Doing it: good or bad...

no not sex… [-X

I was thinking of this:

you can imagine at least:


  1. do it = good, not do it=bad
  2. do it = good, not do it=null
  3. do it=bad, not do it= good
  4. do it = bad, not do it = null

Some might say everything is a matter of 1, I would say that really 3 is the same thing just a different perspective, its like a magnet just flipped around, doesn’t matter where you point it you can say to do the “not doing it” is good thus it is a thing where doing it is good and not doing it is bad the same as 1.

then you have 2 I don’t know if such really exists…is it still bad not to do it in that it is relatively less then good?

then there is 4 where obviously the best thing to do would be to not do it because otherwise is bad, does that mean that really it is relatively good to not do it?

which makes those two the same as 1 and 2 and ultimately there is just one thing it is either bad to do it or good to do it there is not in between?

yet I tend to think there can be something where it is good to do it but not bad to not do it…or that truly doesn’t matter whether you do it…but that leaves that we have it is either good to do; bad not to do, or it doesn’t matter, three is the same as 1 and then 4 is the same as one by relativity, that seems outside the pattern as if to suggest that 2 must be bad not to do…I don’t know…

what are your thoughts on this?

why is there no possibility for “do it = null”?

What is the point of this?


Aren’t your statements here dependent on what it is you are actually talking about doing or not?
At least for me, unless I don’t understand what you’re actually saying, this is just a mishmash…sort of like building without a foundation…come to think of it, even without the necessary materials.
The answers to these statements would all depend on ultimate reality.
They would also depend on one’s own sense of logic and reason and subjective reality and perceptions…which might cancel out the above.
True morality must be based on the common good, respect and responsible freedom for all -and to do no harm - and on logic but we all know how subjective our perceptions may become, based on experience, our desires and comfort zones.
Jung said that truth is based on the concert of many voices, but I don’t agree with this. Look what happened in Nazi Germany,

It is very difficult to understand the area between opposites. If I say I don’t do ‘good,’ it does not mean that I’m behaving badly. If I say that I’m not doing badly, it does not mean that everything about me is good.

So, how can you understand the state of being where you have neither good nor bad?

Swinging like a pendulum from one end to the other. That is the movement of thought. It is always between these pairs of opposites. You cannot conceive a state of being where these pairs of opposites do not exist at all.

It is the unnatural thing accepted as natural. That is our tragedy. You have never questioned that, because, if you begin to question, your existence is at stake. You are that. You are not different from this movement of thought.

What is necessary for you is to understand the machinery that is functioning inside of you – the movement of thought.

Supposing I tell you “This is the good (or bad) way,” – then where are you? You experience what you’re told. This knowledge you are going to use and create a state of being and think that you have experienced that good or bad thing. But that is not the Reality or Truth of the matter.

it doesn’t matter to me what good means objectively or bad objectively…I’m interested in what people think as to how this operates within their processors…I just mean good as in what ever is good to whoever…just in general i guess…

so what do you think of it with regards to your definitions of the stated?

The point is that I don’t know what to deduce from the oddity that there are seemingly at most conceptually 4 possibilities with regards to a situation in terms of it being worth doing or not worth doing, but then there is either 1 real possibility, 2 real possibility (good-or-bad, or doesn’t matter) or 3 possibilities where one is the same as the first ultimately, the 4th conceptual possibility seems implausible… in which case i find such indicatory of a quite fortunate state of existence…

but then i don’t know that such is really all the conceptual possible divisions to begin with or what…

Ah! perhasps that is a problem…

Then we would have that you can:

  1. do it = good, not do it=bad
  2. do it = good, not do it=null
  3. do it=bad, not do it= good
  4. do it = bad, not do it = null it = null, not do it = good it = null, not do it = bad

one might propose a 7th:
7:do it = null, not do it = null

but i would think that really (within current reality) 7 doesn’t exist but then also 4 does not exist…3 is the contrapositive of 1. and 5 is the contrapositive of 2. and 6 is the contrapositive of 4 (4 which does not seem to exist) then we would really only have that there is 1 and 2 (but then maybe 2 does not really exist…)

Or it would seem one can say that it is a matter of relative level of ‘goodness’ wherein then if something was god to do and null not to do then it would be relatively bad not to do. thus we would then have that everything was a form of 1 except 7 if 7 actually existed…

think of good and bad as axioms here…so that we are under the assumption that good and bad exist…(it doesn’t matter what actually is definable as good or bad, just that they can be, it doesn’t matter how they can be either in so far as being for example subjective or objective)

that would be odd to think that 7 has often been a magical numbers to those entities most concerned of what is good and bad, and then there are actually 7 possibilities… :question:

what do you mean 7 doesnt’ exist? most things are 7. i mean, if by “bad” and “good” you mean immoral and moral and by “null” you mean amoral.

Yeah, certainly option 7 would descibe most choices for most purposes, so I don’t see how it could just be cast aside for an unspecified action with an unspecified purpose.

well I don’t know that it wouldn’t but it seems to me that really there is always a goodness or badness, it is just that it seems insignificant to us and thus goes un-noticed.

but then there would be an 8th and a 9th…maybe

we have:

  1. do it = good, not do it=bad
  2. do it = good, not do it=null
  3. do it=bad, not do it= good
  4. do it = bad, not do it = null it = null, not do it = good it = null, not do it = bad it = null, not do it = null

then: it = bad, not do it=bad it = good, not do it=good

we still don’t even know what the criteria are for good and bad.

I said it is what ever you want… just what ever is thought to be good or thought to be bad… clearly there are situations where a person thinks a thing is good and otherwise bad…regardless of how it is good or bad…that is subjective it would seem

if there’s no criteria we can’t even tell if all of the items in your list of 9 possibilities are even feasible. we can’t discuss the feasibility of the options without discussing the criteria.

The criteria are whatever is good or bad for you.

You only know what is right for you. If you were convinced that there is something wrong with you and you became dependent on whatever it was that made you feel that way, then you are being falsified.

there is no criteria because it is expected for others to suggest what should be the criteria FJ…what do you think should be the criteria and what deductions can then be made from that?

It’s difficult to stabilize criteria and then deduce when one judges present moments continually. It may be at any given time that what is wanted is not what is being done currently. But that’s on a personal basis. In thought, there are many clever ways to make criteria fit what you want. You can even go so far as to claim that your conclusions in the way you think and act are in line with society’s advise that you be a peerless individual.

Is there actually a philosophical thesis for discussion here? Please see rule 1.1 of the Forum Rules.

If there is, could you please state it in a form simple enough for even a moderator to understand? :slight_smile: