Righteous in our own eyes and mind???

Question

They say we are all righteous in our own eyes and minds! So Philosophically speaking, what if our "righteous eyes and minds" were us, who we are today... And the real self (capsule) who we carnally are, are in another realm wicked? You have to be a Philosophy person to understand this one. Kinda like dreaming and the person in the dream is good, and the person laying in the bed dreaming is wicked!!!!!! I want you stances on this.

Also, is the quote "figment self" responsible for what the "real self" does whether wicked or on the verge, or predestined to wrong doing???

Yeah, I guess it could be a spiritual question, seeing that God can see through our eyes and into our minds!

Doesn't this hit home for anyone? If you don't know much of Philosophical thinking, give your own account/opinion

Answer 1

I know you want some deep thoughtful answer but in all reality there is only one us and that is you. There is no one else too blame our trouble on but us.

Answer 2

http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/hegel/works/sp/osabstra.htm#OS496

''(c) RIGHT versus WRONG
§ 496

Law (right) considered as the realisation of liberty in externals, breaks up into a multiplicity of relations to this external sphere and to other persons (§§ 491, 493 ff.). In this way there are (1) several titles or grounds at law, of which (seeing that property both on the personal and the real side is exclusively individual) only one is the right, but which, because they face each other, each and all are invested with a show of right, against which the former is defined as the intrinsically right.

§ 497.

Now so long as (compared against this show) the one intrinsically right, still presumed identical with the several titles, is affirmed, willed, and recognised, the only diversity lies in this, that the special thing is subsumed under the one law or right by the particular will of these several persons. This is naive, non-malicious wrong. Such wrong in the several claimants is a simple negative judgement, expressing the civil suit. To settle it there is required a third judgement, which, as the judgement of the intrinsically right, is disinterested, and a power of giving the one right existence as against that semblance.

§ 498.

But (2) if the semblance of right as such is willed against the right intrinsically by the particular will, which thus becomes wicked, then the external recognition of right is separated from the right's true value; and while the former only is respected, the latter is violated. This gives the wrong of fraud — the infinite judgement as identical (§173) — where the nominal relation is retained, but the sterling value is let slip.

§ 499.

(3) Finally, the particular will sets itself in opposition to the intrinsic right by negating that right itself as well as its recognition or semblance. (Here there is a negatively infinite judgement (§ 173) in which there is denied the class as a whole, and not merely the particular mode — in this case the apparent recognition.) Thus the will is violently wicked, and commits a crime."

http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/hegel/works/sp/osabstra.htm#OS491

http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/hegel/li_terms.htm

Answer 3

If I were to scrutinize this the first thing I would point out is that "they" are wrong. We only CLAIM to be righteous, but the truly righteous live their lives in a manner that is not wicked. The truth is that there are very few truly righteous people; however everyone wants to get into heaven. So that problem isn't what IS, but rather that which we have created as an illusion to our true nature.

Answer 4

This may be more spiritual than philosophical, but I can’t, (won’t), separate the two.

Righteous and wicked are simply mad-made terms that are used to label other persons and events as compared to the labeler.

Righteous & wicked, Good & evil, etc. don’t exist outside of the conscience mind. There is only varying degrees of ignorance.

btw - I don't want to get into heaven.

Answer 5

What is righteous, it takes a person that has been inside their own body and outside of it too in order to know that there is no reality in either, and yet there is reality in both too.

Answer 6

nicely I see a great form of information that the religious fool themselves into thinking there's a god,they declare that they "be attentive to" yet human beings in all religions say this so there would desire to be some trend of thinking that fools human beings into believing nonsense.