acting, and perhaps by others involved,
however, that evaluation is limited to the ones acting and
witnessing. It is conceivable the act may have dire consequences to
some other life form. That sort of thing is occurring world wide.