Analysis of the Self: The Development of Evil

I have been thinking about the different variations of evil, and was looking for a primal cause. Some say greed is the root of all evil, but greed first requires human selfishness, and is often triggered by fear. The causes of fear are too diverse, and will likely exist even in a perfect society, so this is just a secondary cause. We must then take the primary issue, selfishness, and look at how it is created. When I did this, I remembered that it can be seeded to some degree in genetics, and it can be learned through experience. I also noted that both of these influence one another, so both must be addressed. Evil is technically caused by improper thinking, but such thinking also has its origins.

So in essence, evil has two beginning roots in human beings: genetics and experience. Genetics can either restrict or expand a human’s potential, impacting how we think, feel, and create. It grants us a specific level of intelligence and health that we must work with. Experience (or the lack of) impacts what we know and understand. It also has an influence on our character, our emotional intelligence, and our levels of ignorance.

Experience dictates how much higher our potentials can be, while genetics puts a cap on these potentials in the long-run. Both influence human growth and personality unification, but genetics ultimately influences the rate of growth we receive from experience. When we discuss evil, what we are truly looking at is selfishness in thought. It acts as a counterforce to goodness, but can ultimately make a being ignore truth and beauty as well. This trait is often triggered by one’s own experiences (which can include a lack of education), but the underlying traits or limitations of the being indicate either what types of experiences create such behavior, or how much learning is required for such behavior to be rooted out.

How is evil minimized in human society? It requires the multifaceted approach of improving our genes, changing how we educate ourselves, and improving the experiences of individuals. Not one of these actions alone will do the trick, because either the potentials of humans will remain just as restricted by DNA, or we will fail to change the very elements of life that shape who we are and how we grow. It must also be said that such adjustments to society do not create results at the same rate, nor is every change appear positive at first.

The Burden Series: Trust

Trust is something that is commonly valued throughout life, whether in the home, at work, or in general social situations. The heart of trust is the belief that an individual shares a common value. Even when that trust exists as relying on someone to follow a responsibility, you are trusting that accomplishing such a task is valued by the other party. The problem with trust is that even when the subject is only one human being, that trust cannot be universal. It is usually very specific.

Humans do not all share the same values, and universal trust between two individuals would imply that each shares the exact same morals, and even the same mores. But in reality, even when there is a strong commonality between individuals, circumstances and goals shift. While one person might feel betrayed about another’s decision, the other may just be following a higher priority. To trust an individual is thus a set of values you expect another to follow under certain situations. This is truly limiting and vague, which should tell us that no one should trust others completely, because such belief or faith does not account for a wide enough set of circumstances.

Instead of blindly trusting friends, family, or coworkers, we should trust each other to make certain relevant decisions. The foundation of trust is then the circumstances of the decisions a person is faced with. So long as the personal values of an individual create dependable results, you can trust that individual to take certain actions, and that is really where the trust ends. Of course, the boundaries of this trust are going to be different for each individual, and it is each person’s responsibility to identify these boundaries on their own.

This also changes how we look at people we do not trust, because instead of labeling a person with the negative trait of untrustworthy, we instead identify areas where we either expect problems in the decision-making process, or a conflict of values or interest. The point is that being trustworthy is not the same as being a good person, and vice versa. You cannot expect to satiate the ideals of everyone, especially if you intend to be genuine. Everyone has a different idea of what trust means to them, and this meaning is hardly communicated properly when we depend on others. We then suffer as a result of our own assumptions, something that could have been avoided by adjusting how we perceive human relationships.

The Burden Series: Careers and Money

The ascension career can be likened to the spiritual path of the mortal, though the scale in time is much larger. It is a measurement of spiritual growth, as well as a growth in work capabilities. The ascension career exists as the combination of learning, work, rest, and the personal developments gained therein. The spiritual life of an individual more closely resembles this, as it is all about reaching a state of being that is greater than the sum of its parts. Spirituality elevates man above the elements of normal life, beyond both the outward and inward observations of human identity and experience. It is about an expansion of future potential and its realization, to say the least. It also brings man on the path of greater expressions of truth, beauty and goodness.

