Dear davidf,

I should have refreshed before posting. By the way at 34 words your last post must be the shortest exchange between us.

To answer; No, unreasonable guilt only enters into the equation if you think it is bad or unnatural to have evil thoughts.

For any person in a situation such as Fractelle's to harbour such thoughts is entirely understandable and I don't think they should be made to feel guilty in any way, shape, or form. Be a wallower not!

To wish someone dead in most circumstances should/is/must be regarded as an evil thought. But we're not angels thank god, we are humans. If the evil in us isn't there for good to conquer then good must be meaningless.

Many years ago I will admit to being a few steps further down the path toward eliminating the source of a 'clear and present danger' to my family. Unquestionably entertaining evil thoughts even though never acted upon.

It must be the height of arrogance to believe that evil only lies in the deeds of others. In fact a person who fails to recognise evil thoughts within themselves is one of the most frightening sort going.

Even God recognised some of his plans and actions were evil. Not to see them as such is a particularly Christian perspective.

From Jerimiah 18:11

Thus saith the LORD; Behold, I frame evil against you, and devise a device against you: return ye now every one from his evil way, and make your ways and your doings good.

We have discussed evil but a possibly a more interesting topic might be 'good'. What should we regard as the act displaying the greater good? A tee-totalling minister passing up a stiff drink or a new inductee into AA doing the same? A pauper or a wealthy man returning a fattened wallet?

I could put the argument that angels are far less capable of a measure of good than a human being because of what is innate in each of us.

Dear csteele,

I don't recognise evil thoughts within myself since I don't recognise evil thoughts in others. To me evil is an action not a thought. It's that simple. I can't see that a thought that does not result in action of any kind can be evil. I have wished the entire population of countries dead. You know what? Didn't hurt them a bit. To feel guilt over such a thought can mean a belief in a kind of magic. The magical belief is that mere thoughts without action have some mystical power to hurt. They don't.

You wrote: "It must be the height of arrogance to believe that evil only lies in the deeds of others. In fact a person who fails to recognise evil thoughts within themselves is one of the most frightening sort going."

The two sentences have little to do with each other. You are comparing evil deeds of others with 'evil thoughts' of one's own. Deeds can be evil. To my way of thinking thoughts cannot be so it is a meaningless comparison to me.

However, excessive love breeds hate. One thing that is generally neglected in considering the Nazis is the great love they had for each other and the German volk. Their love drew tight boundaries around the love objects and made it easier to hate those outside those boundaries. Like thoughts love and hate are only meaningful when they are expressed in action.

As we both get older my oldest son and I have grown closer, and he has felt free to tell me things that bothered him. He mentioned to me that when he was a child I rarely praised him. My thoughts of love for him were meaningless if I was too uptight to express them in word or deed.

What does a tee-totalling minister passing up a stiff drink or a new inductee into AA doing the same have to do with good or evil?

The good of returning a fattened wallet depends on more than the wealth of the returner. To be continued.

Csteele

You can only have as much insight into my personal situation as I am able to explain, given the limitations of this forum. I agree, that to do evil one must start with the thought; however, it remains the act which defines it.

One can harbour animosity towards race or religion or whatever even while behaving 'normally', although I cannot imagine such prejudices as always remaining fallow. These are long held beliefs; in my case I described a reaction to a situation.

Prejudice towards groups, whether because one is aligned with a religion or other ideologically based organisation (or one is simply a misanthrope) have the greatest capacity for harm to others. How a single person acts under duress is a mark of their character, how one acts on one's prejudices is more malleable and, therefore, of use to either an individual's sense of superiority or may be cultivated by others for nefarious ends. Ergo: greater capacity for evil.

What I have a great deal of difficulty in understanding is DavidF's statement: << I don't recognise evil thoughts within myself since I don't recognise evil thoughts in others.>>

I'll take the second half of this statement first:

My ability to recognise evil intent in others has quite literally saved my life on a couple of occasions and alerted me to potential for malice from people like the workplace bully, as an example. Therefore, I recognise evil thoughts in others. However, I do start on a basis of innocence until otherwise indicated.

:)

To fail to recognise evil in my own thoughts (either deliberately, as Davidf appears to be, or by lying to myself) may result in harm to others (even if not consciously acted upon) , or a massive load of subconscious guilt. Better to be aware of one's limitations and underlying motivation.

I look forward to Davidf edifying his above statement. Thank you.

Csteele:

<< Music however seems to me to be more innate. One only has to see a chimpanzee mother crooning to her infant, or engaging in rhythmic rocking to calm it, to see its origins. Leonard's Hallelujah has been covered by so many artists and although using essentially using the same words and tune have given us religious, sexual, sad, celebratory, romantic, lonely and many other versions of it. It is an example of how, with its ability to elicit such powerful responses, music heightens our awareness of things that are can be beyond speech. >>

Absolutely.

Other animals respond to music - I can relax my pets by singing their names softly to them - just as a mother does to a baby.

And music can rouse to action, think "Das Deutschlandlied", the Maori Haka or the afore mentioned "Onward Christian Soldiers".

<<.. music heightens our awareness of things that are can be beyond speech >> Although not religious, I would described this as a spiritual reaction. I do get rather peeved when religious people claim to hold the patent on spirituality.

Regards

Fractelle wrote:

“My ability to recognise evil intent in others has quite literally saved my life on a couple of occasions and alerted me to potential for malice from people like the workplace bully, as an example. Therefore, I recognise evil thoughts in others. ...

:)

To fail to recognise evil in my own thoughts (either deliberately, as Davidf appears to be, or by lying to myself) may result in harm to others (even if not consciously acted upon) , or a massive load of subconscious guilt. Better to be aware of one's limitations and underlying motivation.

I look forward to Davidf edifying his above statement. Thank you.”

Dear Fractelle,

I try to choose my words carefully and sometimes succeed.

I also wrote: “To me evil is an action not a thought. It's that simple. I can't see that a thought that does not result in action of any kind can be evil.”

I doubt that you or anybody else can read minds. However, I am sure you are perceptive enough to recognise evil intent. You don’t do that by reading minds. You do that by picking up physical manifestations of people’s feelings. It may be a hesitation in speech, a raised eyebrow or some other subtle action that expresses a feeling. You have recognized evil intent because a thought has resulted in a physical manifestation that you have been able to pick up. There has been an action.

The action may not be evil in itself (I wrote ‘of any kind’), but it is sufficient to alert a perceptive person such as yourself.

Dear csteele,

I don’t regard having a drink as any more good or evil than eating an apple. Therefore “a tee-totalling minister passing up a stiff drink or a new inductee into AA doing the same” has no relevance to good and evil. The minister has probably falsely, in my view, equated drinking with evil. The AA member has a problem with a personal proclivity that he or she finds hard to control – could also be overeating.

Davidf

Appreciate your thoughts.

Just quickly:

I would posit that a thought IS an action; chemical and electrical responses and transferences between synapses in the brain. Therefore physical, therefore an action.

Cheers