Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Does it?

Yes

The law of cause and effect. Every time we do something, we create a cause, which in time will bear its corresponding effects.

Doesn't seem to apply to all. Nice people often do not get it back around that same way.

My life is a prime example LOL

Absolutely.

My friend committed armed robbery and 2 days later he got robed and beat.

Also, I stole a a handful of Penny candy from a store, but got locked out of my house.

It's like, when most people do bad stuff, they get it back some day, for me, it's instantly. But the good stuff I do never comes back around when I need it.

Is there really an objective 'cause and effect' relationship between otherwise seemingly separate events, or is WhaGACA subjective? That is, do we impose the connections because humans naturally impose patterns on things?

Is there some aspect of a self-fulfilling prophecy?

Is there some combination of the above?

Definately. SOme call it karma or destiny or God. I call it Universal balance. This principle can be seen all the time

I'm not going to agree with that neccesairly.

Anyone notice how no one's examples are about someone doing good and it coming back to them?

Originally posted by chithappens
I'm not going to agree with that neccesairly.

Anyone notice how no one's examples are about someone doing good and it coming back to them?

this is how the universe stays balanced, my friend

And yet you gave no good examples. If someone, for example, stays humble for life then when someone does them wrong them they are to turn the other cheek, but when something "good" happens to them then they are being rewarded.

Very convenient metaphysical explanation.

Originally posted by chithappens
And yet you gave no good examples. If someone, for example, stays humble for life then when someone does them wrong them they are to turn the other cheek, but when something "good" happens to them then they are being rewarded.

Very convenient metaphysical explanation.

it applies in both ways sir. I don't understand why you are being biased to this notion?

Because you can't prove it. Never said it's totally invalid. But you have to be able to say it goes for all at all times, on a universal level. Nothing metaphysical can be totally proven. "Bad" things happen to people but not because people do bad things necessarily. Good things happen, bad things happen; doesn't make them related.

Originally posted by chithappens
Because you can't prove it. Never said it's totally invalid. But you have to be able to say it goes for all at all times, on a universal level. Nothing metaphysical can be totally proven. "Bad" things happen to people but not because people do bad things necessarily. Good things happen, bad things happen; doesn't make them related. Humility results in less conflict. Thus humble behavior has lowered conflict returned. A person entertains, gives gratification to his audience, and is rewarded with fame and compensation. A person does a good deed, and feels good. A person provides wisdom when such is requested and is viewed as wise. There are plenty of examples of "good" receiving in kind.

Originally posted by Regret
Humility results in less conflict. Thus humble behavior has lowered conflict returned. A person entertains, gives gratification to his audience, and is rewarded with fame and compensation. A person does a good deed, and feels good. A person provides wisdom when such is requested and is viewed as wise. There are plenty of examples of "good" receiving in kind.

Again, this is not universal.

Humility results in less conflict at times among individuals, but certainly not every single time and not even often because people tend to be assholes when it comes to conflict (as seen through this board, people lately can't even have simple convo without insulting each other.) Actually, I've seen humility make shit worse because the person who is mad thinks the person they are mad at is trying to imply that they are "better" than them. People are silly LOL.

A person who goes to Los Hollywood in hopes of making it big does not make it. That is the exception to the rule.

A person does a "good deed" and feels good. This is subjective and while I do agree with the statement, the idea of a "good deed" is what makes this troublesome from point of morality. Again, this has nothing to do with the "universe" and more about how an individual decides he/she will feel.

A person providing wisdom is subjective in the same sense. If my father says "Son, you should go to college so you can make money and have your pickings from women!" is that wisdom? Some might call it such but it's not all would agree that this is wisdom or a "good deed" since it might cause me to become a womanizer (one will take it as either "i can pick for women for a wife" or "i can just pick through women"; most of the time its the later).

I'm not trying to be an ass, but it's just not that simple. People tend to try to find one answer that can cover all basis for all people, but it just does not work that way. I like the principle of the universe but in application, it is not so black and white. I think it's a good thing to tell people. There are a few holes in the concept, but I like the intent of it.

No.

If this was the case then childern wouldnt be killed or harmed. The fact of the matter is that bad things happen to goog people as well. Of course I think it helps to be honest rather than decietful because if you go around cheating and stealing you tend to piss people off.

I think its true to an extent.

Originally posted by Alfheim
If this was the case then childern wouldnt be killed or harmed. The fact of the matter is that bad things happen to goog people as well. Of course I think it helps to be honest rather than decietful because if you go around cheating and stealing you tend to piss people off.

I think its true to an extent.

