Venting The universe isn't neutral it's bad

[Darkover]

Being neutral in a hostile environment does seem especially challenging to justify. the universe chooses neutrality in a world full of suffering, it can feel like an active choice to allow harm to persist without intervention. In a setting where pain, struggle, and survival dominate, the choice not to alleviate suffering—or even prevent it—seems like a passive endorsement of that suffering.

In a neutral world where creatures didn't have to kill to survive, neutrality might look more benign, as i mentioned. But when suffering is unavoidable, a universe allowing this without intervention could feel indifferent at best, or even malevolent at worst, to many people.

Yes, neutrality in a world rife with suffering and conflict does feel hard to reconcile with any concept of fairness or compassion. It can seem especially harsh that the universe remains indifferent to the struggles of creatures whose survival often depends on causing suffering to others. In such a world, the "neutrality" of the universe may come across as a passive allowance of harm, making the harsh realities of existence seem not just inevitable but, in a way, sanctioned by that neutrality.

If, instead, the universe operated in a way that minimized suffering—like a world where life could sustain itself without predation, disease, or painful survival mechanisms—then its neutrality might appear more tolerable. In that imagined setting, neutrality could be seen as a hands-off, benign presence, allowing life to flourish without suffering as a necessary cost. But because suffering is so deeply embedded in the natural world we know, the universe's non-intervention can feel, as i mentioned, indifferent to the point of malevolence.

 

[MentalFuneral]

The way I see it is suffering is the baseline for living things and any moments of respite from suffering are exceptions and not the norm. But most modern people (mostly westerners) are comfortable enough that they can avoid it, and when we are challenged by it we struggle immensely because we've been conditioned to distract ourselves from the pain rather than to work through it

 

[Forever Sleep]

I don't think the universe has a personality or an intention even. Stuff just seems to happen. Like evolution- is that truly conscious? Does it 'think', what's the most sadistic, depraved thing I can come up with? Oh- I know- some fungus that infects some spiders, turns them into zombie spiders where they'll effectively climb somewhere high, die via pretty much exploding and releasing the spores to infect a whole bunch of other spiders. That sounds nice and sadistic. Let's do that... I don't think either evolution or the fungus itself 'intended' to do that deliberately. A variant of it likely just happened to happen one day and because those spores survived and reproduced, the pattern became more established.

Can something itself be behaving 'badly' if it isn't conscious, so it didn't 'choose' to do such thing? Is gravity being 'evil' when a coconut falls from a tree and squashes a mouse? Did the tree aim at the mouse? Should we blame the tree? It's just all unfortunate chance really- for the mouse anyway. A passing crab might be grateful for the meal.

I feel like 'good' and 'bad' labels are more applicable when something is intended. Like- everything we seem to do now seems to generate a request for a review. Do you like your purchase? How would you rate your delivery? Will you leave us a 5 star review for the meal you just ate? All of those were paid for so- they ought to have been good!

Imagine if you got a chance to review the weather! Was there enough sun to your liking today? Did your garden receive enough rain? Did you get caught in a hail storm? Sorry about that. Did gale force winds blow down your fence? Our bad. I don't think we view the weather as mallicious. Although, we can probably blame ourselves when it comes to climate change...

I suppose you could argue that a lot of the systems that govern this world benefit some and cause suffering to others. So, some will say they're good, others, bad in terms of their own experience of them. I feel like you can only really say the intentions behind them were deliberately bad though if they were deliberately intended/ designed that way via a God for example. If it's all chance though- then- it's just good or bad luck in a way.

Put it this way- if no humans existed, would the same systems be able to be considered good or bad? I guess we'll never know but, animals and plants don't appear to have those sorts of judgements. I imagine a lot more would kill themselves if they did! Especially seeing as humans have added to their woes by obliterating most of their habitats.

Obviously, we are all we have and, our own pain is incredibly real but- why are our opinions of 'good' and 'bad' even that important? To either a God or the universe anyway? Neither will particularly care I imagine that- we have a problem with how they run things! That's maybe the most depressing thing of all though. We have no power.

The other thing of course is- what's the alternative? Shall we scrap death? Or maybe, it should exist for those who want it. It's going to get overcrowded pretty rapidly if no one dies... So- we can't have physical form anymore. What if people don't want to lose their physical forms though? Maybe they enjoy food or intimacy or physical sports. Do you think you could actually create a world where everyone got what they wanted? What if 300 year old granny wants to die but her great, great, great, great, great grandchildren can't bare to lose her? How do you keep everyone happy without imposing your own will on them?

 

[Darkover]

I don't think the universe has a personality or an intention even. Stuff just seems to happen. Like evolution- is that truly conscious? Does it 'think', what's the most sadistic, depraved thing I can come up with?

Good and Bad Only Matter When There's Intent
many argue that the morality of actions is determined by their outcomes, not by the intent behind them. For instance, if someone accidentally causes a car accident that injures another person, we still see the outcome as bad because of the harm done, regardless of whether there was malicious intent. Here, the "bad" is real because it involves suffering or harm, even if the cause was unintentional.