Since our journey through the morontia spheres toward Havona is described as a career, many may liken it to an earth career, though smaller in scale. However, a work career is often about public life, not personal life. More so, it is about labor and making money. This money is then used for survival, safety, and pleasure. There are other uses for money, of course, but these are the common uses. Work is most certainly necessary for life, unless one has a large inheritance.

Careers are the overall trend of work performed, and they are lopsided. They do not create an accurate picture of a person, as they do not always capture what a human does to learn or relax. Growth accumulates in these three areas of life, yet only part of such is used to measure a person's worth in a society. Labor involves the social life of the individual. It records how one interacts with others in society. A good career is an important goal, because there is so much clear value seen within it, but it is not the only valuable thing attainable.

One need not a good job in order to find self-validation in life, nor happiness. It is not the temporal career that should have focus, but the future work of ascension. And if the attainment of wealth becomes the primary goal of the mortal, he or she will not only leave the earth poor in physical wealth, but spiritual wealth as well. All that can be taken beyond is stored within the soul to be resurrected, and what remains with the individual is the accumulation of spiritual value created within the life that is lived.

To understand this value, remember what was said of spirituality. This is the value that determines the future potentials of the being. It also reflects how close to perfection one currently is, and the possible speed one can reach relative perfection as well. What was not learned in mortal life must be learned later, and likely at a slower pace than what was possible before death. Yet this future life of ascension and learning cannot be the sole concern of the mortal. After all, one cannot gain wisdom during mortal life if one does not survive for very long. Clearly, people must work to support themselves, and in balance with the personal evolution of thought and spirit. Money cannot remain as the prime reason for service or for life, as it retards the future progress of the personality. An individual should serve others out of love, and receive money as payment for expenses. However, if this is not the motivation, such funds will likely be used as fuel for an individual's selfish desires, and one cannot serve both God and money.

Analysis of the Self: Identity and Being

So what is identity, exactly? It is often used synonymously with either personality or being, but it is neither. Identity is both an objective and subjective construct that defines and categorizes an individual. Identity is a part of being, as well as personality, which also shapes identity. All remain a single construct that helps define self, the unification of which, requiring all three elements, as well as many more.

Objective:

A person’s identity is a creation of who a person is, what they do, what they think, etc. It is both a person’s status and the totality of their life records on High. At bare minimum, one is identified as a free will creature. The identity of a free will being requires the existence of a personality received by the Father. Identity itself requires existence. Future status (or a possible change in status) is also a part of identity, making someone mortal or immortal. All in all, objective identity consists of the various facts of existence – truths that are not altered by perspective.

Subjective:

A person’s identity is both an outward and inward perspective of self, thus making identity perceived being. Subjective identity progresses and regresses. It changes with the circumstances of the individual, as well as everyone else. This is a direct contradiction to personality, which is a permanence in the presence of change, so identity can change when personality does not. It is also important to note that since identity acts as part of the totality of a being, “being” is largely a subjective term as well. Thus, a person’s total being is adjusted along with identity, as there are changes in perception and experience. All in all, identity can be both existential and experiential in expression.

We have now more or less established what creates identity, so what are all of the contributing factors for being? They are likely the following:

Personality
Mind
Soul
Body
Identity
Circumstance
Knowledge
Wisdom
Growth
Experience
History
Goals
Opportunity/Potentials
Inopportunity/Non-potentials
Physical Environment
Social Environment

Analysis of the Self: The Measure of Worth

How is worth measured? Things are often valued when they help one reach a goal. That is how the common value of things is derived. This value may be determined by a mean’s efficiency. It could be an issue of flexibility, with the option of multiple means or multiple ends at once. It could also be the new existence of a means, or the first way of reaching an end previously unobtainable. When worth is defined by usefulness, it is subjective in that each person has different goals, as well as preferred methods of reaching such goals. Thus, the perceived utility involved here is a product of human will, as it is that will that must be aligned with the purpose of the object for the thing in question to be valued. Of course, such worth can be ascribed to both tangible and intangible things.

Worth is likely seen much differently when the subject is a human being. Those who value humans based on usefulness do not actually value humans as living creatures, but as moving objects. Beyond this value is that which is brought about by personal affection – love. Such love is going to be relative in one sense or another. Even unconditional love is going to be finite to humans, but this very love is what goes beyond judging worth by potential and empirical data.

