I would place an understanding and knowledge of what is “good” and “evil” as one of the great pillars of essential human knowledge. It is most unfortunate that this great necessity of mankind is seen as exclusively religious in nature. Why? The very essence of government and law deals with how this knowledge is understood. For what is the point of a law if it does not accomplish some measurable “good”. Or why define a person as a criminal if they have done no perceivable “evil”.
Why should we educate our children in matters that are not “good” or of “good benefit”? What is science if it does not better mankind and provide something “good”? The first point I would like to establish is that at the very essence of everything that is rational or worth while is the concept of good and evil. Knowledge of good and evil is the very core of any discussion or consideration. Yet there is little investment beyond religion to make sense of what is good or evil.
Has there ever been a college course in studying good and evil? Of all the things of possible study is there a course in science, language, public relations, business or even sports where good and evil is studied in any depth? The sad thing to me is that very few that I have conversed with seem to know or care about defining what is good and evil. At the same time; everyone with an opinion about anything thinks they have differentiated between good and evil and thus they have their opinion.
For the most part people seem to draw an invisible line on a spectrum of choices saying that anything on my side of the line is good or okay and everything on the other side is not okay or evil. Another was of expressing this concept is that it is not okay or evil to cruelly beat some unknown stranger to death because someone is bored and needs to be entertained. But it is okay or good to help someone in need. The question is; how do we know one is bad and the other good? Some will say that what is good or evil is all based on the circumstance. What is good one time can be evil at another. How is that determined? What basis is there for such a conclusion?
In all human collisions of contention is the ever present notion that I am on the good side and everyone that is with me is good – every one that is against me is evil. Thus we have the “us against them” mentality. Every disagreement, every war, every divorce and every conflict has this idea as an engine. I submit that the great problem in any conflict is a misunderstanding of what is good and what is evil.
So what then is good and what is evil? Why is good and evil opposite? Why is there no common ground? As I stated in my introduction – often we think of things in terms of “destination” rather than a “journey”. Everyone thinks they can recognize good or evil when they “get there” but how do you recognize the first step to evil or the first step to good? The problem is that in the process of good and evil – once we get there it is too late. We are caught into the continuing the process.
Let me give an example: If we are to understand “bondage” as evil and “freedom” as good then every step we take towards bondage is evil and every step towards freedom is good. Applying the logic of science, the point is to isolate the elements of bondage and freedom and then experiment. We then begin to separate and try each step as a separate entity to determine its polarity. Those steps that make a difference we can then measure and determine what they are – good or evil.
It really does not matter if the point in consideration is religious, political, social, scientific or even private; if we use this scale (of reference to bondage or freedom) we can determine what is good and evil. You may call bondage and freedom by different names if you wish. You can call them damnation and salvation if you like. You can call them debt or receiving return on investment. You can call them joy or depression. You can even call them hate and love. The point is that one controls you and the other you are in control.
Most have this concept well under control it is understanding the next principle where most get lost. Why? Because evil is the enviable “natural” result while good must be achieved contrary to what must happen even to the violation of the principles of thermal dynamics. Okay maybe I exaggerated a little but I want to make a point that good requires a change.
All of this logic was put together to get you to the point where you could appreciate the difference between good and evil because the logic of it is so easy but the practice is impossible. I submit that the first step to evil or bondage is the effort of satisfaction of self. Likewise the first step to good or freedom is the denial of self or the sacrifice of self.
The Traveler
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Traveler,
Gwen could not get her account to work so she wanted me to post this for her. She wrote the following:
I couldn't get this to post on your site because I couldn't remember my password, but here are my thoughts on the matter.
In many instances where you used good v. evil I was unknowingly substituting those words for right and wrong. When I caught my error it made me wonder, is there a difference between the right/wrong paradigm and the good/evil? If we decide that they are one in the same then I further speculate on the matter of little children. It is very difficult if not near impossible for children to make the "right" choice when given the opportunity (this is by my observation of my own children so I'll admit it's very limited). Paraphrasing you, evil flourishes when the doer is selfish or self-centered. Well ok, that describes children very well, so are they (were we all) evil? Are we all destined to be damed without the guidance of a superior to teach which is evil or good? If so how do we help our children recognize and DO good? I don't disagree with your thought process, I'm just curious as to further application.
Children are an interesting problem because they are capable of choices but as you indicated - the choices of children are almost always selfish. I hinted at the fact that evil is the “natural” course and that good requires effort. As remarkably innocent as children are – they must be taught and trained not to be selfish for without such guidance when they are young and impressionable it is most unlikely that they can reverse a selfish trend as an adult.
All this would imply that for the preservation of good in society there is no more important contribution within a society than the teaching of children and the support of those involved with children (parents). But this is a subject for another blog.
Post a Comment