Evil things

[HerenIstarion]

Here we are speculating on the mind & motives of Illuvatar - which is perfectly valid if we view Illuvatar as a character Tolkien has invented - we may question, criticise, do a character analysis (or assasination ) if we choose. But if we see Illuvatar as in any way synonymous (even if only in Tolkien's mind) with God, then we simply can't enter into such speculation, simply because the Mind of God is too great

touché

On the other hand,

Well, it may be that the individual's perception of eternal things may be 'eternally new', but the things themselves, being eternal, cannot be in themselves eternally new - except in Eckhart's sense of being eternally created, rather than being created & constantly 'held in existence' - which strikes me is the difference between what Eru does (constantly creating all things) & what the Elves do by means of the Rings (creating an object once & then preserving or embalming it). From this I would draw the conclusion that the Elves' understanding of Eru's creativity is, while a genuine attempt at emulation (as all true sub creativity is), & is mistaken

On grounds given above (inability to understand Eru's mind), the conclusions you come to may be equally untrue as mine are, than. Though I agree that mine "aha" was a crooked argument, of course. Yet you, me, Eckhart and any other creature is equally unable to enter God's mind, therefore all of our reasoning may hit wild.

Yet, unless we are forced to abstain from any discussion whatsoever on that ground, and thus bringing us in discordance with God's will, somehow, for A) Having in mind the statement of being created in His likeness B) Having in mind that one of the mind's (pun warning - H-I always puns badly) main faculties is such of reasoning C) Abstaining from its employment is drawback on said likeness,

I draw a conclusion that we have to go on discussing such issues too

Well, I was not aware of the note you provide about elvish perception of Time. Thanks for the revelation, but I may argue that perception of time is not equal to perception of the Music, if we talk about ability to actualize given theme only in elven case. Therefore

A new Music, changed in any way from the original, would not appeal.

is speculation. It may be applicable to Valar and Maiar, or may be not, but with elves and men both being new theme in the Music, it strikes as discrepancy. Why should elves be so oppressed and depraved of ability to receive Eru's gifts? For anything coming from Eru is stated textually to be believed by Elves to be for the good of his Children (Estel), and elves are His Children. In case change comes from Eru, it is for their good and should not be rejected. And the answer is backed up textually too – because of Morgoth – who, tainting matter of Arda, made constant union of elven fëar and hroar even inside temporal boundaries of Arda Marred inharmonious and even impossible. And since the power goes both ways, and as fëa has its influence on hroa, so the latter does influence the former, the effect is such a dread of the future (and in case of Men Morgoth causes dread of death). It may be even speculated that Elves dread the future because their bodies fade (what with parting of fea and hroa regarded unnatural and undesirable). Barring of which process is the reason for such a preservation and freezing of time as done in places of elven rings (T.A), and Valinor in later times. (cf 'we must leave ME for Valinor or else we fade'). But there is no evidence that once harm done by Morgoth is healed (Arda Remade), elves must nevertheless dread the change.

Indeed, the change is not their main function (such being the remembrance), but dread they exhibit is not to be there in Arda Remade. Therefore, the change in the Music if produced by Eru should appeal.

Of course, as Finrod says, they hold to estel & believe that Eru will cause Arda re made to be the ultimate state of perfection, but they cannot concieve it

Than nobody can, for the same reason of Eru's minds inscrutability. Even Men, who, as I have a feeling we are agreed upon, act unconsciously. Besides, Estel consists not in the belief of perfection of final product of Eru's, but in the belief of His love for his Children and any deed of His being for their ultimate good.

For Elves, the ideal of Arda re made would seem to be -everything remaining the same, but their perception of it being constantly renewed. For Men I don't think that would suffice. They would require genuinely new things to be possible, genuiine change & the possibility of new sub creation. So Elves would seek newness of perception, Men newness of that percieved.

In case of the perception, how would one tell whether the thing perceived is the old thing perceived as new but nevertheless unchanged, or thing indeed changed and new and therefore so perceived?

