Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2025 Poal.co

1.4K

Previously I asked . Some of the answers pointed to trannies/pedos and the power of globohomo as evidence, which I definitely feel is convincingly suggestive of a great force of evil.

I would heap onto this category of suggestive evidence the sort of mass stupidity/foolishness that is so omnipresent that you can barely find anyone in the world who isn't victimized by whatever is causing it. More evil.

I often worry that there's more evidence to suggest a great supernatural evil than there is to suggest a great supernatural good.

Call it God, or the Holy Ghost, or whatever. Maybe there is a pagan equivalent but from what I've seen in those traditions things aren't so dualistic. Do you think that exists? What would you point to as evidence that suggests it does?

Can you believe in Satan (or whatever you want to call it) without God? Though initially it's counterintuitive I would like to hear the argument for why you couldn't...

And now I will ping some people who were involved in the previous discussion: .

edit: And I should've included this originally, but in the previous discussion we settled on a definition of evil (in people), as basically that which contradicts or disrupts a functioning natural order of things.

Previously I asked [what evidence there was to suggest the existence of esoteric forces that influence our world](https://poal.co/s/AskPoal/133266). Some of the answers pointed to trannies/pedos and the power of globohomo as evidence, which I definitely feel is convincingly suggestive of a great force of evil. [I am continuing to use the term suggest instead of prove because I feel it is very unlikely that the existence of supernatural influences will ever be proven.](#spoiler) I would heap onto this category of suggestive evidence the sort of mass stupidity/foolishness that is so omnipresent that you can barely find anyone in the world who isn't victimized by whatever is causing it. More evil. I often worry that there's more evidence to suggest a great supernatural evil than there is to suggest a great supernatural good. Call it God, or the Holy Ghost, or whatever. Maybe there is a pagan equivalent but from what I've seen in those traditions things aren't so dualistic. Do you think that exists? What would you point to as evidence that suggests it does? Can you believe in Satan (or whatever you want to call it) without God? Though initially it's counterintuitive I would like to hear the argument for why you couldn't... And now I will ping some people who were involved in the previous discussion: @TheodoreKent @NotHereFor @GoyGenius @Timmy @WaWhite13. [My limit is 5 pings so sorry if I didn't get you.](#spoiler) edit: And I should've included this originally, but in the previous discussion we settled on a definition of evil (in people), as basically that which contradicts or disrupts a functioning natural order of things.

(post is archived)

You are currently inside a comment thread.
Click here to see all the comments (69).
[–] [deleted] • 1 pt (edited )

Recalling the last thread we had about this, and some of the responses I'd like to try a slightly different approach, but will say something similar (but I don't want to get muddled into limitations of science). Last time I offered a paradigm that instead of evil and non-evil, psychopaths (wolves) and non-psychopath innocents (lambs) could explain the guiding subversion that is going on. Further, good and evil messes us up from protecting ourselves in this case, and as a point consider your really nice Uncle who treats you nicely and buys nice gifts at Christmas but also happens to be a serial killer. The paradigm of evil becomes muddled in this case and it may cause us to not see the "evil."

Until you can fully define the mechanism with every step from the local purview, I recommend instead consider Occam's razor and simpler, local paradigms. While good and evil are compartmentalized ideals, the definitions become hazy and non-universal (different definitions for different people) for various perspectives. I'll use a simpler paradigm here.

I can correlate with three different axis natural behaviors of people.

  1. Politicians

  2. Police

  3. Mafia

Consider the neither good nor evil interactions between such groups/types. I'm not saying this is how it is, per se. Just saying that if you take that idea it is actually more useful to traverse our society (which is the point). Further, one can consider each of the three "variables" something to tweak for each situation. Some days you need to act more like the police, sometimes you need to act more like a politician.

With this idea, all you need to add to the formula is the concept of "survival."

[–] • 0 pt (edited )

As for Occam's razor:

Is it really a simpler argument that our society is being driven insane by the coordinated efforts of a group of psychopaths (who may or may not mostly be members of a tribe that evolved to be that way similar to the way a virus evolves to attack its host)? It's an explanation, for sure, but hardly a simple one.

By contrast, "muh devil" is much simpler. It could still be wrong, but isn't that explanation like the Occam's razor ideal?

Still, I think it is important to consider alternative possibilities.

I supposed another possibility is we're much more sensitive to the seemingly coordinated efforts of an omnipresent evil actor than we are to the omnipresent good actor. Those "possessed" by this evil are more viscerally disgusting than those possessed by good.

On muddling:

If we are to believe in both the evil entity and the good entity, they are probably both acting on the same people at the same time. (Your well meaning boomer uncle who is all about faith and family, but maintains diversity is our strength and "there are only two genders -- people just need to pick one or the other.")

edit: so while I would agree with you that good and evil or muddled in people, that doesn't necessarily disprove any actors that might be the cause of one or the other. There could be The Great Evil possessing people, who resist somewhat and still do some good things. There could be Great Good and Great Evil, or just Great Good (and people with their self-interested nature resist its influence), or no influencers at all.

[–] [deleted] • 1 pt (edited )

I just came across this quote somewhere else which kind of sums it up in a different way and thought it would be fitting to share it here. It has to do with simplicity, and the strange subversion that "accounting" has on our moral actions.

Believers in religion teach us that God will reward men for good actions, but mean who are intellectually free, know that the reward of a good action can not be given by any power, but that is the natural result of the good action.

The free man, guided by intelligence, knows that this reward is in the nature of things, and not in the caprice even of the Infinite. He is not a good and faithful servant, he is an intelligent free man.

-- Robert G. Ingersoll

EDIT: Check out this