Right/Wrong... subjective?

Originally Posted by Greenslade

Universal Truth? I'm not big on Truth never mind Universal, Truth is relative to one's own agenda.

Awareness is subjective.

I don't even know where to decipher this.

So I am guessing gravity is only relative to a scientists agenda, so it is not Truth to you?....Gravity is Truth in our world.
Universal truth is wisdom.

"Awareness is subjective?" please explain yourself

Look up Hundredth Monkey Effect (mentioned in first post), so you can actually understand what I'm talking about when I mention awareness.

Originally Posted by sea-dove

Hate is a very strong word. I personally dont necessarily see any of those things as hate. If anyone is directing those things towards me, I do not go and think they hate me. (not like to me isnt hate)

So intolerance to you is not hate?

Are these just words to you, or do you understand the impact behind them?

Intolerance means unwillingness to accept views, beliefs, or behavior that differ from one's own. We don't have to like someone's views/beliefs but tolerance of them allows for peace, if we are intolerant then we cause suffering within ourselves that most likely releases to them or the world in some way.

Originally Posted by lemex

Have to say many are off track here and sad people don't know. Anyway my friend, the spiritual person is probably more prone not to have the concept because it is necessary for survival, that would be us. But I would also say the spiritual person started out that way or at least willing to go beyond such normalcy.

What are you even talking about? We are all "spiritual people". I know morality is necessary for survival to an extent.....Does that make it it's purpose in us though? Who's to say it doesn't have other uses?

I don't know what you're talking about when you say"That would be us"
going on about how you and other poster are the only spiritual people in this thread or whatever you wrote lol......Ok, you're the only "spiritual person" here, thanks for posting that in this thread. If you don't want to explain yourself why post in this thread for?

Many people gave great insightful reponses that I am still reading and taking in.

For the people who came in with know-it-all attitudes, Listen. I know we need hate/love, right/wrong. Both are valid.
Without the dark we wouldn't appreciate the light. Without one of them we wouldn't have a story. My whole point here is that Morality is part of the Hundredth Monkey Effect for those in the same country/environment that is.
I believe the Hundredth Monkey Effect is spiritual evolution, and so Right/Wrong becomes more clear to us as humans. What's Right/Wrong to you? I asked that question to you all and few people gave a clear answer. I think all of you agree with what is Love/Hate but you want to appear more sophisticated than other people here, for your own ego. Or you're making it more complex than it is.

Originally Posted by Holly

If I want to sink into fear and be hateful for a day then I do it and I judge myself as little as possible for it. .

Ok....So let's say a man decides he wants to sink into fear for a day and terrorizes his whole town with gun violence.
He does it, and doesn't judge himself too much. He feels content with it.

This is ok to you?

You don't think about the other people around you and the consequences of your own actions? Because this is how the world works to me.

Originally Posted by each1teach1

I don't even know where to decipher this.

So I am guessing gravity is only relative to a scientists agenda, so it is not Truth to you?....Gravity is Truth in our world.
Universal truth is wisdom, look it up.

"Awareness is subjective?" please explain yourself

What people try to tell others is the truth can easily be nothing more than a complete fabrication.

Applying physical analogies to these kinds of concepts just doesn't work. Gravity I can see and feel the effects of but all there is of the truth is what people say it is, often regardless of the facts.

Awareness is about perspective. Until there's a Universal Truth and Universal benchmark to compare against, awareness won't be anything else other than what people say it is.

Originally Posted by each1teach1

Look up Hundredth Monkey Effect (mentioned in first post), so you can actually understand what I'm talking about when I mention awareness.

I don't need to, numbers don't dictate what the truth is or isn't.

Originally Posted by each1teach1

So intolerance to you is not hate?

Are these just words to you, or do you understand the impact behind them?

Intolerance means unwillingness to accept views, beliefs, or behavior that differ from one's own. We don't have to like someone's views/beliefs but tolerance of them allows for peace, IF we are intolerant, then we cause suffering within ourselves that most likely releases to them in some way.

Having been slated in these forums for my beliefs before makes me quite aware of intolerance, not to mention being Scottish or having short hair. And yes, I was in a few fist-fights with people who didn't tolerate others with short hair because they didn't tolerate people who were in the forces. No, intolerance is not hate to me but if we're here to 'learn the lessons' and whatever else then we shouldn't complain when we're presented with one.