But that's not the universe though. If you don't go around stealing and cheating, more often than not, you are not around cheating people. Automatically you are at a better chance not to do such things. Not trying to run you in the ground, but trying to make the point that this can not be really applied in any situation.

I don't think it's "true." It's a nice standard to live by. It can be applied universally no where sadly. If shit worked that way I would be rich and hell probably, at least in comparison to those around me

Originally posted by Bardock42
No.

Why do you do that? No one even knows what this is for. Please at least add a little more

Originally posted by King Nothing
Absolutely.

My friend committed armed robbery and 2 days later he got robed and beat.

Also, I stole a a handful of Penny candy from a store, but got locked out of my house.

It's like, when most people do bad stuff, they get it back some day, for me, it's instantly. But the good stuff I do never comes back around when I need it.

Maybe being good is its own reward.

Originally posted by Grand_Moff_Gav
Maybe being good is its own reward.

I like that answer. Stick to what you believe. May not "reward" necessarily but it's a good thing to stick 2.

Interesting topic. Brings to my mind the age old expression - "the road to hell is paved with good intentions."

I always thought that phrase was kind of silly and illogical. I think if someone is really trying to do good with the most loving intentions within their heart, despite whatever failed or misguided efforts they make, the ultimate outcome for that person would not be an evil one.

Still - I don't think that all evil and good actions are completely returned back to those who practice them. I think many of these things are probably forgotten, or perhaps not really considered all that consequential in the grand scheme of things.

So yeah, I think consistently good and evil intent ultimately bring about good and evil outcomes to those who practice them. Sometimes it might not bring these things to the person(s) with the good/evil intents right away though.

Originally posted by Thundar
Interesting topic. Brings to my mind the age old expression - "the road to hell is paved with good intentions."

I always thought that phrase was kind of silly and illogical. I think if someone is really trying to do good with the most loving intentions within their heart, despite whatever failed or misguided efforts they make, the ultimate outcome for that person would not be an evil one.

Still - I don't think that all evil and good actions are completely returned back to those who practice them. I think many of these things are probably forgotten, or perhaps not really considered all that consequential in the grand scheme of things.

So yeah, I think consistently good and evil intent ultimately bring about good and evil outcomes to those who practice them. Sometimes it might not bring these things to the person(s) with the good/evil intents right away though.

That explains why you seem to have so many problems with other people on this forum. You don't see the connection between what you do, and how other people respond.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
That explains why you seem to have so many problems with other people on this forum. You don't see the connection between what you do, and how other people respond.

What you say has some merit to it. Ultimately though, we all need to take responsability for the way in which we present and respond to things.

Some things are very profound and polarizing when presented, so they tend to bring forth very emotive reactions to those who they are presented to.

Originally posted by Thundar
What you say has some merit to it. Ultimately though, we all need to take responsability for the way in which we present and respond to things.

Some things are very profound and polarizing when presented, so they tend to bring forth very emotive reactions to those who they are presented to.

I agree, and I'm not blaming you for what others are responsible for. However, if you put your hand in the fire, you will get burned. There is no use of getting angry at the fire.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I agree, and I'm not blaming you for what others are responsible for. However, if you put your hand in the fire, you will get burned. There is no use of getting angry at the fire.

Sure there is. If the fire's about consume something or someone than I could get very upset at the fire, or specifically at the person who started it -- especially if the fire is about to consume a friend or loved one.

Relating this back to the topic -- do I expect a reward from helping the person from the fire? Possibly, if you consider saving a life from the fire a reward - or getting to be with that person you saved from the fire. Perhaps the better reward though, would be having the person that I saved go out and help others who were caught in similar situations.

Anyway, this is definitely a difficult subject to discuss. In the end, I truly believe all things eventually lead towards an ultimate good. Perhaps this alone should be the primary motivation one has when doing things in life, whether they themselves experience good or bad things that come about from their actions.

Originally posted by Thundar
Sure there is. If the fire's about consume something or someone than I could get very upset at the fire, or specifically at the person who started it -- especially if the fire is about to consume a friend or loved one.

Relating this back to the topic -- do I expect a reward from helping the person from the fire? Possibly, if you consider saving a life from the fire a reward - or getting to be with that person you saved from the fire. Perhaps the better reward though, would be having the person that I saved go out and help others who were caught in similar situations.

Anyway, this is definitely a difficult subject to discuss. In the end, I truly believe all things eventually lead towards an ultimate good. Perhaps this alone should be the primary motivation one has when doing things in life, whether they themselves experience good or bad things that come about from their actions.

All you will get for that point of view is suffering in this life.

Originally posted by Alfheim
If this was the case then childern wouldnt be killed or harmed. The fact of the matter is that bad things happen to goog people as well. Of course I think it helps to be honest rather than decietful because if you go around cheating and stealing you tend to piss people off.

