<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Good and Evil &#8211; useful categories?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.allconsidering.com/2009/good-and-evil-categories/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.allconsidering.com/2009/good-and-evil-categories/</link>
	<description>Considering life, spiritual growth and more ponderings</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 24 Jan 2012 11:34:22 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stella</title>
		<link>http://www.allconsidering.com/2009/good-and-evil-categories/comment-page-1/#comment-27956</link>
		<dc:creator>Stella</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Aug 2010 18:10:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.allconsidering.com/?p=457#comment-27956</guid>
		<description>Maybe it&#039;s not a matter of selfish or unselfish. Maybe it&#039;s a matter of selfish or whole-ish. As in, you can consider only yourself in leiu of a decision, or you can consider the whole, which includes you. 
So when Ayn Rand advocated total selfishness, I get what she was going for. After all, you can&#039;t love and help anyone else unless you love and help yourself. But those things can be done simultaneously. Seeing things that way requires the viewer to take a lot of responsibility, I think. This idea has caused me to become more meticulous when making any decisions, and has made me more sensitive to the butterfly effect.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Maybe it&#8217;s not a matter of selfish or unselfish. Maybe it&#8217;s a matter of selfish or whole-ish. As in, you can consider only yourself in leiu of a decision, or you can consider the whole, which includes you.<br />
So when Ayn Rand advocated total selfishness, I get what she was going for. After all, you can&#8217;t love and help anyone else unless you love and help yourself. But those things can be done simultaneously. Seeing things that way requires the viewer to take a lot of responsibility, I think. This idea has caused me to become more meticulous when making any decisions, and has made me more sensitive to the butterfly effect.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: al puglisi</title>
		<link>http://www.allconsidering.com/2009/good-and-evil-categories/comment-page-1/#comment-8816</link>
		<dc:creator>al puglisi</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Mar 2010 20:48:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.allconsidering.com/?p=457#comment-8816</guid>
		<description>Good and Evil are a matter of action coupled with motive, not of being, IMHO.
We can do good things, this does not make us good people. We can do bad things, this does not make us bad people. Most people do good and bad things. What does that make us. I think we can classify actions as good or evil, but that is a tricky endeavour, and we must be careful. Case in point: happened in my city not long ago...a woman shoots her husband. Evil?  He was in the process of  killing their little toddler at the time..Good?
I think to say, as postmodernists do,  there is no good and there is no evil is a dangerous sidewalk to trip along.
But either good or evil is not a matter of persons, but of actions and motives.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Good and Evil are a matter of action coupled with motive, not of being, IMHO.<br />
We can do good things, this does not make us good people. We can do bad things, this does not make us bad people. Most people do good and bad things. What does that make us. I think we can classify actions as good or evil, but that is a tricky endeavour, and we must be careful. Case in point: happened in my city not long ago&#8230;a woman shoots her husband. Evil?  He was in the process of  killing their little toddler at the time..Good?<br />
I think to say, as postmodernists do,  there is no good and there is no evil is a dangerous sidewalk to trip along.<br />
But either good or evil is not a matter of persons, but of actions and motives.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Psiplex</title>
		<link>http://www.allconsidering.com/2009/good-and-evil-categories/comment-page-1/#comment-276</link>
		<dc:creator>Psiplex</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Jan 2009 11:32:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.allconsidering.com/?p=457#comment-276</guid>
		<description>All connected in the Source. The play of existence encompasses all and our personal interpretation of phenomena colors events. Overall, a non-personal awareness allows and witnesses all existence.

Thank you for posting!

One Love</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>All connected in the Source. The play of existence encompasses all and our personal interpretation of phenomena colors events. Overall, a non-personal awareness allows and witnesses all existence.</p>
<p>Thank you for posting!</p>
<p>One Love</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Daphne</title>
		<link>http://www.allconsidering.com/2009/good-and-evil-categories/comment-page-1/#comment-275</link>
		<dc:creator>Daphne</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 Jan 2009 00:39:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.allconsidering.com/?p=457#comment-275</guid>
		<description>Hi Katinka,

I enjoyed reading this post. Good and evil are dualities, like hot and cold, which means each derives its meaning from the other and so cannot exist independently. So they are not real in that sense. Wow, now you&#039;ve started me thinking about this all over again (I used to think about morality a lot). Thanks for the post!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Katinka,</p>
<p>I enjoyed reading this post. Good and evil are dualities, like hot and cold, which means each derives its meaning from the other and so cannot exist independently. So they are not real in that sense. Wow, now you&#8217;ve started me thinking about this all over again (I used to think about morality a lot). Thanks for the post!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Minified using disk: basic
Page Caching using disk: enhanced

Served from: www.allconsidering.com @ 2012-02-08 06:33:04 -->
