• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

what do you think of the idea that evil contains the seeds of its own destruction?

Lark

Active member
Joined
Jun 21, 2009
Messages
29,569
what do you think about the idea that evil contains the seeds of its own destruction? whether its chaotic, neutral or lawful evil, that it will always be defeated by its own nature or character?
 

Julius_Van_Der_Beak

Up the Wolves
Joined
Jul 24, 2008
Messages
19,445
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
I'm actually a little skeptical regarding this, which might contradict what I said in the "good" thread. All the modern myths seem to suggest the opposite, though. But if evil contains the seeds of its own destruction, why does it still exist? It might harm the people who align with it, but that's not the same thing as defeating them.
 

Sacrophagus

Mastermind Fieldmarshal
Joined
Jul 11, 2017
Messages
1,702
MBTI Type
ENTJ
Enneagram
854
You always hear that good always prevails. You also hear that Good and Evil defeat each other in an everlasting cycle. None of them persists.

Evil chooses its destruction when Good can destroy it. Good chooses its destruction when Evil can destroy it. There are people out there who fight for good and know that they might not always come back victorious. So does evil. They will, however, fight each other until one of them is a champion, waiting for a new challenger.
 

Virtual ghost

Complex paradigm
Joined
Jun 6, 2008
Messages
19,769
Evidently more true than false.
I don't really believe in fundamentally bad societies, but only societies that have perverted by the few at the top. Since most of humanity aren't fundamentally self destructing wackos, because humanity is quite defined with our survival instincts and knowledge. So the only real question is how quickly will society start to counter mess at the top in the case there is a mess at the top. Through knowledge and propaganda this push can prolonged but history shows that such systems eventually fall apart. Mostly because desire for control and narcissism start to lower productivity and create conflicts ... what lowers objective productivity even further, what triggers people.
 

Virtual ghost

Complex paradigm
Joined
Jun 6, 2008
Messages
19,769
I'm actually a little skeptical regarding this, which might contradict what I said in the "good" thread. All the modern myths seem to suggest the opposite, though. But if evil contains the seeds of its own destruction, why does it still exist? It might harm the people who align with it, but that's not the same thing as defeating them.


Because new will emerge and it will emerge because the world isn't perfect. But when evil creates enough objective havoc it becomes a target for most and eventually that is the fight it is going to lose, since evil is mostly in random individuals. In the process evil can install even more evil to the mix but eventually self-preservation kicks in for everybody.


I am not using the term evil in some "metaphysical" way.
 

Lark

Active member
Joined
Jun 21, 2009
Messages
29,569
Because new will emerge and it will emerge because the world isn't perfect. But when evil creates enough objective havoc it becomes a target for most and eventually that is the fight it is going to lose, since evil is mostly in random individuals. In the process evil can install even more evil to the mix but eventually self-preservation kicks in for everybody.


I am not using the term evil in some "metaphysical" way.

This reminds me of the idea that mankind is not infinitely adaptable, they can change to suit their circumstances but only so much and only for so long before something gives way.

It might not be open, head on, mutually assured destruction style resistance but it is more likely to be a sort of cutting corners, lazy, foot dragging and passive resistance sort of thing, at least at first.

It is a curious one though because while I've see this argument, about mankind not being infinitely adaptable to particular visions or plans or ideas hatched at the top or by elites, used against communism, even socialism or liberalism, quite a bit, logically, and I've read it used this way too, it applies as much conservatism, capitalism or other schemes too.
 

Maou

Mythos
Joined
Jun 20, 2018
Messages
6,117
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Evil cannot exist without good. So yes, technically it does possess its own seeds of destruction. Oppressive governments will eventually sow the seeds of its own destruction, via rebellions. So there is definitely a limit to how far things go in one direction.

I also believe that utopias are impossible because of human nature/the dynamic between good and evil. Society follows a distinct 4 step cycle. Hard times (evil in charge) create strong men (good people, to fight against evil), Strong men create good times (peace), Good times creates weak men (people who are naive to evil), Weak men create hard times (Rise of evil).
 

Coriolis

Si vis pacem, para bellum
Staff member
Joined
Apr 18, 2010
Messages
27,230
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
what do you think about the idea that evil contains the seeds of its own destruction? whether its chaotic, neutral or lawful evil, that it will always be defeated by its own nature or character?
I think everything contains the seeds of its own destruction. Nothing is truly permanent. Death is a part of life.
 

Virtual ghost

Complex paradigm
Joined
Jun 6, 2008
Messages
19,769
This reminds me of the idea that mankind is not infinitely adaptable, they can change to suit their circumstances but only so much and only for so long before something gives way.

It might not be open, head on, mutually assured destruction style resistance but it is more likely to be a sort of cutting corners, lazy, foot dragging and passive resistance sort of thing, at least at first.

It is a curious one though because while I've see this argument, about mankind not being infinitely adaptable to particular visions or plans or ideas hatched at the top or by elites, used against communism, even socialism or liberalism, quite a bit, logically, and I've read it used this way too, it applies as much conservatism, capitalism or other schemes too.




However the main x factor in this mix is technology, as technology progresses it opens more and more options for those at the top. Today you can have an industry with little or no workers, robotic armies are already here, pictures and audio can be manipulated, 24/7 media coverage is here .... etc. What altogether is fundamental change in how all of this pays out, since evil contains the seeds of destruction but it isn't necessarily seed of it's own destruction. What will surely have profound impact in how 21th century plays out.
 

Lark

Active member
Joined
Jun 21, 2009
Messages
29,569
However the main x factor in this mix is technology, as technology progresses it opens more and more options for those at the top. Today you can have an industry with little or no workers, robotic armies are already here, pictures and audio can be manipulated, 24/7 media coverage is here .... etc. What altogether is fundamental change in how all of this pays out, since evil contains the seeds of destruction but it isn't necessarily seed of it's own destruction. What will surely have profound impact in how 21th century plays out.

On the one hand I know what you are saying but on the other I think that the possible impact of technology is always exaggerated, I mean if it wasnt we'd have had a totally crime free utopia a very long time ago.

What law and order there might exist is largely a mix of good fortune and good people.
 

Virtual ghost

Complex paradigm
Joined
Jun 6, 2008
Messages
19,769
On the one hand I know what you are saying but on the other I think that the possible impact of technology is always exaggerated, I mean if it wasnt we'd have had a totally crime free utopia a very long time ago.

What law and order there might exist is largely a mix of good fortune and good people.



People who claim that technology is not a big or perhaps even a dominant factor don't understand how world really works. Without technology average human life lasts about 25 years. 7.5 billion people alive would never be reality without technology. Oil and similar important resources would not be consumed and over them there would be no wars (what would make global political reality to be completely different). There would be no political ideologies as we know them, there would not be abortion debate for obvious reasons, there would not even be primitive architecture that was built centuries ago, diseases would still kill large parts of the population, there would be no education that allowed political landscape .... etc. Without technology you have nothing, even hunter-gatherers require some technology.



Technology allows what you call good fortune (and resource stability), but it is double edged sword if not handled correctly. Which is why you need proper and available education, since in the world of technology the knowledge is power and if people aren't properly educated they are destined to become second class citizens and eventually poor. Since in the world where seller is 20+ steps ahead of consumer the logic of the market will collapse and we will end up with evil.
 
Top