Can something itself be behaving 'badly' if it isn't conscious, so it didn't 'choose' to do such thing? Is gravity being 'evil' when a coconut falls from a tree and squashes a mouse? Did the tree aim at the mouse? Should we blame the tree? It's just all unfortunate chance really- for the mouse anyway. A passing crab might be grateful for the meal.

Natural events like earthquakes, hurricanes, and wildfires cause extensive harm and suffering, though they occur without any intent. However, we still respond to these events as morally significant. Communities offer aid, and people are driven to help the affected because the outcome—harm and suffering—elicits empathy and a moral response. We recognize suffering as bad in itself and worthy of alleviation, even though there is no conscious force behind the disaster.

I suppose you could argue that a lot of the systems that govern this world benefit some and cause suffering to others. So, some will say they're good, others, bad in terms of their own experience of them. I feel like you can only really say the intentions behind them were deliberately bad though if they were deliberately intended/ designed that way via a God for example. If it's all chance though- then- it's just good or bad luck in a way.

Many environmental harms occur without any specific intention. Pollution, climate change, and habitat destruction have resulted from industrial activities that weren't intended to destroy ecosystems or harm species. Yet, the resulting damage is widely seen as morally concerning because it negatively affects other beings and ecosystems. Here, the lack of intent doesn't negate the ethical importance of reducing harm or reversing damage.

 

[Forever Sleep]

Good and Bad Only Matter When There's Intent
many argue that the morality of actions is determined by their outcomes, not by the intent behind them. For instance, if someone accidentally causes a car accident that injures another person, we still see the outcome as bad because of the harm done, regardless of whether there was malicious intent. Here, the "bad" is real because it involves suffering or harm, even if the cause was unintentional.



Natural events like earthquakes, hurricanes, and wildfires cause extensive harm and suffering, though they occur without any intent. However, we still respond to these events as morally significant. Communities offer aid, and people are driven to help the affected because the outcome—harm and suffering—elicits empathy and a moral response. We recognize suffering as bad in itself and worthy of alleviation, even though there is no conscious force behind the disaster.

Many environmental harms occur without any specific intention. Pollution, climate change, and habitat destruction have resulted from industrial activities that weren't intended to destroy ecosystems or harm species. Yet, the resulting damage is widely seen as morally concerning because it negatively affects other beings and ecosystems. Here, the lack of intent doesn't negate the ethical importance of reducing harm or reversing damage.

Hmmm, yes and no. I definitely agree that unconcious events can create immense harm. Are they all truly unintentional though?

The unintentional car accident. Why did it happen? Was the person DUI? Were they on the phone or distracted? Were they driving slowly enough for the weather conditions? Was the car safe to drive? A car can become a lethal weapon if it isn't used properly. That's the main reason I don't drive! Or, was it the other person's 'fault'? Did they run into the road without looking? Regardless- the accident still happened for a reason. Both parties know that traffic accidents can be very bad. Were they both doing all they could to avoid that happening or, did someone slip up? Maybe there wasn't intent to kill but, was there enough intention to drive responsibly or, cross the road responsibly so it's less likely someone does get killed? We are actually aware of risk as humans. We either intend to mitigate risk or, we don't but, we know the consequences. I don't however think a hurricane knows what it's doing.

Large scale industries also don't just unintentionally dump tons of toxic waste without realising what they're doing. They do it to save money. They likely do it knowing the long-term harm it's doing too. I'd argue most of the harm humans do comes from bad intent. Either negligence or outright exploitation. Dupont and C8 is the prime example of that.

As for natural disasters- yes- I agree. For the people and animals they affect, they can only be seen as terrible. In some ways, we as humans can mitigate some risk still though. Not building on active volcanoes or on flood plains. Building structures that can withstand earthquakes. Again- we have the advantage there. We know about these things and where they are prone to strike.

Not that I'm grateful to exist but, if that comet hadn't wiped out the dinosaurs, I wonder if we wouldn't exist now.

Plus- it depends who's side you're on. If a starving lion kills an antelope- it's a good day for one and a bad day for the other. Is it a 'good' or 'bad' act? The outcome was good for one and, bad for the other. There's no way of mitigating that really- handing out veggie burgers or something.

Ultimately though- we wouldn't have to worry about any of this if our parents had realised what a hostile environment this was from the start and, not brought us in to it! That often feels like the worst act to me on a daily basis. As in- why on earth did you bring me in to this? Why don't prospective parents do risk assessment?!!

 

[ijustwishtodie]

I agree. I never understood the "life is neutral" crowd on this site as there's nothing neutral about this. It doesn't matter that the universe and evolution are brainless and directionless, what matters is the suffering caused by these things existing. The ignorance of the perpetuater doesn't undo the suffering upon the victim. In my opinion, what matters is the suffering caused, not the motive of the person or thing causing the suffering. As an example, I wouldn't care if I got raped by somebody who knows that rape is wrong or by somebody who doesn't know that rape is wrong, what matters to me is the suffering caused by getting raped. Similarly, it doesn't matter to me if my leg got crushed by a boulder that a human threw on my leg or by gravity rolling a boulder down a hill that then crushed my leg. What matters to me is the suffering because that's real and is bad. It doesn't matter to me that the universe and evolution has no brain or direction as what matters to me is the suffering caused