Hobbit meets "Habit"

“I think the reason we can’t agree on this is because there is a difference between our two devils. My Devil has a name, a history, and a definite plan. His name is Lucifer, he’s a fallen angel, his sin is pride, and his aim is the destruction of (or, if not, distraction from-comment mine) the Divine Plan.  Now I judge that your devil is co-equal with God, not His creature: that pride is his virtue because there isn’t any Divine plan to destroy. My devil is objective and yours is subjective. You say one becomes “evil” when one leaves the herd. I say that depends entirely on what the herd is doing.

The herd has been known to be right, in which case the one who leaves it is doing evil. When the herd is wrong, then the one who leaves is not doing evil but the right thing. If I remember rightly, you put that word, evil, in quotation marks which means the standards you judge it by there are relative: in fact you would be looking at it there with the eyes of the herd.”

--F. O’C

“The Habit of Being” ( after which this blog is, hopefully playfully named) p 456

To John Hawkes, 28 November, 1961

Cultural or sociological half-or-less definitions of evil tend to enhance it, as the 20^th Century more or less proved.

The disembodiment of Lucifer is not his disembowelment—quite the opposite in fact—and the results are not just “real” but “hyper-real.”