Original Sin and the Potentials of Matter

[sibyloftherhine]

I was reading this interview with theoretical physicist Chiara Marletto who discusses her current work at attempting to rewrite the laws of physics in terms of counterfactuals or statements of what's possible and what isn't. Her reasoning behind this is that:

Declaring something impossible leads to more things being possible.

This immediately reminded me of the statement at the end of the About page on Ray Peat's website:

When we realize that our human nature is problematic, we can begin to explore our best potentials.

Ray's quote itself, however, has always reminded me of original sin. This has always perplexed me because Ray has criticized the concept.

From Generative Energy (p. 128):

Ideas of "original sin," "karma," "bad genes" or "wrong consciousness" are often invoked to "explain" suffering and disease. The most offensive example of this that I have heard was when a well known writer and lecturer claimed that people who are raped or murdered, even the victims of Auschwitz, including children, were responsible for their fate, through some mysterious spiritual defect. Even most of the conventional theories of aging and degenerative diseases contain a strong tendency to blame life itself as being at fault for its suffering.

I am in no way condoning the use of "original sin" to justify evil acts like rape and murder. This is the line of reasoning of Calvinists who are merely one sect among the many who believe in "original sin" and were not even the ones who came up with its definition. That being said, what is the difference between blaming "life itself as being at fault for its suffering" and realizing "that our human nature is problematic"? My own answer to that question is the statements themselves have no difference in essence but they differ in the way they are applied. Applying original sin in the same way that "bad genes" is applied to excuse the bad behavior of human beings is creating a limitation for the sake of limiting behavior. Ray's quote on his website, however, is the application of a limit for the sake of widening the potentials of behavior. This is perfectly analogous to Chiara Marletto's current work of attempting to widen the horizons of quantum physics by defining limitations.

If original sin can be used to not only limit human behavior but also to potentialize it, this means that the idea itself is not inherently restricting but instead an idea that can be applied in a restricting, authoritarian manner. I think it's important to note that all evil that exists in the world is the result of the perversion of something good. To lie is to pervert truth, to kill is to pervert life, to rape is to pervert sex. Truth, life and sex are good things that can exist without lies, murder or rape. Good can therefore exist without evil, but evil cannot exist without good.

In summary, I do not really understand why Ray condemns the idea of original sin in itself. In my opinion, original sin is a good, true idea and can even be used to justify Ray's own work. In the same way that all sex should not be condemned just because rape exists, original sin should not be condemned just because it is applied by some people (i.e. Calvinists) to justify undesired behavior. For all I know, however, Ray has touched on this topic a bit more, and he might have more reasons for condemning original sin. I would appreciate any resources and insights on this topic.

 

[Comstock]

One of the few "principles" I've settled on is that anyone is capable of anything. When you accept that you could be a Hitler in the right context, you realize that the only sustainable solution is to make it increasingly impossible for those types of contexts to arise. By avoiding the hubris of putting yourself above anything, you start to prioritize things like decentralization, personal freedom, unlimited mercy, total compassion, and other things that simply end up making everything else better. In a sense, thinking yourself as no better than the worst there will ever be is accepting "original sin", and acknowledging that allows you to carefully evade it.

 

[tanya48]

"Good can therefore exist without evil, but evil cannot exist without good." Good and evil are two sides of the same coin, since this is a world (or dimension) of duality, and therefore everything is in a polarity. I believe there is no such thing as "evil" only lesser degrees of good. As there is no dark, only lesser degrees of light. No cold...only less heat, etc... Therefore, an individual can always choose (using their free will) to move up or down the scale - towards greater good or towards lesser good. In this sense it's as Comstock said, no one is potentially better or worse than anyone else.

 

[TibRex]

There was this woman who had a troubling relationship with her husband and she couldn't get intimate with him. Later, she went to see a psychologist {I think it was Dr. Brian Weiss} who regressed her and found to his surprise that her husband was her father in her previous life and that he raped her during that life. When she got back and understood the situation, she actually got healed and realized that her past life father had returned to make reparation. After that, her life normalized and she found that she was able to relate to her husband without issues. So, hereditary/genetic diseases may well be rooted in past-life actions which in the East is philosophized as Karma/rebirth, etc. And in the bible, there one can find these declarations that seem to support this cosmic law :

"I will even repay into their bosom, both their own iniquities and the iniquities of their fathers together." {Isaiah 65:6b-7}.

"I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children, on the third and the fourth generations of those who hate Me, but showing loving kindness to thousands [of generations], to those who love Me and keep My commandments" {Exodus 20:5-6}

"Do not be deceived: God is not mocked, for whatever one sows, that will he also reap." {Galatians 6:7}

“I the Lord search the heart and test the mind, to give every man according to his ways, according to the fruit of his deeds.” {Jeremiah 17:10}

 

[TibRex]

"Good can therefore exist without evil, but evil cannot exist without good." Good and evil are two sides of the same coin, since this is a world (or dimension) of duality, and therefore everything is in a polarity. I believe there is no such thing as "evil" only lesser degrees of good. As there is no dark, only lesser degrees of light. No cold...only less heat, etc... Therefore, an individual can always choose (using their free will) to move up or down the scale - towards greater good or towards lesser good. In this sense it's as Comstock said, no one is potentially better or worse than anyone else.

We live on the plane of duality consciousness and the two poles of good and evil are there and their interplay helps us to get out of, or transcend, this plane towards that which is beyond them [= plane of oneness or Advaita], the plane characterized by absolute love. Good/bad are just functional agents. TWO teams are needed in the game of football. As one spiritual teacher once pointed out : Life is a game. Play it. Apparently Plato had the same in mind too : Life must be lived as play.