Ever since it came, its been worshiped, praised, supported, refined and even defended. What it’s done to us behind our backs has brought us all to the brink of self-destruction.

Humanity is suffering greatly today on a large scale, with a disease that has become increasingly life-threatening. The host of this disease is suffering from great confusion, especially from its defense systems. It is devouring the host and not the disease. I guess the confusion stems from not really understanding

the differences between what is “good” and what is “evil” – even though you are enormously concerned with the issues, you are also enormously confused.

I hope to help bring some clarity into your life.

It seems reasonable and rational to say that we need to define our individual and collective, long-term purpose before we can define what is good and evil.

trojan-horse

The “Battle of Armageddon”

I propose that there is an ongoing multidimensional struggle in our local universe between two extremes of polarization. These are commonly known as the dualistic forces of “good” and “evil”. Those with religious beliefs will without exception recognize their perception of what this spiritual battle is all about. It is even referred to as the “Battle of Armageddon”.

I propose that there are some hidden aspects to the common debate about these issues from a religious, philosophical and a rational point of view. I have found some surprising aspects that I had never thought of, before taking the time to do a critical analysis of the differences. I’d like to share what I have discovered, uncovered and recovered.

What does “good” and “evil” really mean?

The first aspect of my quest was to define the extremes of both polarities. Since I am using a human reference to my judgments. I have to ask myself how other people make their judgments. I have found that there are two distinct reference points. The one is intellectual and the other is emotional. It makes a difference which resource we judge from.

The intellectual – rational – left brain approach

The concept of following laws and rules and cooperating is very essential to the intellectual approach to being “good”. If you break the laws, rules and refuse to cooperate – we all know that is “bad” or “evil” depending on the severity of the “sin” committed.

The intellectual approach is also the realm of: legalities, judges, prosecutors, defenders and lawyers. It permeates our corporate, organizational and governmental institutionalized concept of what is right and wrong.

Religious principles, from my rather considerable background knowledge also fall into the category of rational thinking. The Christian tradition is about laws and rules of conduct – the Ten Commandments and a long list of “sins” that fall into different degrees of severity that promise some form of punishment. As a generalization, breaking religious rules is generally understood as evil or at least bad so I consider that an intellectual approach.

It is also an intellectual approach to this issue that punishment of “bad” is “good”. We see this clearly in the judicial systems of justice we have. We also think its “good” to punish or kill people that do “bad” things but then we end up with emotional conflicts and confusion.

The emotional approach

The emotional approach to good and bad is very direct and simple. Good feels good and bad feels bad. Evil feels worse. Judging from an observer’s perspective, there is much to say about this approach as a way to be led astray. From the emotional perspective, it is never “good” to feel the pain of punishment. But does that make it evil to punish people for breaking the rules and laws?

When nations go to war, they have soldiers go out and kill each other and civilians. Some people call it “righteous” while others call it “evil”. We know we have a problem coming to clarity here.

There are also too many things in life that feel good in the moment but make you feel really bad later on.

Most people would recognize that addictive drugs are heavily on the bad and maybe evil side of the dualities in question. They make you “feel good” but will certainly destroy you later down the road.

The missing reference point of judgment

It would seem that both the intellectual and the emotional methods of judging the difference between good and bad are ultimately very dependent on what our reference is for the judgment call. I have found this important when defining many different issues – especially the word “effectiveness”. It is generally understood that effective is good and the opposite is bad without considering that it would be bad to be effectively led to death and destruction for example.

Effectiveness, in order for it to be understood, must always be measured up against the greater intention and therefor the long-term direction of pursuit. Because we all change our reference points in our daily lives, we wind up making judgment over good and bad – from a self-referencing point of view.

This creates quite a lot of confusion, frustration and general chaos when it comes to the issues of determining – objectively what is good and bad. This is also why it’s important to look closely at the issues. I mentioned “greater” intention because if we are too close to our immediate concerns – we lose track of our long-term goals. If we want to have clarity about what is really good and bad – It seems reasonable and rational to say that we need to define our individual and collective long-term purpose before we can define what is good and evil.

Can we define collective purpose?

In order to come to clarity here, we need to think of long-term perspectives and take a look at the issues from a higher perspective so we don’t get lost in the details. Short term and changing perspectives will not help us define a purpose for humanity and therefore provide a foundation for defining what is good and evil.

Because I have dealt with these issues for a long time, I know that there is a trap here concerning defining what is short and what is long-term when it comes to thinking about life. It makes a huge difference if you have one lifetime under consideration, or if you have an expanded perspective that involves a series of life experiences. Yes, I’m referring to “reincarnation”.

You may or may not be aware of the fact that there is an overwhelming database of sound evidence that does everything but physically prove what can never be physically proven. My experiences and clinical research tells me that reincarnation is indeed a perspective we have to take into consideration if we are going to understand anything about the issues we are dealing with hear.