I think its true to an extent. What goes around comes around does not imply that one is immune to the bad if one is good, nor does it imply the opposite. Given the interactive nature of existence, there is a constant flux, this does not mean that good is not returned for good nor that evil is returned for evil, it only means that there are forces besides the returning. Just because good is returning to the good, does not limit evil occurring to them, it only limits evil returning to them. What goes around comes around merely states the effect we have some limited control over, not the effects that we do not.

Originally posted by Thundar


Relating this back to the topic -- do I expect a reward from helping the person from the fire? Possibly, if you consider saving a life from the fire a reward - or getting to be with that person you saved from the fire. Perhaps the better reward though, would be having the person that I saved go out and help others who were caught in similar situations.


The reason this is also a DANGEROUS concept is because of people like you who just say x will bring x. Good does not always bring "good."

From what you are saying, every time you do something "good" you will expect to be rewarded. Not only does it start a precedent for illogical reasoning, but that will make everything you do a selfish act in some way - there's no getting around that.

If you want to just do good things because you feel that's respectable, gets you to heaven, whatever, then do it. But do not do it because you think you will be rewarded. That is a dangerous precedent to set forth.

Originally posted by Thundar
Sure there is. If the fire's about consume something or someone than I could get very upset at the fire, or specifically at the person who started it -- especially if the fire is about to consume a friend or loved one.




Do you often get upset with non-sentient objects ?





Originally posted by Thundar
Relating this back to the topic -- do I expect a reward from helping the person from the fire? Possibly, if you consider saving a life from the fire a reward - or getting to be with that person you saved from the fire. Perhaps the better reward though, would be having the person that I saved go out and help others who were caught in similar situations.



What if the person is not thankful for your risk ? What if he or she goes back to being who they are with no particular insight after your brave decision to save him or her ? what if that person does not reward you in any way what-so-ever ?


Would you regret saving them? Does it invalidate your action?


You should not do things expecting to be rewarded. You should do things because you know or beleive it's the right thing to do. You saved someone from a horrible tormenting death. That should alone be the motivation and all you require from your deed.





Originally posted by Thundar
Anyway, this is definitely a difficult subject to discuss. In the end, I truly believe all things eventually lead towards an ultimate good. Perhaps this alone should be the primary motivation one has when doing things in life, whether they themselves experience good or bad things that come about from their actions.



Your above quote can be intepretted in a million different ways by people from all sides of the spectrum of beleif.


Keep in mind that every1 defines "the ultamate good" in different and contradicting ways.

Originally posted by Thundar
Interesting topic. Brings to my mind the age old expression - "the road to hell is paved with good intentions."

I always thought that phrase was kind of silly and illogical. I think if someone is really trying to do good with the most loving intentions within their heart, despite whatever failed or misguided efforts they make, the ultimate outcome for that person would not be an evil one.



"Good" here does not mean good (I hate this damn word.) The way it is written can be seen many different ways. For example, it could mean that "good intentions" implies that the person is doing good for themselves or some sense of justice. Hitler going to Hell? More than likely, but he was doing what he thought was "right" to help his people. Extreme case but easily applies. "Good" intention, "evil" acts.

Originally posted by Goddess Kali
Do you often get upset with non-sentient objects ?




I tend to agree with you most of the time. By the way, why did you change your name? I like Urizen, the all-powerful consumer of souls

Originally posted by chithappens
"Good" here does not mean good (I hate this damn word.) The way it is written can be seen many different ways. For example, it could mean that "good intentions" implies that the person is doing good for themselves or some sense of justice. Hitler going to Hell? More than likely, but he was doing what he thought was "right" to help his people. Extreme case but easily applies. "Good" intention, "evil" acts.

That is true; good is a relative term. What is good for me may not be good for you. A better word would be Karmic choice.

Originally posted by chithappens
I tend to agree with you most of the time.












Originally posted by chithappens
By the way, why did you change your name? I like Urizen, the all-powerful consumer of souls





So do I, but I've had a real Kali fetish lately duster

Originally posted by Goddess Kali

So do I, but I've had a real Kali fetish lately duster

I would ask but I'm not sure I wanna know.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
That is true; good is a relative term. What is good for me may not be good for you. A better word would be Karmic choice.

I agree but you know some people would misuse it. Better to leave it to the few who understand the concept

Originally posted by chithappens
I would ask but I'm not sure I wanna know.



4 ARMS dd

I know the feeling. If I ever met a woman with three breasts........artist

Originally posted by chithappens
The reason this is also a DANGEROUS concept is because of people like you who just say x will bring x. Good does not always bring "good."

