X-Message-Number: 17380 From: "George Smith" <> References: <> Subject: More on beyond good and evil. Date: Sat, 25 Aug 2001 12:55:19 -0700 In Message #17374 Mike Perry mentioned my quote (from #17363) >... >Some one suggests that they must have a positive value. > >But why? and then Mike Perry responded: "I find it *inspiring* to think that I *and* others have positive value, and I think this can also be justified, even for "bad" people or beings, who actually have some good in them (this thought too is inspiring!). (Note here: I don't say *a* positive value, just positive value, to emphasize that you don't need to worry, always, about the details! Warm fuzziness has its place!) This principle of valuing is an important source of meaning and comfort in my life and I find it very worthy of upholding. Need I say more?" Mike, in order to have a "positive value" it must be measured against something else whether that is a greater or lesser "positive" value or a negative value. "Value" comes from making an evaluation, a measuring, a judgment. There is no need to judge yourself as having any value at all, positive or negative. To do so assumes that you must first HAVE a value and then on top of that you can go ahead an evaluate what you DO. I have consistently found that skipping the superstition of "self evaluation" makes it far easier to perform the critically important task of evaluating what one DOES in the context of what one finds desirable or not. I have tried to explain in detail in previous postings why placing a value on one's own self is (1) not possible in the first place and (2) always detrimental (as it immediately introduces existential anxiety over the issue of the possibility of not being certain you will always measure up and because of the unnecessary human pain which inevitably results given enough time). As I have attempted to explain earlier, the entire Deathist (anti-cryonics) perspective comes, I believe, from the culturally popular error and delusion of self evaluation. ("Do I DESERVE to live forever?") I have also tried to explain that for those who will attempt to break free of self judgement in any area of their life, they quickly discover how it improves the quality of living, their effectiveness in operating in the world and even their potential capacity for survival. Now the flip side of this issue is to NOT automatically grant its opposite. To assume a prior positive value for people in general may give you a warm fuzzy but it comes at the expense of clouding your perception of their actions and the evaluation of those actions in any particular context. This can then produce a lifetime of cold pricklies. A NEUTRAL stance toward judging other people fits a universe in which your judgement of any value is imposed by your judgement. "Do unto others as they do unto you" is a better way of summing this up insofar as JUDGING their value in your life is concerned. I can't remember all the times I have had a patient describe a family member who is fundamentally sociopathic in their behavior toward the patient but the patient's "problem" is "I feel guilty when I am angry at my father/mother/spouse for killing my dog, burning my car and beating me with a crowbar because, after all, he/she IS my father/mother/spouse and I am SUPPOSED to love/respect them. I would be a BAD person if I don't love/respect them." But of course that is precisely what the patient needs to do: JUDGE that person's actions and STOP assigning himself a value ("bad")! If we ascribe a prior positive value to people just because they EXIST then we inhibit our own ability to then make further judgements about them based upon their subsequent actions. People do this all the time as with the stock market. They first DECIDE if the market has a positive or negative value (it's a bull market or a bear market), and then they are less able to recognize the actual behavior of the market to draw correct conclusions (due to the psychological issue of selective perception - we see what we expect to see and don't tend to see what we do not expect to see). Thus 90% of investors continuously can be counted upon to buy high and sell low. NOT placing a value on your own self but then being fully willing to evaluate what you or anyone else does WITHOUT PRECONCEPTIONS gives anyone a better chance of perceiving what IS there and avoiding delusion and the resultant problems which come from such delusions. When we presume that all living human beings already have a positive value (for whatever reason given) we are then starting from a premise which is already out of alignment with reality. We feel a need to "prove" this assumption and, due to our psychological makeup, we distort our perceptions before they even become conscious. (As in the experiments with identifying playing cards in which some had the colors of red and black reversed. Subjects would identify a spade as a heart because it was red while staring at it and saying things like, "But there is something funny about this heart card"). It is so much easier and helpful to simply assume nothing about the value of anyone or anything until there is something to base that upon. ("Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar," - Sigmund Freud). Taking a neutral, no value, viewpoint may deny one the pleasant feelings that "all of humanity is basically good" but it will never leave you standing in line at Auschwitz through your own error either. It is also important to recognize that all of these judgements are YOURS and not some universal external standard to which all others must agree. Further, YOU are judging only SOME actions of others, as it is quite impossible to judge them ALL. Errors will happen. And finally, human redemption in YOUR eyes is potentially possible depending upon both what changes in behavior the "condemned" make and whether or not YOU feel these are sufficient to deserve a re evaluation. Additionally, I personally feel that assigning a positive evaluation to those people who demonstrate they deserve your praise and assigning a negative evaluation to those who demonstrate they deserve your condemnation INTENSIFIES the degree of these emotional experiences. "Unconditional love" has always been an oxymoron in my opinion. To move in that direction weakens the intensity of both love and fear. To take a neutral stance toward people (and all experiences) in general is not to see that as either good or bad but just simply un valued. Then the probability that your judgements about specific actions by specific people will be accurate and therefore useful will increase. Dr. Nathaniel Brandon, a California psychologist and early proponent of the teachings of Ayn Rand, once made a lecture entitled "The Benevolent Universe". I consider Brandon wrong. The universe is neither benevolent nor malevolent. It is neutral. It is beyond good and evil. We ASSIGN meaning and value to our experiences. That this is true is easily demonstrated. We do it all the time. Really good films or novels cause us to evaluate the plot situation and we have to re evaluate everything as we go. Surprise endings which do this are entertaining because they cause us to have to immediately re evaluate everything we just saw. (The innocent man freed by the hero in the courtroom turns out to actually be the serial killer, for example). You can easily demonstrate it for yourself. Just drop assigning a value to yourself in any chosen context, substitute evaluating your experiences (YOUR actions, thoughts, feeling, OTHER people and the rest of reality) and see what happens. What I have found happens is (1) release from existential anxiety (due to dropping a delusion), (2) more happiness and (3) less pain. Just my opinion. George Smith CI member Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=17380