How is worth seen within the self? This is also relative, and can exist as both a measurement of utility and a love of the self. Neither are particularly bad so long as they are not distorted. Measuring the worth of one’s role in society is going to require a cost-benefit analysis. Measuring the value of one’s existence on its own is rooted in personal love (though an understanding of God’s love for the individual is also important when incorporating an objective point of view). When imbalanced, the former can either curtail the total value of something or overlook the value of existence altogether. On the other hand, the latter is capable of inflating the value of something completely, especially in comparison to something else.

The ego is essentially a feeling or representation of personal worth. What the ego does is perpetuate identity and the value therein. It is essential when circumventing the problems existent when a person is outwardly undervalued, but it can also make selfless behavior, a product of love for others, a much rarer event. A balanced ego is tantamount to creating a sensible measurement of worth for things, ideas, and people. Otherwise, things may not seem good enough for the self, ideas not good enough when not originating within, and people not good enough in comparison to the individual in question.

New Ideas: Ideals and Reality

All can be organized by associated values, but not all values may be known. Some are known, some are deduced, some are experienced, and some will remain unknowable. The unknowable is truly a statement about our inability to perceive, a reflection of our nature hiding in the abyss. Yet the unknown can be pursued, and the known will be validated or invalidated in return. However, if the known is unchanging, and we hold this to be optimal, then we have created our own prison.

Let us consider one of the more basic of necessities. Light is valuable, but this value is not always appreciated to the fullest extent. To fix this, there must be darkness, as darkness brings greater value to the light.  However, while the appreciation for light from the experience of darkness is an ideal state, the darkness itself is not. Darkness must then be temporal – a temporary challenge to give the individual a greater understanding of how good light can be.

There must be a distinction between two opposites or two unlike qualities, and this distinction must be felt within our very bones. It must divide our senses and split the sky of possibility, raining down upon us the realization that reality has changed to its core. Our perception cannot be clouded. We must see the clouds for what they are, a frame to rightly position our true desires, and the values they represent. The bursts of light hidden beyond the clouds that flash in our minds like wildfire.

The revelation is that experience is a double-edged sword, and rightly so. Yet, while the danger acts as a precursor to precious things, it is not valuable in and of itself. Only through the potential of its existence, and our acknowledgement of that potential, does the pain hold any real worth. Reality is fresh, wonderful, cruel, and frightening. The potentials may breed the longing for cessation – escape – but in accepting the reality for what it is, our minds can see the truth. A new prize has been gifted, and we experience the joy of its discovery as we save it for later use, when newer revelation can be uncovered and compared, or when the old becomes the most valuable of realities, stagnation becoming a welcome home.

A newer perspective is bound to be greater than the last, perhaps not in depth, but in breadth, surely, as this new reality is built upon the old foundations. But newness will always hold the potential of stagnation when the potential of change is present. The absence of new potentials – ever-present stasis – makes reality absolute in expression, and inescapable through its unqualified nature. There is no  growth or regression. There is only inertia. However, we know that such lethargy can only be felt as true when there is indeed something just beyond the horizon.

Newness is always a possibility for the temporal expressions of man, but whether the change, or its utter lack, is noticed is a different matter. This is subjective perception at its roots, yet all circumstantial viewpoints hold the same three possibilities – progression, regression, or stagnation – all products of causation. No particular state needs to be an ideal on its own, as all states can appear as a fresh experience. Existence within a cage grants credence to the value of life outside of it. All states are elements of a much grander destiny, one that lies beyond the realization that we must be the change we seek.

Newness cannot be constrained as an element of tangible things or intangible ideas. It must remain as a constant ideal itself, existing as discovery that can never remain complete. The adventure of new dimensions of understanding, the dream of exploration and the dreams to follow, will take us beyond the gray world of conflicting certainty and belief, and most assuredly above the egotistical praise of personal circumstance. It is in the desire for the object where our true desire should lie. We should desire to desire, and in presenting this idea to a fallen world, we become ever closer to the unknowable truth we seek, evolving our ability to perceive as a species despite the darkness of the abyss.