Originally Posted by each1teach1

What's Right/Wrong to you? I asked that question to you all and few people gave a clear answer. I think most of you agree with what is Love/Hate but you want to appear more sophisticated than other people here, for your own ego.

It's about accept/not accept. I've been down this road before and it's only leading me to the same conclusions. I've had experiences that I wouldn't wish on my worst enemy and I'm not talking about the ones I've already mentioned. If you take a look at the real world outside these forums then you'd realise soon enough how subjective right and wrong are, and if you thought about it you'd realise that there are things happening behind the scenes.

The real world is what inspired this question for me, not this forum. I'm not even that familiar with this forum much at all. or any other spiritual forums

You mentioned that in your view its about lessons with the implication that there are souls who come with the mission to bring negative energy in order to teach others.

I think about this concept a lot and it's hard to understand for me but I continue to try and figure out how it would work like this.

It's my heart/feelings that brings me to ask this question about Right/Wrong. Not that I am much of an emotional person, more humanitarian minded.

Originally Posted by Lorelyen

It’s probably a combination of universal and subjective related to cultural maxims.

This is what makes the most sense to me.

Originally Posted by each1teach1

The real world is what inspired this question for me, not this forum. I'm not even that familiar with this forum much at all.

You mentioned that in your view its about lessons with the implication that there are souls who come with the mission to bring negative energy in order to teach others.

I think about this concept a lot and it's hard to understand for me but I continue to try and figure out how it would work like this.

It's my heart/feelings that brings me to ask this question about Right/Wrong. Not that I am much of an emotional person, more humanitarian minded.

Ah, now we come to the heart of the matter. I listen to my feelings more than anything else because they are the communications between myself and much in my Spirituality. Following your heart on a quest to find out more can be very rewarding. And if you're coming from a humanitarian perspective it makes sense, not as a Universal Truth but in understanding yourself. Often that's just as if not more important.

Often our own answers are the best so let me ask the humanitarian in you this. If you knew that sometime in the future you would need to empathise with someone and the best way to do that was to have a similar bad experience, what would you do? Have you already made a similar choice in Spirit?

[Holly]

Originally Posted by each1teach1

Ok....So let's say a man decides he wants to sink into fear for a day and terrorizes his whole town with gun violence.
He does it, and doesn't judge himself too much. He feels content with it.

This is ok to you?

You don't think about the other people around you and the consequences of your own actions? Because this is how the world works to me.

Is it OK? Honestly it's neither Ok or not OK. It's nothing. It only becomes SOMETHING when I invest emotional energy into it.

I have no responsibility for the gunman, do I? So why waste my energy debating, in my mind, the morals or ethics of his actions? If I decide to use my body or mind or voice in a way that creates responsibility, then I've CREATED that responsibility out of a cultural imperative to preserve life.

The preservation of life is admirable but we still have countries on Earth where we practise the death penalty for murder. How then, are we any better than the gunman?

The act of murder is important to the human brain because we have social systems in place that inhibit those behaviours, because nobody wants to lose a relative or be murdered.

Spiritual right and wrong is also something we create. The spiritual definition of right and wrong is limited by our individual understanding of God and our place in the universe. If we want to have a definition of wrong then fine - just know that it's a choice we make and not a god-decreed imperative.

In effect you're suggesting that a wrong deed is wrong no matter how you look at it. I'm suggesting that a wrong deed is only wrong when you decide it is. From the standpoint of your average human, anything that they find frightening or disturbing or emotionally threatening is called 'wrong.'

That 'wrong;' is not a universal standard. It's a measure of 'wrong' unique to mankind. An alien would have a different classifciation of wrong, and angels would see every act as a simple learning curve without any judgement at all.

All I'm suggesting is that 'wrong' is not only subjective but it relies heavily on the damaged human mind for its definitions. Most of us are carrying scars from childhood that inhibit our natural, wild behaviours, usually through shame conditioning. How then, can we be certain that wrong is wrong, and not just the product of our own twisted inner child psychology?

The soul has a plan of its own which may or may not include murder as one of its lessons.

If you go about labelling that gunman as wrong, are you helping his soul, or hindering it?