One life-time is never enough perspective to reach clarity. It leads us to assume that the meaning of life, for example is: “The pursuit of happiness” – which is nice, but unfortunately often leads to that short-term happiness leading to long-term pain. It leads us to assume that survival is the greatest issues we need to deal with and that is simply not the case. You have to take me on faith for that. You will find documentation other places on this web-site, that provides all the information you need.

I suggest that we look at the issues of evolving development of potential as a long-term goal that reasonably fits within the parameters of understanding that life is indeed a series of experiences in different bodies. If you assume with me for a while that reaching our potential would be a good generalization of a development theme for defining our collective purpose – I think we can get some where here.

The scale and scope of human performance

In order to encompass the entire scope of human performance, we need to define the extremes. I suggest we go with what is commonly accepted as evil to give ourselves a common reference. Let’s call it “The pleasure of inflicting pain, loss of life and the destruction of property”. On the other end of the extreme, we have the extraordinary, and what is amazing because it expands our perception of possibility. We could call this an expression of extraordinary vitality.

To define this side of the scale makes it easy to understand the other extreme side of that scale as the painful loss of that vitality. This gives us a logical reference system we can use for our further development of understanding about good and bad.

Reflections on the difference between the extremes

I ask you to consider if we can come closer to defining evil and good by looking closely at the differences that make these two polar opposites what they are. The character traits that are the same or overlapping will not helps understand what makes them be what they do. I also suggest that we can perhaps even come closer to identifying that mystical character that humans often refer to as the devil with so many other different generalized names.

Extreme brutality

Extreme vitality

Singular Reference – no Empathy

Multiple Reference – Empathy

Domination – Authority

Autonomy – Anarchy (self-leadership)

Friction and Resistance

Free Flow

Driven by Deception

Driven by Truth

Manipulated Choice

Universal respect for fully informed free will

Rule of Force

Unified Collective agreement

Limitations and Scarcity

Abundance

Laws, Rules and Regulations

Intentions

Fear of Failure

Acceptance of mistakes as necessary for mastering extended performance

Driven by Conflict

Free for Conflicts

Complete fragmentation

Complete Integration

Competition

Synergy

Closed system

Open System

Punishment

Never Punishment

Incongruence – Emotional Dishonesty

Congruence – Emotional Honesty

Celebrates Monoculture - Uniformity

Celebrates Diversity – Uniqueness

Rigid organization

Flexible organization

Destructive

Constructive

Last man standing wins – everybody else loses

Everybody wins – Nobody loses

Local intelligent organization – General chaos

Local and General intelligent organization

Service to self at other’s expense

Service to self and others in balance – never at other’s expense

Uses man-made laws and rules as justification for actions

Uses universal, unchanging Laws as justification for actions

Energy, Power and Knowledge unequally distributed

Energy, Power and Knowledge freely and symmetrically shared.

Creates dependency relationships in the commitment to compete

Creates self-sufficiency and independence in commitment to vitality

Operates on short-term pleasure providing long-term pain (hell?)

Operates on short-term pain (learning/stretching), providing long-term pleasure

Sacrifice self for the collective good

Sacrifice of self is a lose for the collective

 

From this list of traits that are unique and polarized between the two polarities, we can certainly learn a lot about the differences in the traits between real good and real evil.

After a considerable amount of systemic analysis to map how these conditions fall together – I have come to discover, uncover and recover the primary difference between these polarities under one single description – COMPETITION.

Scientific research in a diverse collection of living and non-living systems, asking the question, “How much competition is optimal for optimal performance of the system?” All came up with the same answer – zero! No system can perform at its best with the inclusion of competition. The opposite is of course true on the side of Vitality. No system can reach its optimal level of performance without complete passive or active mutual cooperation – or synergy. Evil has competition within it and Vitality does not. Could this be a portal for a new and clear understanding of what competition really is?

The devil in disguise?

There are certainly a majority of people in a global context that encourage, support, maintain and even defend the idea that competition is natural, necessary, unavoidable and useful for development of: social systems, infrastructures and individuals. Our society lives under the paradigm of “Survival of the Fittest” in all practical ways.

Finding the “good” in competition

In order to have the moral support that competition has in society, there has to be a uniform perception that it is good enough to support and defend. I can come up with a number of positive issues like motivation, entertainment, excitement, human drama, learning to cooperate toward a collective goal, teamwork, to increase strength, stamina, resiliency, creativity, diverse benefits and rewards. Competition definitely has its lighter side.

So there is debate over the difference between good and bad competition. It implies that we have to have competition. We want it in some parts of our lives, where we are strong, but not in other parts of our lives where we want to feel free and live – like on a vacation. Have you heard that one before? It’s a very subjective theme.

In order to become clear here – we are well served to ask the question about whether vitality provides all of these same things. I have to say these issues are actually common to both sides of our equation here. There has to be something more.