Logic Puzzles: The Issue of Balance

It is a common trope in the entertainment industry for there to be a balance between good and evil. This theme is so common, it is almost considered as ideal. The only reason it could be ideal is if it represents a state that is superior to the present world, and a world where there is just as much evil as good is spiritually pathetic. There is simply nothing ideal about evil, certainly not in a lasting fashion. Suffering and error can bring about learning and character, but these positives lead to a state of goodness held by the personality.

Balance can indicates a gray world, one where there are not always clear answers. A world with truly subjective morals certainly could lead to people fighting for what they think is right, and this occurs in the real world as well. People can do unspeakable things simply because they feel they have a good reason. Wars can occur between nations when neither nation really holds moral superiority. In a world where few actions are entirely good or bad, as there is no clear example of moral perfection, the world may seem balanced. However, is such balance something to fight for? In this type of world, you rarely fight to make things ambiguous again. In this world, people search desperately for the right answers – they self-validate by rationalizing their decisions and their perspective because the environment rarely does this for them. In this type of balanced world, the general goal for both good and evil is to upset that balance.

Balance can also indicate a world with clear definitions of good and evil, one where people are rigidly sorted between these two sides. And in this type of world, balance isn't something someone should fight for either. No particular side should want more people or power on the apposing side. Balance in this world is not ideal, as it indicates never-ending error and sin. Still, a "balanced" world such as this is commonly used in entertainment, especially in comic books. Of course, the idea that there could be a population that holds individuals who are always good and bad is ridiculous. We still live in a gray world, where a person can do both harm and good in the same day. A person may accidentally do bad with good intentions, and he or she may do good with bad intentions.

The greatest problem, though, is that no one who is good would desire evil. Evil largely implies selfishness, which is an unyielding focus on personal goals. Those goals do not have to align with the goals of other selfish individuals. In fact, it is normally far easier to achieve such goals when far more people are selfless or average. But this can be a double-edged sword. While there may be less competition, one's actions are likely going to stand out more, which could hamper these goals. Obviously, everyone has personal goals, and you do not have to be selfish to pursue them.

Why do we hold that there has to be evil? One very simple reason is that the good guys would have no one to fight without it, leading to a boring story. Another is that there simply is no human civilization where evil is not present. Still, for these things to be a problem, the author of the story would have to lack imagination. There are still plenty of challenges a person can face when there is no great evil force at work. Life is hard enough, and we do not need to add more problems to the mix. You can experience fear without fearing for your life in a dark alleyway. You can experience betrayal simply through the complexity of shifting loyalties and goals. There is no need for liars and criminals to fill that role.

It is true that society as a whole still lacks an objective definition of what evil is, despite the beliefs of individuals. There is no great example of a place where all are good, but a utopian society would surely hold all of those who would choose goodness, who would choose to serve others. How do societies even reach such an "unbalanced" world? Societies certainly do not evolve into such heavens on earth through a system of economics that promotes selfishness and unyielding competition, nor one that equally distributes poverty. You don't reach a utopia through politics either, certainly not when bureaucrats are bred to be selfish. A quick look at the world will tell you that few truly realize they cannot serve both God and money.

Analysis of the Self: The Circumstances of Service

While it is important to look at things on a case by case basis, people will generally fall into two categories: those who normally accept help and those who do not. Now help can be a vague word. It is normally about aiding a person so that he or she can reach a goal that would be difficult alone, but the subject matter is diverse. In fact, the help could be for something the individual did not know they were struggling with. So the type of help given falls under a few categories, and it is up to the individual if it is welcome or not. They are the following:

1. Solicited help for a known objective.
2. Solicited help for an unknown objective.
3. Unsolicited help for a known objective.
4. Unsolicited help for an unknown objective.

Known objectives are clear goals an individual has or is tasked with. Unknown objectives are unclear issues which need addressing. You may understand the nature of the goal or problem, but cannot pinpoint an exact cause, effect, need or solution. Solicited help is help that is asked for, while unsolicited help is not asked for, but can still be desired.