From what you are saying, every time you do something "good" you will expect to be rewarded. Not only does it start a precedent for illogical reasoning, but that will make everything you do a selfish act in some way - there's no getting around that.

If you want to just do good things because you feel that's respectable, gets you to heaven, whatever, then do it. But do not do it because you think you will be rewarded. That is a dangerous precedent to set forth.

You're correct. I worded it poorly. I guess what I meant was better expressed in the last line of the post...

"In the end, I truly believe all things eventually lead towards an ultimate good."

So despite whether or not those perceived "good" or "bad" things happen to myself or others -- in the end, my sincere hope that everything will be working towards this good purpose -- and not an evil one. Now if I found out the good things that I did were not working for good, then I'd be very upset...

Now can I get an amen, praise the lord or Hallelujah?

Originally posted by Thundar
You're correct. I worded it poorly. I guess what I meant was better expressed in the last line of the post...

"In the end, I truly believe all things eventually lead towards an ultimate good."

So despite whether or not those perceived "good" or "bad" things happen to myself or others -- in the end, my sincere hope that everything will be working towards this good purpose -- and not an evil one. Now if I found out the good things that I did were not working for good, then I'd be very upset...

Now can I get an amen, praise the lord or Hallelujah?

Personally I just get up at the end. Not sure what to adhere to at the moment.

I want to believe what you said also. Faith in some omniscient being working it out for all of us so long as we do as he says seems so tyrannical. I don't trust it: the words of men have deceived on a historical and personal basis. History is "his story."

As Nas said "Never talking among snakes cause the words of men kill."

Or in this case deceive i.e. Paradise Lost. I hate how John Milton writes but it is a good read once you take you time with it.

Originally posted by Thundar
You're correct. I worded it poorly. I guess what I meant was better expressed in the last line of the post...

"In the end, I truly believe all things eventually lead towards an ultimate good."

So despite whether or not those perceived "good" or "bad" things happen to myself or others -- in the end, my sincere hope that everything will be working towards this good purpose -- and not an evil one. Now if I found out the good things that I did were not working for good, then I'd be very upset...

Now can I get an amen, praise the lord or Hallelujah?



i hope you find your Heaven...it seems to mean a lot to you....




Just now you're Heaven is not the Heaven that myself or many others desire. We will find our own paths, and our own way.

Originally posted by chithappens
"Good" here does not mean good (I hate this damn word.) The way it is written can be seen many different ways. For example, it could mean that "good intentions" implies that the person is doing good for themselves or some sense of justice. Hitler going to Hell? More than likely, but he was doing what he thought was "right" to help his people. Extreme case but easily applies. "Good" intention, "evil" acts.

Having thought about it a bit more, I think the statement should have been phrased this way.

"The road to hell is based on men's perceived good intentions."

So to me, the flaw with the original quote is that it gives the impression of man being the final judge on what "good" and "evil" represents. The original author's version of "good" leaves way too much room for subjectivity of what these things truly represent.

So to simplify a bit, I don't believe that something that represents a divine or perfect good -- could lead to an ultimate purpose that consisted of ultimate evil. Still, I must admit that I am speaking from a very limited view and understanding of what "good" and "evil" truly represent. Or perhaps Job describes it best --

"Surely I spoke of things I did not understand, things too wonderful for me to know."

Originally posted by chithappens
Personally I just get up at the end. Not sure what to adhere to at the moment.

I want to believe what you said also. Faith in some omniscient being working it out for all of us so long as we do as he says seems so tyrannical. I don't trust it: the words of men have deceived on a historical and personal basis. History is "his story."

As Nas said "Never talking among snakes cause the words of men kill."

Or in this case deceive i.e. Paradise Lost. I hate how John Milton writes but it is a good read once you take you time with it.


I don't believe God's intention is to harm us, nor do I believe it to be tyrannical. He may be the author of the "story" so to speak, but at the same time - I believe that he makes it easy for us to edit it. Ultimately though like any author he does have the rights to do any final revisions on the book, so this is where the faith aspect come's in to play for me. I have faith that this book of life he created has a good ending to it, and I base this faith on what I've observed from the author's Word and actions.

Originally posted by Goddess Kali
i hope you find your Heaven...it seems to mean a lot to you....




Just now you're Heaven is not the Heaven that myself or many others desire. We will find our own paths, and our own way.


Thank you. Ultimately though, we all have to take responsability for the choices we make, despite the perceived "good" or "bad" circumstances we find ourselves presented with in this life. I sincerely hope at some point, you are able to see that this "good" exists outside of your own wants and desires, and see how loving this type of good truly is.

