Okay, today, I have a question for you. I'd love for you to send me an email at skeptic Metephysician at gmail dot com or go to skeptic meenahysician dot com send us a message, voicemail, email, from the site, whatever you prefer. But the question is regarding duality. What are your thoughts on that to mean? This book that is trying to explain these kinds of duality questions to the Eastern world, And in one chapter he writes
this. He says, in the beginning of the Bible, God speaks of a tree of wisdom with two kinds of fruits, which he tells Adam not to eat. That means don't reach for the goodfruit. He doesn't say don't eat the evil fruit. Now on the moment that Adam wants what's good, automatically he doesn't want what's bad. Once you take one side, the other side follows. Apparently, so God said, don't reach for what's good.
There's no evil or good in you. Stay away from those dualities. But if you begin to argue that, no, no, this is good, why can't I taste it? Then even as you do it, you'll be classifying something else. As bad. When there's one quality, the opposite sea is always there. God asks Adam to remain above this good and bad, pleasure and pain, all of those dualities. But Adam saw only the good and he wanted to taste its fruit, so its counterpart, evil arose.
That's what the book says. So here's the question I have for you, is that your thought process is there no good or evil unless you choose one or the other. I mean, what I'm getting from that passage basically, and from quite a bit of the bog of a Gida, is the advice to be detached from the outcome of good or evil. Basically, it's saying that if you don't reach for good, then evil can't exist because the minute you reach for good, it immediately and automatically creates its equal or evil.
So I don't know how I feel about that, and because I'm conflicted about it, I need to ask you what your thoughts are. This show has always been about learning, not us teaching you, but us all learning together, and that's where this question comes from, because in this case, I'm honestly not sure how I feel about it, and I really really appreciate your thoughts on this passage. Have we been going about this all wrong? Should
we not see good or evil at all, but rather just be? I mean, everyone from the day we were born is talking to us about how important it is to be a good person, And then the act of telling our kids to be good people is that then automatically creating bad people? Is there such a thing as good people and bad people? Sure, there's people who do good and people who do things that are not really that good for
others, but they might do good for themselves. Right, So, I think in most classic fiction, you see the evil person, for the most part, doing what they think is good for them. It doesn't matter if it's good for others or not. But I don't think no. I mean, I think there's very few times when you see people doing bad things just for the sake of doing bad things. Right? Oh yeah, you see.
That's why I'm conflicted when it comes to duality. Are we supposed to be completely detached from good or evil and just be like, are we doing this all wrong? By choosing to be good? Do we create then bad? Should we just not vote one way or the other? Anyway? I really love to hear your thoughts. Skeptic menivosician dot com or Skeptic Metehsician at gmail dot com. That's enough of my blathering