Naturally, the first kind of help is the easiest to understand. You are attempting to accomplish a specific task, but are unable to do it on your own, so you request aid. The second example is when someone requests help for a vague problem, or a clear problem with an unclear solution. Such issues are usually long-term in nature, as time is often a factor influencing the problem and its solution. The third example is when someone is pursuing a goal on their own and is helped along the way by another. Here, the second person normally has a clear understanding of what the first person is trying to accomplish. The last example is the trickiest, where someone attempts to help another with a problem either one or both cannot pinpoint, using a solution that may not even be appropriate. In this case, even when an objective is cleared, the help becomes labeled as unwelcome.

Of course, all examples of help may not be desired. Pride, or a desire for self-sufficiency, will keep a person from asking or accepting aid. And even when one does ask for help, the person may not be happy about it. A person's attitude may also depend on the exact solution to the problem, and if that solution is undesired, then he or she will certainly be livid when another solves the problem in the perceived negative way (the situation becoming even worse when it is unsolicited help). You cannot always know how a person will react to being helped, and you certainly cannot expect to thanked every time. This is even more clear when you consider that there are at least two different categories of help: performing an action and providing information.

A physical action may be necessary to help someone, but if the solution is only reached through thought, it may require more information. Both forms of help work with the four examples above, creating eight different situations to be analyzed, but there are some general trends. If a physical action is performed on behalf of another, even if it is unsolicited, the person receiving the help will show some form of gratitude (though whether that is genuine or not is another question). However, if information is provided to someone instead, there is a higher chance for dissatisfaction.

Provided information can easily be something a person does not wish to hear. It could be because this person feels they could have come up with the same answer. It could be because it is something they already thought of and are wanting to hear something new. Unsolicited advice/information is most notably something that is frowned upon, and even solicited help may be looked down on if it does not provide a new perspective. A person generally doesn't know if what they provide will actually be accepted, but it is commonplace that the provider feels their attempt to help should be respected. Ultimately, it depends on the relationship between the two before it can be judged who is being improper in such a circumstance. One may feel the need to always give unsolicited advice, and do such automatically without thinking. Another may despise repeated information, and reject anything they have already heard. It should be noted that such possibilities are not reasons to avoid serving others, and are also not reasons for getting angry at those simply trying to aid you. Not all help may be seen in a positive light, but no form of help is absolutely negative either, as one would not offer to help in the first place without any good intentions.

The Burden Series: Self-Sacrifice

Self-sacrifice is a human action that is often looked at favorably. The act is often pursued in order to help someone else. It could be something as simple a sharing a meal, or as serious as sacrificing your own life for another's. As noble as such causes seem, there are many instances where sacrifice simply isn't necessary in order to help someone, unless you include something as small as sacrificing time. There are many instances where the illusion of helpfulness is created, and both parties may fall under this spell.

A good example of this is a person inconveniencing oneself for the sake of another when the only effect is an emotional one for the other party. In other words, an act of self-sacrifice that may be appreciated, but is wholly unnecessary if the other person can cope on their own. For example, a woman decides to go gluten-free, due to health issues, and her husband decides to follow suit. What are the benefits of this? The wife may somehow feel that her burden has been lessened when the husband undergoes the same troubles, but her life does not actually improve. Her meals do not change, so having someone else who is also limited in what they can eat does not make a difference. They will likely be sharing many gluten-free meals anyway, and going to restaurants that offer the right selection of food. The only exception is when there is a lack of storage space.

All the husband is doing by pursuing this lifestyle is reducing the flexibility of his consumption, especially when his wife is not around. There may be long-term health benefits, but it is likely not something the man would pursue alone. This self-sacrifice is a form of emotional support through the bearing of an artificial (self-created) burden. It can also be a tool to understand the plight of another, creating empathy. But the husband should be capable of empathy beforehand, and the wife should not be so childish as to require others to experience her own burdens. While one may think this reduces the number of cravings in the house, it still keeps the husband from enjoying things he loves inside and outside the house. Finally, if the wife is empathetic, she would feel bad for her husband who does not really have to sacrifice things he likes. In other words, this self-sacrifice can be seen as an increase in the suffering of both parties. All the husband really has to do to alleviate the suffering of his wife is buy a greater variety of things she can eat. His own consumption does not harm her, so it does not need to be adjusted.

There are a few things that can be concluded from the above, and a few more points I would like to add. 

