Thoughts on Good & Evil
By Roth Harbard
From Good and Evil by Tristen Powers: “One of the more pressing and fundamental differences in the worldview of the ancient Indo-European peoples and that of modern post-Christian society is that the former did not possess a dichotomy of Good and Evil like some near-eastern religions, but rather a classical dualist setup of Order and Chaos as the primary dichotomy of existence.
I'm not arguing that the word "Evil" and "Good" did not exist in Germanic vocabulary because it quite clearly did, but rather that the meaning of these words was staunchly different to the moral understandings of the terms created through Christian syncretism and enlightenment philosophy derived from it, as an attempt to ethically square the recorded beliefs of ancient peoples like the Stoics or Aristotle, with the desired results of a Christian moral education and the vocabulary of our Germanic ancestry. In short, the ancient meanings of words do not necessarily reflect their modern meaning despite being functionally the same, as a result of cultural osmosis and change over time.
Now, we can see here that the linguistics of the situation and indeed the quoted text accords more akin to the classical system of consequentialist ethics, and derive from a value-creating force. The Word for "Good" is "God" because that which is good is that which is like the Gods. The Gods exist as the value-creating force, for what is Good is what is their own nature and will and which accrues good results. This is part and parcel of the world of Order, that which is Good yields Goodness.
The Good is not a universal but rather a particularist force, and that which is good for us is good because our ancestors (The Gods) have commanded us to obey such, and as Authority is the basis for all morality and knowledge, this saves it from arbitrariness. We may note that this truth is contained also within the word “Hosios” itself, as meaning literally “That which is sanctioned by the Gods” as opposed to “Dikaios” meaning “that which is sanctioned by Humans.
Likewise, the word "Evil" derives from a term meaning "Bad, Misfortune, Injurious, Shoddy" (See the middle English Yvel and the old English Yfel) because it lacks the same moralistic undertone of vilifying oppression and ressentiment. That which is "Bad" is that which produces undesirable results, hence the phrase meaning "Misfortune". Again, it hearkens back to Order and Chaos, that which is Bad produces Bad Results.
Hence, we can see the same dichotomy of thought behind the Words of Odin:
" I rede thee, Loddfafnir! and hear thou my rede,--
Profit thou hast if thou hearest,
Great thy gain if thou learnest:
An evil man thou must not let
Bring aught of ill to thee;
For an evil man will never make
Reward for a worthy thought."
….
"In evil never joy shalt thou know,
But glad the good shall make thee."
That which is Good produces Positive and desirable consequences, that which is Bad produces negative and undesirable consequences. This is in stark contrast to moralistic understanding of Evil, which will in fact often produce good and desirable consequences and must exist as a temptation.
As such the moralistic underpinnings which modern heathens seek to use to interpret the world and our ancestors' worldview must be rearranged into a more legitimately authentic and ancient construction, if we are to maintain fidelity to the intent of our ancestors’ commands. We must see Evil as meaning Bad, and Good as meaning Noble, in an array of extended consequences.
That which is Noble is that which our ancestors first perceived as evidenced within themselves, inextricably linked with the folk-soul and the spirit of the IE peoples. That which is Good is conceptually bound to those commands which is given to us by our Gods as particular to us and evidenced by our nature. The Noble is the Warlike, the Honorable, the Truthful, The Glorious, The Pious, the Patriarchal. In the Germanic sense that which is bad is almost akin to Ergi - that which is not according to the nature of a proper Man.
Critically, our ancestors did not understand Evil as being “wickedly Immoral” as we do today, but rather something else entirely. As such we may speak archaically of an evil color which we dislike, or an evil dog who resists housetraining, despite the modern inflection of these words making the statements nigh gibberish. As modern heathens we must seek to retrain our brains to understand the actual meaning of our ancestors’ commands, and not merely what we would like them to have said.”
The idea is that the forces of Chaos and Entropy are opposed by the forces of Order and Preservation, and embodied by a serpent (representing Chaos) and a hero (representing Order). In Germanic mythology, Chaos is represented generally by the Jotnar and specifically by Jörmungandr, while Order is represented by the Gods and specifically by Thor, who will confront the World-serpent at the Götterdämmerung during Ragnarök.
Mircea Eliade has written: “Since ‘our world’ is a cosmos, any attack from without threatens to turn it into chaos. And as ‘our world’ was founded by imitating the paradigmatic work of the gods, the cosmogony, so the enemies who attack it are assimilated to the enemies of the gods, the demons, and especially the archdemon, the primordial dragon conquered by the gods at the beginning of time. An attack on ‘our world’ is equivalent to an act of revenge by the mythical dragon, who rebels against the work of the gods, the cosmos, and struggles to annihilate it. ‘Our’ enemies belong to the powers of chaos. Any destruction of a city is equivalent to a retrogression to chaos. Any victory over the attackers reiterates the paradigmatic victory of the gods over the dragon.”
I like the "good" = order, and "evil" = chaos understanding. It's logical. I also understand how the Nine Noble Virtues and the Aesirian Code of Nine both lead to order and failing to follow them leads to chaos. The acts we consider evil: murder, rape, theft, lying, corruption, etc. all lead, ultimately, to chaos.
When something chaotic or bad happens, folks tend to take one of three possible reactions.
1) The victim: Self-pity and weakness are character traits of this. This is the most common operating system humans employ at this time. This is why people are drawn to Communism or even Christianity. The victim surrenders to authorities and the common narrative because opposing it is too difficult for the powerless mind.
2) The villain: He believes if he hurts, so should others. He cares not for justice, only the self-gratification of watching others suffer. Since he believes suffering is inevitable, he may as well be the one dishing it out.
3) The victor: He sees pain and suffering as lessons to stimulate growth. He doesn’t like the challenges and traumatic experiences, but he knows that without them he is forever weak. He is willing to take on suffering to improve the lives of those he loves. He swears to himself, “Better me than them, for I can tolerate hell to build for them a heaven.
Following the tenants of our faith (the Codes and Virtues) place us in the victor column. The victim succumbs to chaos and the villain promotes it.
Pondering this reminds me of some things I've read previously; that we men have given up our agency to others. Protection to police. Justice to the courts. Provision for defense to a standing army. Retirement funding, in large part, to the government. Growing and hunting our own food to big-Agra. We've become "civilized" tax cattle (that which is not according to the nature of a proper Man) rather than feral (natural/wild state, not domesticated) human beings. Our pre-Christian ancestors were feral in the sense that they naturally took responsibility for themselves and never would have dreamed of surrendering their agency.
We need to take back our agency, but first, in order to return to the nobility of our pre-Christian ancestors, we need to be examples of the Code and the Virtues. Every day, in every way. If Christians can espouse that the most Bible most people ever see is the example of the Christian, I would suggest that the most Paganism most people ever see is the example of the Pagan. It is, therefore, imperative that we live the Code and Virtues.
For traditional heathenry the world is not evil and it's important to make the world better, not just for ourselves, but also for our people. There is also no disconnection from our people when we die, so there's more motivation to think about the future of the world. We should simply embrace the storm, for in chaos we find our greatest strength.