Originally posted by Thundar
Thank you. Ultimately though, we all have to take responsability for the choices we make, despite the perceived "good" or "bad" circumstances we find ourselves presented with in this life. I sincerely hope at some point, you are able to see that this "good" exists outside of your own wants and desires, and see how loving this type of good truly is.

Good can't be loving.

In general it seems many believe that the cause/effect cycle implies that there are not effects that simply occur that may be viewed as "bad" or "good" aside from those in question. Just because doing "good" results in some "good" returning doesn't negate all other effects that may occur just by chance, nor does it imply that the returned "good "will outweigh the chance "ill"

Originally posted by Thundar
Having thought about it a bit more, I think the statement should have been phrased this way.

"The road to hell is based on men's perceived good intentions."

So to me, the flaw with the original quote is that it gives the impression of man being the final judge on what "good" and "evil" represents. The original author's version of "good" leaves way too much room for subjectivity of what these things truly represent.

So to simplify a bit, I don't believe that something that represents a divine or perfect good -- could lead to an ultimate purpose that consisted of ultimate evil. Still, I must admit that I am speaking from a very limited view and understanding of what "good" and "evil" truly represent. Or perhaps Job describes it best --

"Surely I spoke of things I did not understand, things too wonderful for me to know."



I take the quote to imply the way you paraphrased it. The problem comes with the words used to define the "intentions" - good and bad have always been subjective and can never been applied universally.

I do not believe in a perfect good or an ultimate evil. I believe it far reaching to say that something is "perfect" because you could get have something and say that it is "perfect" meaning that it could never get any better. But what if you think of some improvement of some sort.

* I worded this terribly but I'm tired. Please just look @ refutations of Greek philosophers ideas on the "perfect" forms of the other plane.

Nice quote from Job though. That story is funny because I think it's not something that would happen often but I'll probably come back and say something on that later.

Tired. Chit out.

Originally posted by chithappens
I take the quote to imply the way you paraphrased it. The problem comes with the words used to define the "intentions" - good and bad have always been subjective and can never been applied universally.

I do not believe in a perfect good or an ultimate evil. I believe it far reaching to say that something is "perfect" because you could get have something and say that it is "perfect" meaning that it could never get any better. But what if you think of some improvement of some sort.

* I worded this terribly but I'm tired. Please just look @ refutations of Greek philosophers ideas on the "perfect" forms of the other plane.

Nice quote from Job though. That story is funny because I think it's not something that would happen often but I'll probably come back and say something on that later.

Tired. Chit out.

Well yes, fundamentally - we have to assume there is something that is absolutely correct - or perfect, or else we would have really nothing to base our arguments on, and this would be a rather pointless discussion. The only time subjectivety comes into play is when one believes there is an ultimate judge making such a determination. So true subjectivity of the concepts "good" and "evil" -- really only applies to something divine in nature(i.e. God)

Many men can do things perceived to be good by the world and by themselves, however, the underlying motive and result may bring about evil. I believe that the evil can be found in any one thing or in all of them, and doesn't necessarily have to be present within them all to be deemed ultimately "evil" - at least by a divine judge.

There are definite gray and muddled areas though, just as much as there are polarizing ones. As I grow in understanding, I tend to think that evil is more of an extremist-selfish-discontent mindset, and exists at all levels of the spectrum.

You gave a good example of such a mindset in another thread, relating to a father giving advice to his son of "go out and meet as many women as possible." Was the advice bad or inherently evil? Of course not. Like you stated - the evil aspect comes into play when the son selfishly utilizes this information to the extreme and becomes a womanizer, or when the son then goes back to the father and falsely accuses him of giving bad advice. So in the end, my firm belief is that the choices we make, lead to these perceived "good" or "bad" conclusions.

Still, despite any evil commited - I strongly believe that all things will at some point go to assisting this greater good, which in my mind - exists outside of the spectrum of what I know good, evil, and the gray areas to be.

Or to go back to the son analogy, I'm sure you know of the story of the prodigal son. The son in this story knew that he had commited wrong against his father and hadn't used his inheritance wisely, but in the end despite his evil actions - he took responsability for himself, and ultimately the conclusion to the matter was a good one. I know I'm over-simplifying a bit, and not explaining things all that well - but I think you get the basic gist of the story if you are really looking for it..

Karma is a man made thing, guilt is the reason we sow what we reap.

Guilt can be one of the emotions that impedes us most. It can be fun to exploit too, if you don't feel guilty about it.

i agree. i guess we jus never notice d good things dis universe gives us coz we r too busy dealin wit d repercussions of our previous bad doings.