If Elves or Maiar were to choose to manifest Melkor's theme, go over to his side, they would not only be choosing to actualise his 'prototypes', build the things he has 'drawn up the blueprints for', they would also be choosing to suppport his desires & bring about his goals - because they cannot think beyond the themes, & have to choose one or the other. Men can take something which Melkor intended for domination & destruction - say a jet engine, & choose whether they will build a warplane or a cargo plane, or a rescue aircraft. Melkor's intent in producing the 'design' would have been to build the warplane, if Elves or Maiar had chosen to build a plane it would inevitably have been a warplane, because they can only choose to manifest his theme or not. But Men can take the idea of the plane & choose to turn it to either good or evil.

Well then, if I understood correctly, you state that:

A) Valar and Elves know some themes to be good and some to be bad. Their freedom is expressed in choosing bad or good theme, and than act upon it. Whatever they do once they choose the theme, is defined to be good or bad according to the theme chosen.
B) Men may choose any theme of the Music (good or bad uniformly) and than act upon them in a good or bad way. So their freedom is of the other kind whatsoever.

Now my argument is that: Should groups and categories be introduced, it is incorrect to place Valar and Elves in one group and Men in another. It would be rather more logical to make groups as follows – group 1 Valar and group 2 Elves and Men, on the ground of difference of status. What is the case for Valar in choosing the themes may be speculated upon (I hold it is the same way as with elves and men, keystone being possible repentance of Sauron), but possibilities there for elves and men are discussed in following entries:

A) Good and Evil are stated to be the same for everybody. If we come to define what Evil is, I presume we will agree that uttermost end of it is Pride – i.e. replacement of priorities – putting forward of created self to take place of its Creator. Cruelty, domination and destruction are consequences. Any material object used for evil ends is ultimately but still merely medium for pride. Medium of the thing can not be at the same time the thing contained, so warplane can not be pride [=evil] in itself. I.e. warplane or any material object probably could not have been sung of in the Music, and if it nevertheless was, the dominant in the theme of warplane (sword, torture chamber, bomb etc) should have been pride.

B) Good and Evil are stated to be the same for everybody, again. So, any elf or man becoming proud in an evil way, (there are good ways to be proud, but that's another issue) are 1. Choosing Morgoth's theme 2. Performing act of choice. But Man, can not choose to be proud (cruel, dominant, destructive) and yet make any good end of it. Eru bringing good out of evil does so in mixing up results of actions of those who chose to be evil, but evil doers in themselves were planning quite other results (c.f. Melkor vs Ulmo and Manwe and snow and rain – freeze and heat were not invented with producing of beauty of snow and fertility of rain in mind)


C) With the B clause in mind, the way of acting goodly/badly for elves and men is the same and expressed by choice.


Further support for clause A:

He chanted a song of wizardry,
Of piercing, opening, of treachery,
Revealing, uncovering, betraying.
Then sudden Felagund there swaying,
Sang in a song of staying,
Resisting, battling against power,
Of secrets kept, strength like a tower,
And trust unbroken, freedom, escape;
Of changing and shifting shape,
Of snares eluded, broken traps,
The prison opening, the chain that snaps

That is excerpt from Finrod's singing contest with Sauron. Even in lesser expression of thing [probably] similar to Great Music, the concepts are handled rather than material objects (though these figure too, but as mediums – broken trap=freedom etc)

Or, to be back on jet engines, jet engine per se is neither good nor bad. The knowledge on behalf of its handler (be it man or elf) that its usage is damaging, and decisions and actions hence with regards of such a knowledge, that is which makes jet engine probable medium for evil.


PS I have asked Estelyn to separate the discussion down from post #67. Let us await her decision

[davem]

Quote: Why should elves be so oppressed and depraved of ability to receive Eru's gifts? For anything coming from Eru is stated textually to be believed by Elves to be for the good of his Children (Estel), and elves are His Children.