Being 'wrong' is synonymous to the atavistic brain with being pushed out of the group and therefore preyed upon and killed. When you define life in terms of right and wrong you activate that deep brain that was conditioned in childhood by means of negative reinforcement. By defining the world this way you only limit yourself and cause distress to the survival instincts. Better to think of the gunman as a soul with a purpose and try to survive what he visits on you and others than to propagate the very system of judgement that created the gunman in the first place.

[Deusdrum]

Yes I believe there is right and wrong, and universal law.

Of course panties will be bunching from the get-go when people start throwing out judgy words like 'right' and 'wrong'.

The author Philip K D___ (censor always picks up his last name) once said; 'Reality is that which, when we cease to believe it, doesn't go away.' Which essentially sums it up for me.

People take issue because no one likes to be told anything. And also because the quote unquote right way is also often not always the easy way.

Quite frankly, the typical intellectualizing about the relativity of this question to me is somewhat lazy and cowardly. Yes, people can justify pretty much anything if it suits their purpose or preference, but somewhere in me I know those times when I sold someone short or sold myself out. Because it will bother me, and I will think about it. Even if I've done all I can it will bother me, but if I'm short in there somewhere it just won't quite sit right.

Not saying everyone is like this, in fact there is ample proof that indeed this is not the case but that's another story. I think if we starve our ego of it's sense of entitlement and notions of self glory too long he will not be happy and is going to let us know about it, but therein lies the struggle.

Compassion, helping a brother or sister out, teamwork, good sportsmanship and high fives; (can't help being somewhat facetious) these are the good things in life. There is a reason the iching talks of the superior man, why all cultures have both their heavens and an underworld. Why Arjuna felt compelled to join the battle against his enemies, many of whom his family. The advocate and the adversary.

Greed. Good luck trying to take that from people because it is so ingrained in much of human culture. Karma is not punitive; humans are, out of necessity. Divine law is not so prejudiced, it only results according to it's design. We can take it personal if we wish. We go astray imo when we fail to recognize our true nature, beyond selfishness and desire.

Some of the most egregious wrongs in history are made by those who would proclaim what is right and wrong for others. I say follow your conscience (assuming you have one) and that is essentially the difference betwixt right and wrong, morally speaking. What that consists of specifically is something that imo everyone comes to an understanding of on their own terms. What is right or wrong for another I cannot say, but when it effects people around us in a harmful manner then imo it is upon us to do what we can to address the situation.

What if it's really more about people having the need to be right, than debating whether something is "truly" right or wrong?

There's a certain egoic satisfaction to declare something is "X", whether that be right, wrong, black, white or whatever. I think there's an accompanying need to declare whether the declaration of X is "subjective" or "objective", for the same reasons of wanting to be right. Whether it is or not may not be provable. But people want a definitive answer. Because, well...., we want a definitive answer. Why? Because it feels better somehow in the mind, I guess.

But it doesn't really help anything. It's not useful. So even if we all agree something is "X", nothing is really solved. Ditto if we say that a pov on something is subjective or objective. Wars continue, as do murders, whether we say they are right or wrong, good or evil.

This doesn't mean we have no opinion on things, or that we sit around and do nothing, like passive vegetables. Of course we stand up for what we believe in. But it is a belief, a pov, a perspective, a perception. And we aren't all going to agree on everything.

What if people can let go of the need to agree on everything, to get everyone to label things as "X", ie good, bad, right or wrong? Things just are. It doesn't mean I don't care. It just means I don't want to go into my head about it and waste energy drawing conclusions of declaring something is "X" as right or wrong for everyone on the whole planet for all time, for every circumstance.

To me, it would be more interesting to see if people can do that. Because that is much more difficult than getting everyone to agree on one perspective or the other, which is usually what killing and wars are about.

I just want to thank you all for your input, for those that wrote thought out responses I appreciate it. I have a lot of these type of questions in my mind and you all really help to open up my thinking range to different angles. Every response I read and take in. For this question I have learned a lot. Respect and peace to you guys/gals.

[Deusdrum]

Take for instance Nietzsche's "will to power." Towards the end of his life, before he went crazy Nietzsche publicly praised and lauded two men who had murdered a person/ or people living in a nearby city from him, basically for pushing the envelope or what have you. In my crim. Psych class I've heard a version of the "right and wrong is all relative depending on a person's perspective.." argument made from at least one infamous serial killer. Don't take it the wrong way, Hitler said some great sounding things too in his day; just because something an awful person once said may sound agreeable to us doesn't imo mean we are bad people by association.

