IndieAgora

I think harm can just be seen as 'bad', but as I mentioned, determined sm can lead to good things occuring too, even novelty.

Definitely, and I find good things rather tragic too, especially in that they can be taken away in many senses and would thus be perhaps less painful having never been known. Yeah people tend to use the word Evil these days mostly in a moral sense, which I also believe the case to be. That anything with consciousness and power thus knowingly hoists harm and temptations upon us and is thus and can really only be Evil if it has Freedom which it must necessarily have.

Hi there, just wondered how this duty to be free and encourage freedom could apply to law, would we not preference some freedoms above others through habit, like the right to own property over freedom of movement ? Or would there be no law as law is backed by force which is not freedom. Ideally there would be no law.


Hi, without (normative) laws there will be arbitrariness. The only way to avoid it (and all violence that comes with it) is by contract. The contract is equivalent to "rejection of violence" (BTW "the property" or "freedom of movement" is also the consequences of the contract). It seems confusing at first -- why freedom can only be brought to society by laws? Freedom is one for all, common for all. There cannot be freedom for one at the expense of others (for several reasons, one is such conditions create fear). Human freedom manifests itself by the unique own personality, ability to create something new, and it is only possible when nothing suppresses it (ie violence, determinism).

Laws are backed by force as long as there are those who do not want to participate in the contract. If all people were ethical no force would be necessary.
 

I was thinking at best, this is all pragmatic - freedom is a necessary illusion within a complex determinism. Novelty can come out of determinism, as determined conditions change over time, less like laws and more like 'tendencies' or 'habits'.


Natural laws never show themselves exactly. They all are our abstractions of stochastic (more or less random) processes. And still they are the same. Otherwise we could not be able to see/learn them. We learn laws because their manifestations repeat. The definition of the new, novelty, is "it did not exist before" which directly contradicts the definition of the law (ie "repetition").
 

Determinism isn't evil, it just IS.


As long as we strive for something better, the existing is evil. However, this matter is more complex because there are degrees of evil. If we can use something deterministic as a means to our goal (ie freedom) we consider it as a relative good. If something deterministic interferes, obstructs or hinders with our goal (for instance death, tsunami, human violence, etc), we see it as (relative) evil.

Basically, freedom as the supreme value gives us the scale to measure evil.

You may be interested in this: https://ontic-philosophy.com/Thread-The-Garden-of-the-Believers-Saracen-Playground since it discusses freedom.
[hr]
This: https://ontic-philosophy.com/Thread-Initiation-through-the-Eye discusses striving for better, so you may also be interested in that.