What I meant was that from the perspective of Elves in Middle Earth, living out, or attempting to live out, the original Music, knowing (consciously or unconciously) only the original Music, a New Music would seem alien & unattractive, unless it was in vitually all ways a restatement of the original. Of course, once they actually hear the new Music, as it proceeds from Illuvatar, as Eruhini, they could not but be won over to it. If they can only choose to manifest one or other of the themes of the original Music, they could not relate to a totally new form of it, because they could not concieve of a totally different Music.,

Quote: Estel consists not in the belief of perfection of final product of Eru's, but in the belief of His love for his Children and any deed of His being for their ultimate good.

But surely, the result of any loving deed of Eru must be 'perfect'. Whatever the Elves hope for, or trust in, they would expect it to be perfect, even if they cannot concieve of the form that 'perfection would take.

Quote:In case of the perception, how would one tell whether the thing perceived is the old thing perceived as new but nevertheless unchanged, or thing indeed changed and new and therefore so perceived?

By difference in form of the thing percieved. My feeling is that the Elves would seek constantly renewed experience of what they already know, whereas men would seek experience of new things. This is how I understand the difference of human & Elvish psychology. Both races could tell whether they were simply looking at the same tree with 'renewed' vision, or looking with the 'same old' vision at a new tree.


Quote: Now my argument is that: Should groups and categories be introduced, it is incorrect to place Valar and Elves in one group and Men in another. It would be rather more logical to make groups as follows – group 1 Valar and group 2 Elves and Men, on the ground of difference of status.

You see, I would agree with you here, except it is clearly stated by Tolkien that mne are not bound by the Music, which is as fate to all things else. So, Elves Valar & Maiar are bound by the Music, & Men are not

Quote:.But Man, can not choose to be proud (cruel, dominant, destructive) and yet make any good end of it.

I would say that Turin does exactly that. He is driven by pride - probably more than any other character but Feanor. Both these characters' pride achieves good - the slaying of Glaurung & the creation of the Silmarils. Even the Noldor's rebellion & return to ME helps to hold Morgoth in check, In fact they probably did more in the fight against Morgoth than the Valar did, taking into account their strength.

Quote:Or, to be back on jet engines, jet engine per se is neither good nor bad. The knowledge on behalf of its handler (be it man or elf) that its usage is damaging, and decisions and actions hence with regards of such a knowledge, that is which makes jet engine probable medium for evil.

If we take the statement from Hobbit about Orcs being responsible for explosives & torture devices as being correct, then we can concieve of Morgoth's theme including the 'potential' for modern warfare, including jet fighters. So, Elves & valar could choose the jet fighter, or reject it, but they couldn't seperate the concept 'jet' from the concept 'fighter'. Men could, so they could build a jet aircraft which wasn't a fighter.

[HerenIstarion]

May I confess I'm immensely enjoying this little skirmish of sorts?

I would say that Turin does exactly that

Well, of all things else, I thought of Turin as argument in my favour. Indeed, what good did his pride brought him himself? He ended up murderer and suicide, committer of incest. Noldor likewise. There is no telling what may have happened if Noldor restrained from rush action. For one thing, there would have been no Kinslaying. What good is following their bad action, is result of Eru's 'bringing good out of evil' principle, but for the doers there is woe and misery. Turin dies, and Noldor are relieved only after total humiliation, when they are almost swept off ME shores into the sea

By difference in form of the thing percieved. My feeling is that the Elves would seek constantly renewed experience of what they already know, whereas men would seek experience of new things. This is how I understand the difference of human & Elvish psychology. Both races could tell whether they were simply looking at the same tree with 'renewed' vision, or looking with the 'same old' vision at a new tree.

No telling before we get there, but it seems to me that it is the same thing, whether one looks at old thing with new eyes or new thing with old eyes. Can not be told apart, somehow + and - signs are exclusive.

But surely, the result of any loving deed of Eru must be 'perfect'

Truly so. But the priority is Love and Good of the Children, the perfection is merely consequence of [the logical conclusion that] the deed proceeding from the perfect being can not be imperfect, or else the being doing the deed is not perfect in the first place.

but they couldn't seperate the concept 'jet' from the concept 'fighter'.

Now that's mere speculation. The mere ability of separating Great Ring from their own Elven Rings proves the opposite. The concept is brought in by Sauron. It may be argued that it is actualization if not Morgoth's, than of his greatest minion's themes. Once it is known that Annatar is indeed Sauron, in case the concept you propose be true, than there would have been for elves two ways only - to go on using the rings and be evil, or reject and destroy them on the spot. Ture, Sauron haven't seen or touched Elven Rings, but the idea of applying power just so proceeds from him.

What really happens, is that Elves show quite a good ability of distinction you reserve for Men only, shift the gears a bit and use their rings with a proviso (unless the Ring is found)

[davem]

Quote"Well, of all things else, I thought of Turin as argument in my favour. Indeed, what good did his pride brought him himself? He ended up murderer and suicide, committer of incest. Noldor likewise. There is no telling what may have happened if Noldor restrained from rush action. For one thing, there would have been no Kinslaying. What good is following their bad action, is result of Eru's 'bringing good out of evil' principle, but for the doers there is woe and misery. Turin dies, and Noldor are relieved only after total humiliation, when they are almost swept off ME shores into the sea"

Ah, but here we come to the 'Frodo Question' In worldly terms Frodo doesn't gain very much - he ends up feeling a 'broken failure', sad, miserable & unhappy. But he has saved others.

Turin's pride leads him to do terrible things, of course, but his pride leads him to almost fight Morgoth's foes to a standstill, & leads him to kill Glaurung - & these things are done because of his pride, not in spite of it - it isn't a case of Eru turning a disaster brought about by Turins pride to bring about good, Turin's proud acts produce the good results.

In the case of the Noldor its the same - imagine if they hadn't rebelled & returned to ME - Morgoth would have totally enslaved &/or slaughtered Men, Dwarves & the Sindar, he would have increased his forces, & possibly have built up an army strong enough to assail Valinor. The pride, selfishness & desire for revenge of the Noldor is what holds Morgoth in check till the Valar can get their act together & deal with him. ME would have been lost to Morgoth if it had not been for the 'sinfulness' of the Noldor - again, not a case of Eru bringing good out of the faults of the Noldor - their 'faults' are what bring about those results.

If Turin & the Noldor had done what they 'should' have done, behaved 'well' it would have brought about disaster. In a sense, it was necessary for them to 'offend' if Morgoth was to be dealt with. The Valar were 'good', behaved as they 'should' & would have enabled Morgoth to win hands down - what's the message there?

Quote:but it seems to me that it is the same thing, whether one looks at old thing with new eyes or new thing with old eyes. Can not be told apart, somehow:

But there is a difference between one tree & another. And there is a difference between seeing the same tree from a different angle or in a new way, & looking at a completely different tree. Eckhart states somewhere that if we could see a flower, as it has its being in God, it would be a greater thing than the whole world. But one flower is not the same as another.

Quote:But the priority is Love and Good of the Children, the perfection is merely consequence of [the logical conclusion that] the deed proceeding from the perfect being can not be imperfect, or else the being doing the deed is not perfect in the first place.

But does Eru, from his eternal perspective, make that distinction? Would not the 'Love & Good of the Children' be the same as the manifestation of the 'perfect' eternal state? One could not be without the other. Maybe Eru's prime desire is to bring about 'perfection' & the love & good of the Children is a part of that. Would Eru see them as separate things?

Quote:The mere ability of separating Great Ring from their own Elven Rings proves the opposite. The concept is brought in by Sauron. It may be argued that it is actualization if not Morgoth's, than of his greatest minion's themes. Once it is known that Annatar is indeed Sauron, in case the concept you propose be true, than there would have been for elves two ways only - to go on using the rings and be evil, or reject and destroy them on the spot. Ture, Sauron haven't seen or touched Elven Rings, but the idea of applying power just so proceeds from him.

I'm not sure he does introduce the concept of the Rings - he introduces the particular form. He doesn't introduce the desire to control & preserve. In a sense the One Ring merely does what the Elven Rings do, only 'more so'. It is a more effective version - it too is designed to 'control & coerce' Sauron wants to dominate & control the world, the Elves also want to do that - their motivations & the end results may differ, but there is little difference in the desire. This is why, I feel, that Tolkien describes them as having 'flirted with Sauron' - meaning not so much that they went along with him in making the Rings, but that they 'flirted' with what he symbolised. But their goals & his are not all that different - for all Galadriel's dismissal of 'the deciets of the Enemy'. Their Rings can bring them what they desire - why would they destroy them? This is their temptation, this is how Sauron ensnares them - not by introducing some totally new idea & conning them into going for it, but by offering them what they really desired all along - as he did with the Numenoreans.

Quote:
(but they couldn't seperate the concept 'jet' from the concept 'fighter'. )
Now that's mere speculation.

Not if 'Jet-fighter' is Morgoths introduction, & exists as a single concept in the Music - If I'm right that would put the Elves in a 'take it or leave it' position as regards flying machines - of course, Morgoth probably introduced a concept more like a flying Dragon - so to rephrase the point - the Elves couldn't have soncieved of breeding a 'good Dragon' they would either have to breed an evil destructive dragon, or not breed one at all. I suggest Men could concieve of a 'good dragon' because they would be free to seperate the concept :'Good' from the thing :'Dragon'

(It is fun, all this, I must admit - though I'm daily expecting a PM from the mods saying 'You two are confusing (& boring!) everybody else to death - go away & do that stuff on your own time! )

[HerenIstarion]

Frodo question re:

But he has saved others

And both Noldor and Turin brought woe upon others besides themselves.
Besides, only when Noldor reach the state of humiliation and self-denial Frodo was evincing, they are granted 'salvation' – i.e. passage to the West. And Frodo is too granted the healing there – a reward not often distributed among mortals. Would it so happen that Noldor (in the person of Earendil) haven't prayed for mercy, of what avail would have been all their valour and bravery?

We have abovementioned 'Hitler's slayer's' situation here. Yes, much against Morgoth have been done, but it does not realese the doer from the charges they are accused of unless they repent = i.e. pride is replaced with self-denial

Perception re: All things are possible, and either of us may be right, but I will rather hold on to textual evidence as voiced by Finrod (up: Forever beautiful and new). It somehow, even contains both views. (though I personally would have acquired a headache if every day new kind of tree was found in my backyard , with new colour of walls and fridge in different place all the time. But that's kidding, there is no need of answering this in your next)

But does Eru, from his eternal perspective, make that distinction? Would not the 'Love & Good of the Children' be the same as the manifestation of the 'perfect' eternal state? One could not be without the other. Maybe Eru's prime desire is to bring about 'perfection' & the love & good of the Children is a part of that. Would Eru see them as separate things?

Maybe. We do not know (inscrutability principle). But if we hold on to tradition, than Love and Good of the Children is prime issue, perfection as a mere result of perfection of Eru Himself, who, being perfect, by definition acts perfectly. (was it tautology, by the way? four 'perfect'-s in one sentence…)

Good dragon/rings of power/flirt with Sauron re:

Is is not self contradictory: they can not distinguish good/bad jet planes, but are very well with good/bad rings? Ring's concept is similar to that of jet-fighter – both are meant for the domination of the world in respective way. And in case of rings elves are quite good at distinction – they bring the concept of domination (coming from pride, i.e. evil in the end) to the comparatively good usage, i.e. doing exactly what is attributed to men only in your concept. To parallel it with jet-figthers: jet=ring=device designed to focus power, plane type=power application form. So, the extracted concept of power focusing device (jet engine=ring) is created in both cases, power application form is different (fighter=ring of power=total domination of all, cargo plane=elven rings=preservation).

Now the jet in itself is not bad or good for the handler untill the handler defines, learns what is in his hands (my exapmle above about jet engine per se). I probably failed to communicate that, but I had a vision of a jet engine as something placed somewhere with no previous connection to its future handler and than found by someone, for whom, the finder, the thing is not good nor bad until studied.
But for the designer, the concept already in his head defines the goodness/badness of the object produced. So, device to focus power for domination is thus defined as bad.

Flirt with Sauron (good point, btw) you mentioned comes in. It does imply that Elven Rings were bad thing to be done from the very beginning. [edit for the sake of better understanding - that is indeed] Not the right thing to do. Yet Elves have been achieving things that are defined as good with their Rings (i.e. beauty of Lorien, etc). So, where is the alleged impotency of elves to pick up the bad theme and act good upon it?

Nevertheless, in case of the rings, giving them up by the end of Third Age is good action – they have to humiliate themselves, deny the last remnants of their pride which led them in the beginning, be relieved and thus be themselves more so. That much good is lost along the way, is grieving, but that is the way with good based on evil – for they were doing exactly what, as you state, man can do only – building their good upon bad foundation. (with Galadriel's "I will diminish, remain Galadriel and go to the West" applying not to the Great Ring only but to her own ring too) It parallels with Noldor seeking pardon in the person of Earendil, with Frodo's "I have to go without, for all else should preserve it" etc

Probably, one day mankind would be forced to reject jet-engines likewise – for the sake of constantly polluted environment, or whatever. For bringing good results out of bad things is Eru's faculty - all else must submit, remake, go back and start over.

[davem]

Quote:And both Noldor and Turin brought woe upon others besides themselves.
Besides, only when Noldor reach the state of humiliation and self-denial Frodo was evincing, they are granted 'salvation' – i.e. passage to the West. And Frodo is too granted the healing there – a reward not often distributed among mortals. Would it so happen that Noldor (in the person of Earendil) haven't prayed for mercy, of what avail would have been all their valour and bravery?

Yes, they brought woe on themselves & others - but that does not deny the good they did - as a direct result of their 'sins', not as a result of Eru changing or manipulating the result. We can't assume that they wouldn't have felt that it wasn't all a failure to be repented of. In this instance one could say the Valar, by their inaction, are just as much at fault, & share some of the responsibility for the sufferings of the inhabitants of ME - though they are not held accountable - don't we have examples here of sins of comission (the Noldor) & sins of Omission (the Valar). Dealing with Morgoth is the Valar's responsibility, not the Noldor's. And what of Manwe's (foolish? idiotic?) decision to release Melkor from Mandos? Who starts this tragedy? But Manwe is not held accountable in any way.

Of what avail would have been their bravery? Well, Morgoth was held in check for a good part of the first Age - at the very least he wasn't allowed to have things all his own way, & become a threat to the whole of ME, including Valinor - which the Valar's inaction would have risked happening. Its entirely possible that the Valar's survival (at least as rulers of ME) is in large part entirely down to the Noldor in ME.

Quote:Perception re: All things are possible, and either of us may be right, but I will rather hold on to textual evidence as voiced by Finrod (up: Forever beautiful and new).

Finrod is expressing the Elvish perspective, not the human. He thinks like an elf. But constantly new things would not have to replace each other with such speed as you suggest. My feeling is that the Elves want to be surrounded constantly with the 'known', but in such a way that that 'known' is percieved with a feeling of 'newness'. Men on the other hand would seek the wholly new - things they had never experienced before. This is simply a manifestation of the Elves backward looking stance - seeking to get back to the known, while Men are forward looking, ever seeking the unknown. The Elves do not seem atracted to new possibilities - which are percieved as changes to what they already know, what has already been, & hence a movement away from Ainlindale.


Quote:Is is not self contradictory: they can not distinguish good/bad jet planes, but are very well with good/bad rings? Ring's concept is similar to that of jet-fighter – both are meant for the domination of the world in respective way. And in case of rings elves are quite good at distinction –

Well, do the Elves consider the One Ring in its essential nature as 'evil' or is it merely teh use it is put to by Sauron that they object to: The One is designed to control & preserve - to control & coerce, as are the Elven Rings. What they realise by the End is that Their Rings & the One are 'wrong', because the desire behind them is wrong. There is every reason to believe that the Elves would have come up with their own equivalent of the One Ring, if they'd had the time & freedom to do it. This is the 'flirting with Sauron' - not the means (magic rings) but the mentality. The Elven Rings & the One are different only in power & in the intention behind their use - The Elven Rings are not 'morally good' & the One 'morally evil' - they are objects which are used by individuals, & it is the individual's intent which should be judged. In a way the Elven Rings are just as potentially corrupting as the One, because they offer the same temptation to power & control, domination & coercion of lesser wills. It could be argued that Galadriel is so acutley conscious of the danger of the One because she has lived so long with the temptation of Nenya..

Quote:It does imply that Elven Rings were bad thing to be done from the very beginning. Not the right thing to do. Yet Elves have been achieving things that are defined as good with their Rings (i.e. beauty of Lorien, etc). So, where is the alleged impotency of elves to pick up the bad theme and act good upon it?

This statement could be applied to the 'pride' of the Noldor - was that 'bad' from the very beginning? Didn't the 'sinful' Noldor achieve great beauty, wisdom & long stretches of peace & happiness in the FA? So, was their 'pride' ever 'good' as you say the Elven Rings were originally? The Elven Rings were another manifestation of the Noldorin desire for power & control - always 'bad' yes, but bringing about great good in various times & places.

[HerenIstarion]

Yes, they brought woe on themselves & others - but that does not deny the good they did - as a direct result of their 'sins'

Than you once again contradict your own maxim of elven inability to play bad theme in good direction. For Noldor are elves, are not they? But, and but, and but again only Eru can bring good out of evil, for:

The woe they brought about is direct consequence of their pride. So, evil results in evil

The good they brought about is direct consequence of their virtues - valour, courage etc. i.e. good results in good

So men are excluded too, boom ta ra ram, for the principle works for them in the same way. Turin's pride ended him suicide, but his courage killed Glaurung. And there is no paradox here, for all I can think. Quite the contrary – the paradox of evil coming out of good and vice versa is thus easily solved. Noldor were not, after all, completely evil, but the dominant, the driving power of their deeds was pride, so overall, on the general plane they could not have succeded unless repenting, but in minor results, which proceeded from their retained virtues, no restrictions were set. And that's why all the good they contrived was vain – being grounded on their evil, it was of no avail

This is simply a manifestation of the Elves backward looking stance - seeking to get back to the known, while Men are forward looking, ever seeking the unknown.

I've already agreed that this may be the case. On the other hand, I have (I believe, successfully ) postulated that once the marring is healed, there will be no problem for elves of change-accepting kind.

So, was their 'pride' ever 'good' as you say the Elven Rings were originally

You missed my point ('thanks' to wording, I reckon – 'Not the right thing to do' is to be applied to forging of the Elven rings, not to what you've said about it. To the contrary, I was saying that elven rings were bad thing to do from the beginning. So, it seems, we are saying same thing here.

The Elven Rings are not 'morally good' & the One 'morally evil' - they are objects which are used by individuals, & it is the individual's intent which should be judged.

So this maxim is also accepted by me. (But then, were did the good jet and bad fighter as part of the music got to, I wonder? and which only men can split as different concepts?) Side note only – The Great Ring is stated to hold part of Sauron's original will, and has an ability to bend handler's will to evil, so it ceases to be mere object (as described up above, found by handler with no previous bias) but is a bit more. But this side note is not revelant. It may be said that Great Ring is merely object. Still more, individual has to have patterns of mind similar to that of Sauron's, and similar intentions already there to be affected (hence no effect of the Ring on Tom, and great dread on Gandalf's part even to touch it) – or, your statement of motives under creation of rings also found acceptable

The noldorin pride might have been good up to some point, but a little bit before making of the silmarils it was already going bad.

Definition of 'good' pride I have none but to rephrase C.S. Lewis' paragon (I don't remember the book where it is to be found, so have to give my own wording, but I do remember the essence – 'to be the best architect in the world, apply skill and build the best building there ever was, and be glad about it, but no more than you might have been if someone else have had erected said building'. Or better still, to, 'see that some thing is good and be content' (no matter who did it)

What Valar did/did not re

Here I spy with my little eye something beginning with s, or here comes another shifting of gear for our discussion:

idiotic Manwe re:

Myths Transformed

Of Manwe it was said, when Melkor was allowed to go freely about Valinor, that he believed that his evil was cured: for he himself was free from the evil and could not comprehend it