The darker side of competition

competition-and-cooperationOne of the problems with competition is what happens if it is allowed to or encouraged to work its way into any living system of any size or complexity. Like a disease, the thought virus of competition as a good, natural, necessary or unavoidable concept – continues to divide and conquer what ever it comes over. What used to function well, is now conflicted, confused, entangled, restricted and bound to rules that have nothing to do with legitimacy in a reality without competition.

Competition, in our social structures implores us all to profit from each other and the absurdity of it all can only be understood by experiencing yourself in a ring with x-number of people, where every interchange will is driven by profit from the provider. As everybody begins to feed off of each other and deplete each other, and cheat each other, manipulate each other, and dominate each other, the group will self-destruct before your eyes.

Try this the other way around – and employ the spirit of vitality where every interaction gives a little bit more than it takes. Watch the group grow and thrive.

The mathematical certainty of the end result of any series of competition events, will in the end create 99.99999% losers. Like musical chairs – only a little different because the last man standing is so internally fragmented that self-destruction will continue in the mind and body until the only winner was an idea – that can never die, never be killed, but it can be refused entrance into our lives if and only if we do so collectively.

The cross-road of choice is here

I hope you have come to realize that an idea is no more physical than an emotion or a dream or any other thought. As such, and science is able to fully confirm this fact - that which is non-physical is also “spiritual”. We have just demystified a word that is scary to many people.

Consider the “Devil” to be the “spirit of competition” – the idea that it is worth having around. It’s a self-important and seductive idea. It pulls you to it and it makes you dependent as a master, an authority, a ruler and it will punish you if you do not obey.

You are not genetically hard-wired to compete. Its quite the opposite and you only have to consider your body as an example. How much more obvious can you get. You have competition in your body and you feel diseased. It’s the same with your mind – but you might refer to that as “confused” or “conflicted”. It’s still dis-ease. Of course that is why the dis-ease in society. Things have reached a limit you might say.

“When scientific knowledge and applied technology reach a critical level of advancement, without being informed by spiritual truths and guided by moral authority, the planetary civilization will severely alter its destiny to continue as it is.”

What this means is that if we keep on with the competition, we will self-destruct. It’s that bad, believe it or not. There is however an alternative and that is to abandon the idea of competition. We need to spend time to get it out of our lives. We need to get it out of our social structures and we need to get it out of the way we use money – immediately.

Full Circle – Good and Bad/Right and Wrong

compassCompetition has to have organized cooperation in order for it to exist. There has to be at least one side that is willing to compete. That’s all it takes. One cell in an organism that wants to compete, will if not stopped, consume every other cell in its path. That’s why every living organism is equipped with an immune defense system that is intelligently organized in its self. The body will resist competition.

Cooperation does not need competition to exist. It lives quite fine without it. Since society is so diseased with the infection of this idea, perhaps it needs to redefine what is the real difference between good and bad as seen from the context we have now gone through.

“Bad” – is any form of competition. Specifically serving your own agenda at the expense of another. This category of behavior is today labeled as lawful, legal, good, honorable and loyal. It’s a disgrace to the truth. It is however typically this way in any social structure driven by competition.

“Good” – is any form of behavior that stretches self and or others to promote long-term vitality. It might even feel “bad” for some to get a kick in the back-side to re-start their moral compasses – misaligned with cooperation in the competition paradigm.

Competition is pollution to cooperation when vitality is the goal.

The spiritual war

There is a real spiritual war going on right now. There are two ideas that are duking it out in the minds of those individuals that are undecided as to how to solve the dangerous and chronic challenges facing our selves, our society and our environment. This is the time where humanity will have to collectively stand up and turn their backs on that old friend they once worshipped, adored, gave money to contributed to and defended – at times with their lives. Its time to recognize that the Holy Cow is a Trojan horse.

When enough humans have understood what is really going on, there will be a collective change – a paradigm shift and it will be unstoppable. This is what we need and this is what so many people are waiting for… those still sitting on the fence, confused about what to do, what is right, and what is the truth.


protest

Self harmonization

The process of making things in the world right, starts with yourself. You work your way from the inside-out, like all natural processes. From there you extend your attention to your society and environment, but you always have to start with yourself.

Les artikler

society400

Social harmonization

Social reorganization and harmonization from the paradigm of competition toward vitalitty starts slowly. It is hardly recognizable for many until it reaches a certain point of general acceptance. Our social structures are all compromized through the effects of competiton. Each sector of society has its own set of challenges and possibilities.

Les artikler

environment400

Environmental Harmonization

Our relationship with the environment - everything that is not YOU - has suffered greatly under the competition paradigm, just like everything else. We have serious levels of challenges all over the planet. If the environment dies, so does humanity perish. Everything is just as important and there is much to be done. We take a look at the solutions that we have today and the ones that we are still looking for in this section.

Les artikler