1. Self-sacrifice is not all that necessary if the only gain is short-term emotional support, especially if there are other means of helping the other party.
2. Self-sacrifice is unnecessary for the sake of empathy. Though it may act as a means of better understanding another party, it would never be attempted unless some form of empathy or caring existed in the first place. It is especially fruitless if it does not directly help someone else.
3. Service should not be confused with self-sacrifice. Service is a form of love shown to another through the giving of time and energy. Sacrifice, as a form of hampering one's own life, does not produce the same level of spiritual growth that service does. Service should not hurt the giver, nor is it usually an unfair trade in the long-run. Plus, God loves both parties equally, thus desiring the best for both. Self-sacrifice rarely acts as a fair trade. Either one party is helped far more than the other, one party is helped superficially, or there is just increased suffering for one more party – increasing the total suffering of the entire group.
4. The value of self-sacrifice should be analyzed before it is attempted (think cost-benefit analysis). It should not be pursued when the joint suffering of all parties increases. Naturally, the values of the individual are important here, as an analysis of the situation will not help a negative person make a positive decision.
5. If the sacrifice does not reach the intended result, or the effects wane over time, the person should be free to cease the activity. People should not fear stopping an activity which has little benefit for anyone. People perceive such things as a form of abandonment, betrayal or a lack of commitment. None of these instances are true, as it is merely the human pursuing what works best as time passes.
6. Self-sacrifice can be seen as a noble gesture, but is wasted upon those who would not value it. One should not have to sacrifice something for the sake of the ungrateful.

Logic Puzzles: The Concept of Infinity

The concept of infinity is normally something that goes on forever, is infinitely large, or does not have limitations. When applied to a thing, the idea of infinity is limited to the said thing's properties, but alone as a concept, infinity can have several different meanings. Perhaps this is why the concept is commonly misunderstood.

Some properties of infinity that may be overlooked are the following:

1. Infinity does not have to include everything. Something can be infinitely large or repeating, and not include some trait, aspect, dimension, number, idea, etc. This concept can even work with objects, as something can be infinitely large, but only in one particular direction. An object could still be considered infinite if it is only infinitely tall. As long as one measurement keeps going, this adjective can be used (though commonly it would only be used on the particular infinite trait).
2. Infinity can exclude an infinite number of things, so long as that infinity keeps going. A negative infinity may exist with every positive one. For example, an infinite sequence of numbers can skip numbers as it goes, and if this is done at regular intervals, the total numbers being skipped is infinite as well.
3. Infinity can include the same thing, not just once, but an infinite number of times. If thinking of infinite universes (which do not exist), you yourself could be imagining such infinite universes an infinite number of times alongside an infinite number of universes where your planet does not exist.
4. Infinity can include one sole thing or measurement an infinite number of times. This includes an infinite series of 1's, or an eternal repetition of the word "zebra". All that matters is that this repetition continues.
5. Infinity can include finite things as well as infinite things within itself. For example, an array of numbers is created where the first row counts to ten, the second row counts to twenty, the third row lists the decimal numbers of pi, and the fourth row counts by two's an infinite number of times. This array may be seen as infinite since at least one of the rows inside of it is infinitely long, even though some of the other rows are finite in length. The array is also finite in its number of rows, but infinite in its number of columns – meaning both rows and columns are finite in one sense, and infinite in another, each having opposite traits.
6. The existence of infinity can create a problem where there are no limitations in potential, but there are limitations in observed actuals (the opposite can also be true, but is not a problem we could experience due to our limits of observation). If an infinite random number generator could exist, it could run an infinite number of times and never produce the number "46". In fact, it could produce "53" an infinite number of times, excluding an infinite number of numbers. In reality, this is not a limitation in potential states, but a limitation in actual states (and is certainly true when this infinite string follows the progression of time). A limitation in potential states would exist if this could not be so, further putting limits on what is actualized.
7. The finite can influence the infinite, and vice versa. Using the previous example, a random number generator could have infinite potential where all numbers are possible, but can only generate one number. Here again, potentials are infinite while actuals are finite. The opposite form can exist as well, with a random number generator that picks between ten numbers, but runs an infinite number of times. Here, the results are infinite, but the possibilities for each result are finite. Here, the opposing traits limit each other in their expression, creating a quasi-infinite/quasi-finite state as a whole.