It is a compelling argument in many ways, to be sure. I've read Clockwork Orange, I get it. However to my mind, in practice it begins to break down when it involves deliberate infringement upon another with the intention of doing them some wrong or harm. Despite the reasons; jealousy, anger, amusement, profit, etc. etc. because imo a person in their right mind feels and has no need or compulsion to do so.

Of course in life everyone commits some form of trespass upon others all the time; some literal, some on various energetic levels, from the intimidation of the bully to the sarcastic condescension of the passive aggressive. Nature of the human drama, as actors on the stage it would be arrogant and presumptuous to think we know with certainly the role we play, let alone that of others. It would also take out the fun and mystery of it all.

Nietzsche was known to have once said that in the whole of history he only considered Plato to be his rival or equal in thought, (whether Nietzche himself belongs in such company is open for debate) which fits considering he authored a book called 'The Antichrist,' and Socrates (who is forever bound to Plato, some theorize he was Plato) died a very Christ like death by execution at the behest of the powers that be at the time. He also chose this death willingly as did Jesus, whether you believe J.C. was a real historical figure or a mythological one or both.

Carl Jung has a quote; "Where love rules, there is no will to power, and where power predominates, love is lacking. The one is the shadow of the other." Call it right and wrong if you want, I think it expresses the human dynamic well.

And the similar sentiment of Jimi Hendrix's the power-of-love not the love-of-power.

To be human is to be fallible, we're all intertwined together with our imperfections, and maybe learning to appreciate all the charming or repulsive personal predispositions of each others' imperfections is a good way to go. Seems to work for me (when I manage not to be hyper-critical of myself and/or others, which I tend to do sometimes unfortunately.)

If you steal my car stereo, it doesn't mean I wish to forever label you a bad person or a criminal. Maybe you're crying for help, doing it for a rush or to feed your kids so there is always context. In more extreme cases (ie: violent crime) though it does mean I think you should be locked up for considerations of public safety.

In literature 'Crime and Punishment' tackles the question in an interesting manner. Besides the obvious storyline, there is also a character in the book who has a desperate need for acceptance from the main character's sister and is in love with her. His neediness and conduct could easily be seen as a 'wrong', regardless (because of?) his constant efforts to be or appear good and nice in order to be like or accepted, and she despises him. Hating yourself is one of the greatest wrongs, imo. If you live your life in order to somehow fit in or validate your own existence in your own mind, then to me that could be construed as a wrong as well.

To be honest, part of the reason I'm even posting this is not entirely without selfish reasons; there is a mischievous little guy in the mix there somewhere who wants to make a big splash and ripple to offend everyone's delicate sensibilities when they read this. Is that wrong? Yes, I suppose it is in the sense that I'm being insensitive. I acknowledge and confess this. In no way do I wish to paint a brush upon anyone; (seriously) it is merely, a perhaps, overly blunt expression of how I currently see the question. I however justify my bluntness b/c I feel I want to make sure the point gets across. So I think I'll leave it right here, with such a confession.

I could have worded it in a gentler manner, but I've invested enough time on this monstrosity of a post already so weighing that into the equation, and also sprinkling in the fact that this is something I feel strongly about, by the time you read this I have therefore already made the conscious decision to post this nevertheless.

I bid you all adieu. ~

Gentler manner? Nah..Very good posts, enjoyed reading them.

I too see it as wrong to not love yourself. To not strive to be strong as well. You are wronging yourself. Your perception and strength is a choice and no one can change that but you. One should not feel sorry for another but lead by example or encourage them to do their best with what they have as others are able to do. But of course there are times when every man/woman needs help or guidance at some point and that's human. No one is an island, we are all interconnected. A grown adult I feel should be confident in themselves though, or at least work on finding the positive aspects of themselves. A damaged individual should seek help from strong people that are willing to offer counsel. There are tons of rehabilitated addicts or other previously damaged people that found their strength within and are willing to help others find it. Strength and love are powerful together.

The Jimmy Hendrix quote could be one answer for this question. There are abstract universal laws that cannot be denied, whether the source is in the heart of us all or some external force. Wisdom is tried and tested truth.