HOME | DD

Description
Good Versus Evil

In science fiction, fantasy, and horror, there have been many tales written depicting good versus evil. Some might suggest that they have grown tired of such morality tales. They might argue that there is no such thing as good and evil. Perhaps there are only shades of grey that make up the vast array between the poles known as good and evil. While there may not be an absolute good and an absolute evil in the world. The story of Good vs Evil has been told a million times throughout history, it may even be the very first story ever told.

There is still much hope for life and hence the good, despite the evil in this universe, hence death. it exists.

Let our children visualize a path forward where good wins. As someone once told me, “There is too much evil in the universe to not have hope. I want to escape from it in the stories I read. I appreciate technology that can help limit the effects of evil and maybe one day defeat it. But the end may just be the death of all things.

Today we know of Mo’s philosophy primarily through a text called Mozi, which was probably written not by Mo Tzu himself, but by successive groups of disciples. The original consisted of 71 chapters, of which only 53 remain. The social turmoil that beset China over several centuries had led Kong [better known in the West as Confucius] to stress tradition and ritual as a means of assuring order and harmony. It led Mo to argue for the very opposite.

Mo distinguished between two principles: that of ‘partiality’ and that of ‘universality’. Someone who held to the principle of partiality, as Kong did, discounted the moral interests of other tribes or other states, or hated or despised them because they were of other tribes or other states. To adopt the principle of ‘universality’ did not mean, as some have suggested of Mo, that one should love strangers as much as one loves one’s family, but rather that the moral interests of strangers, and of other tribes and states, must concern us as much as those of our family, that one should ‘regard others’ states as though regarding one’s state, regard others’ families as though regarding one’s family, and regard other persons as though regarding one’s person’. How, Mo asks, do these two approaches explain ‘the current calamities of the world’, in particular ‘great states attacking small ones, great families overthrowing small ones, the strong oppressing the weak, the many harrying the few, the cunning deceiving the stupid, and eminent lording it over the humble’? Such calamities have not arisen out of people ‘loving others and trying to benefit them’. Rather, they have ‘come from hating others and trying to injure them’. Therefore, ‘partiality is wrong and universality is right’. ‘If men were to regard the states of others as they regard their own’, Mo asks, ‘then who would raise up his state to attack the state of another? It would be like attacking his own.’ Adopting the principle of universality would ensure that ‘Others will be regarded as the self’ and so the need for wars would be greatly reduced, even disappear.

Mo’s philosophy was not a warm, fuzzy embrace of an ‘All you need is love’ attitude. He was much more hard-headed and pragmatic. Why, he asked, should I act to embrace others and to benefit them rather simply to benefit myself? Because, he answered, ‘He who loves others, must also be loved by others. He who benefits others, must also be benefitted by others. He who hates others, must also be hated by others. He who injures others must also be injured by others.’ There are echoes here of utilitarian ideas, and of evolutionary notions of ‘reciprocal altruism’, developed two millennia later.

So here we are, once again at the apex of the root of all stories of Good vs Evil.

This massive Entity is consuming all life and energy in its path, growing larger and larger. aboard their ship they are a million light years away and yet it still fills the viewing windows with it's size.

The Leshy are the last of their kind and perhaps the oldest. Within them is one great power that may save life but may also destroy all life. These three remaining Leshy will transform into this entity, hoping to calm the beast within. Using life's most powerful weapon it has HOPE.

Link to part One:
Link to part Two:

Link to part Three:
Link to part Four:

Created in Daz Studio, Post work in Affinity

IMPORTANT © COPYRIGHT NOTICE
This Artwork and my artwork contained in my gallery is copyrighted ©2018-2022 Henry1850.
All rights reserved. My work may NOT BE reproduced, copied, edited, published,
transmitted or uploaded in any way without my written permission. My work does not belong to the public domain.
If you have doubts about this matter, please feel free to direct message me.

Description
Good Versus Evil

In science fiction, fantasy, and horror, there have been many tales written depicting good versus evil. Some might suggest that they have grown tired of such morality tales. They might argue that there is no such thing as good and evil. Perhaps there are only shades of grey that make up the vast array between the poles known as good and evil. While there may not be an absolute good and an absolute evil in the world. The story of Good vs Evil has been told a million times throughout history, it may even be the very first story ever told.

There is still much hope for life and hence the good, despite the evil in this universe, hence death. it exists.

Let our children visualize a path forward where good wins. As someone once told me, “There is too much evil in the universe to not have hope. I want to escape from it in the stories I read. I appreciate technology that can help limit the effects of evil and maybe one day defeat it. But the end may just be the death of all things.

Today we know of Mo’s philosophy primarily through a text called Mozi, which was probably written not by Mo Tzu himself, but by successive groups of disciples. The original consisted of 71 chapters, of which only 53 remain. The social turmoil that beset China over several centuries had led Kong [better known in the West as Confucius] to stress tradition and ritual as a means of assuring order and harmony. It led Mo to argue for the very opposite.

Mo distinguished between two principles: that of ‘partiality’ and that of ‘universality’. Someone who held to the principle of partiality, as Kong did, discounted the moral interests of other tribes or other states, or hated or despised them because they were of other tribes or other states. To adopt the principle of ‘universality’ did not mean, as some have suggested of Mo, that one should love strangers as much as one loves one’s family, but rather that the moral interests of strangers, and of other tribes and states, must concern us as much as those of our family, that one should ‘regard others’ states as though regarding one’s state, regard others’ families as though regarding one’s family, and regard other persons as though regarding one’s person’. How, Mo asks, do these two approaches explain ‘the current calamities of the world’, in particular ‘great states attacking small ones, great families overthrowing small ones, the strong oppressing the weak, the many harrying the few, the cunning deceiving the stupid, and eminent lording it over the humble’? Such calamities have not arisen out of people ‘loving others and trying to benefit them’. Rather, they have ‘come from hating others and trying to injure them’. Therefore, ‘partiality is wrong and universality is right’. ‘If men were to regard the states of others as they regard their own’, Mo asks, ‘then who would raise up his state to attack the state of another? It would be like attacking his own.’ Adopting the principle of universality would ensure that ‘Others will be regarded as the self’ and so the need for wars would be greatly reduced, even disappear.

Mo’s philosophy was not a warm, fuzzy embrace of an ‘All you need is love’ attitude. He was much more hard-headed and pragmatic. Why, he asked, should I act to embrace others and to benefit them rather simply to benefit myself? Because, he answered, ‘He who loves others, must also be loved by others. He who benefits others, must also be benefitted by others. He who hates others, must also be hated by others. He who injures others must also be injured by others.’ There are echoes here of utilitarian ideas, and of evolutionary notions of ‘reciprocal altruism’, developed two millennia later.

So here we are, once again at the apex of the root of all stories of Good vs Evil.

This massive Entity is consuming all life and energy in its path, growing larger and larger. aboard their ship they are a million light years away and yet it still fills the viewing windows with it's size.

The Leshy are the last of their kind and perhaps the oldest. Within them is one great power that may save life but may also destroy all life. These three remaining Leshy will transform into this entity, hoping to calm the beast within. Using life's most powerful weapon it has HOPE.

Link to part One:
Link to part Two:

Link to part Three:
Link to part Four:

Created in Daz Studio, Post work in Affinity

IMPORTANT © COPYRIGHT NOTICE
This Artwork and my artwork contained in my gallery is copyrighted ©2018-2022 Henry1850.
All rights reserved. My work may NOT BE reproduced, copied, edited, published,
transmitted or uploaded in any way without my written permission. My work does not belong to the public domain.
If you have doubts about this matter, please feel free to direct message me.