++> Inspired by an exchange between W.
 ++> Elliot and A. Masten on "Black & White"
 
 AM> I don't think good and evil are equal counterparts. People routinely
 AM> do good for its own sake. I can't think of people doing evil for
 AM> evil's sake.
 
     I believe people just do what they do .....any good or evil a
     later fallout judgment, (IF it catches someone's' attention!),
     ...that we tend to do what is least problematical in the world of
     acceptance we live in ("pretty-good" being the norm). I belive
     to do bad, when feeling to do good, takes an energy over just doing,
     and the reverse ........  There are also those naturally bad that
     for reasons, try to be/do good and fail or succeed at a cost. There
     are those that DO naturally good without any effort and at no cost.
     They often enjoy the credits like being naturally good looking.
     At least consider it all a bit more than just doing  "good" or "bad"
     .......assuming "good" just means the most pleasant for all about!
     Of most populations, about 10% are bad-ish prone, about 10% are
     good-ish prone, with about 80% of us in the middle......(about the
     same as pretty/so-so/and ugly). I "think" we are in essential agreement
     with what you said above-   Yes?
                                         ^_
        A practicing hedonist liberal  _/0o"\_
        searching to share his candle ... >> ... Dave
 
    NOTE: Take all the postings you can explore here on PHIL in a few
          sessions and get back to me on the (no names) "DO GOODS",
          DO BADS, and DO NEUTRALS .....could be interesting to check
          your view of the 10/80/10% ratio !
    NOTE: I left out the "VERYs" as the number of Saints and devils
          tend to be near the edges of the human range and need be
          treated as outside our "normalcy" experience.
--- Maximus/2 3.01
---------------