To unterstand good and evil, would it not be prudent to understand death first ?

Question

Since we cannot understand death, how do we know absolutely that the killer is evil. Dependant on the outcome, it might be a lesson, as horrible as it seems.
The belief in karma would suggest what comes around goes around as one thesis; right or wrong.

If it wasn't for evil, how would we recognise good ? From my old experience, I have experienced to many peoples perceptions of good, that have destroyed myself. Who is right ?

Good and Evil, is it worth a debate until we understand Death ?

Answer 1

I have thought about this and the only logical conclusion is the one that you have come up with.

What if death is a gift?

Love and blessings Don

Answer 2

My first year biology lecturer opened his first class with a plea. Biology, the study of 'life' is in a stagnant water, the logos of the bio is languishing in it's awareness of its existence in an old and diminishing paradigm. As his students he charged us with the quest to increase biology as it needed to be increased, and bring it about to a revival of its former glory.

The biological explanantion of death has issues being an explanation of death, as equally as biology has issues being an explanation of life, and those issues are quite real.

That does, unfortunately for us, impact on our common norms of perception. What we knew, is lagging behind other scientific discovery by a long margin. While we were sure before, and hence were confident in our separation of good and evil through our certainty of life and death. No, we are not sure now.

Why are we not sure? Well the problem is something that might be intelligence, it might be providence, it might be coincedence but coincidence is a long shot.... The problem is, as always in biology, a missing link. This link is an undiscovered process somewhere between the sentient, precise and foresighted behaviour of microbiological components and the development of the conditions from which it was previously assumed the only biological faculty of such behaviours emerged.
This is the angle where some scientists (whom other scientists would say are indulging disgracefully in psuedoscience) have attempted to drive the wedge of intelligent design. But it's based on an unverifiable precondition named creator God. So it's not scientific enough for science and the search is still on.

What this means for the average thinker, is basically nothing, nobody really wants to tell anyone explicity that the sureity of certain basic presumptions about the emergence of life, and therefore he existence of death, has come under severe scrutiny ('cept maybe me). So most all will go along with the heretofore common sense that Classical Biology *is* life incorporated and limited and that will serve them just fine.... while the scholars of biology work hard at the grindstone to indemnify the original cause.

So I'm saying, we *were* sure about life and death not so long ago, we were really quite well informed about it according to us. However, soon enough, short of a really great save by one of the defending players, we just may not be so sure anymore, and then we should question our notions of good and evil which are based upon it, yes.

Answer 3

Good and evil are the outcome of the perceptions of the individual. They are subjective and no objective criteria could be laid down on this point. It is said that one man's noise is another man's music. A deed good from one stand point may be evil from another stand point. If I am a diabetic sugar is evil for me. For a non diabetic sugar is good or at least not an evil. Death is in a different plane. Some religions which distinguish between body and soul regard death as the shedding of the physical body by the soul. Whether a man is good or bad or evil, he is certain to die. So death has no relevance to good or evil.

Answer 4

You're blending to very different concepts. Death and Life are not necessarily related to good and evil. Good and Evil are more closely related to our perceptions of pleasure and pain. We avoid pain because it hurts us. As a general rule, anything that hurts us without providing us a benefit at some point (pleasure) is considered evil. Anything that provides comfort or pleasure without an abundance of negative consequences is Good.

Beyond that, your example is exclusive. A person need not kill someone to be "evil." A person could beat a child, steal some money, or make blasphemous statements about another person's god. To the victim, that person is evil because he/she has caused them pain. In these cases, Death is irrelevant; it has nothing to do with the crisis at hand.

Death is an event, nothing more. Our view of Death is reliant on our perceptions of Good and Evil, not the other way around. If someone dies, it may cause us pain or pleasure. If a tyrant is murdered, the people he subjugated may rejoice, but the people that depended on him may see his slayer as a villain because of the pain he caused them.

Humans really aren't that complex. Most of what drives us can be broken down into a decision between pleasure and pain.

Answer 5

But death isn't evil, it just is.

To kill, to take someone's life that is evil dying is not the evil of the world. It can give enormous grief but death is a part of life.

The problem with dying is that deep down we all think that we're going to live forever. This is evident in our plan making, we consider all options apart from that we might die.

When I was 15 my best friend and cousin was killed in a car crash. It was preventable death but the thing is he missed out on all our plans to travel the world, explore university, achieve all his dreams. The fact is the no. one thing that was said at the funeral was "that wasn't supposed to happen, you're supposed to live until you're 99 and then die". Even now my friends we know of death, but we don't really comprehend what it is.

Its thought of as evil because it hurts so much when a loved one dies.

Through experincing death we grow, we learn, we are experiencing a part of life. On the other side of things we become old enough to have kids and are party to the creation of life as well. We can't have one without the other.

So no, death is not evil and is not necessary to understand death to comphrehend good and evil.

Answer 6

Good is loving yourself & others.
Evil is hurting yourself or others.

Death is a natural part of the life cycle. To bring death on before its time is unnatural & evil. You don't have the right to take a life, not even your own.

What is there to understand about death? It is the end of this mortal life & the beginning of the afterlife (Heaven or Hell). A killer is evil because he is committing the ultimate crime against another human & against nature. It is not a lesson. Yes what goes around comes around & the evil person will be punished in the afterlife, just as good people are rewarded but that isn't an excuse to commit murder! "Oh I was just doing you a favour, sending you to Heaven, teaching you a lesson." Yeah, whatever, go to Hell!

:)

Answer 7

I would rethink the assumption you've made. The anti death penalty movement in the United States is driven by facts about the death penalty in action, not by a denial that evil exists. Central is the realization that all human institutions are bound to get it wrong some of the time. The death penalty is no exception and we will never know how many people have been executed, in our name, for crimes they didn't commit. Aside from this, we've found that the death penalty doesn’t reduce crime, prolongs the anguish of families of murder victims, costs a whole lot more than life in prison and applies to people with the worst lawyers not to the worst crimes.

Answer 8

I am answering according to your questions
1.NO.
2. If your child or parent were killed would you consider it evil since you don't understand death?
3. Would you consider it a lesson?
4. Right Not because of Kama, because of life experience.
5. By our intellect
6. I can see that by your question.
7. When you die, you will get your answer

Come on, whats with you?

Answer 9

I also believe that there is a Karmatic circle that rules our lives. To many things have happened to me to disbelieve that our evil doings don't come back on us in some fashion. Death is the end result though with no connection to Good or Evil. Whether you are Good or Evil you are going to die so i don't see any point in debating the end result when it is the same for both choices.

Answer 10

your are asking 2 very different questions. We can understand death. Death is the absence of life.

You are speaking in trms of consequences. A good thing can have bad consequences and visa versa. A thing can be good reguardless of its consequnces. Just as a thing can be bad reguardless of its out come. In any thing the out come should be considered but it not the only thing to be considered.

The idea of good is interesting because life has this unrational instinct about what good. How we know anything is good and what standard we have to messure goodness is an interesting debate/

Answer 11

Who says we can't understand death? Death is the cessation of life. Death is sometimes the result of evil acts, but not always. Sometimes death is completely natural. An exploding volcano could kill thousands of people, but it isn't evil - evil is a human quality that requires deliberate malice. I don't think I need evil to understand good either. I think I can recognize good for itself. Evil makes me appreciate good all the more, but I don't think its necessary to recognize the good.