Certainly valuable to me, Tony; so, just to clarify my earlier thoughts and questions, you're suggesting:
"Good" is always purposive, is ultimately subjective either in definition or interpretation, and is consequently unavoidably context dependent (in value judgement; in which presumably rests the definition of "Evil"?), Interesting point you make about evolution and the "Good"; so, projections of the collapse of our star in a few billion year from now would be both objectively and subjectively bad news? On Jul 11, 6:31 pm, Tony Orlow <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Ben - > > A good question, and not one that I haven't spent much time > considering. Here are my thoughts. > > One many levels, good and evil are subjective. When a cheetah kills a > gazelle, that is good in the cheetah's eye and evil in the gazelle's. > Indeed, our sense of what is good or bad rests first in personal > pleasure and pain, and as we mature, is extended by association to > include that which helps or hurts an object of attachment. For the > rich, the current financial situation is good, and for the many poor > it is evil. One's personal judgment is generally dependent on their > perspective. > > One the other hand, if we assume some greater good, then actions which > encourage it are good, and those that set it back or hurt it are bad > or even evil. For instance, for those that believe in evolution and > would rather be a trillion human cells able to think on our level > rather than a pool of algae, evolution may be viewed as a universally > good thing. Actions that encourage it are good and those that impede > it are bad. Since evolution happens on all levels, from stars to > physical organism to minds and memes, one may view this as a universal > good. Of course, this depends on whether one personally believes in > evolution, so again, even this objective good is subjectively > estimated by the individual. > > Hope that was a valuable contribution. Have a nice day > > Tony > > On Jul 8, 11:16 pm, Ben <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > I do not believe that we can define good and evil without entering > > into a philosophical conversation. > > > Good and evil are not absolute rules nor can there be a universal good > > or a universal evil. > > The concept of what is good and what is evil must be taught to us as a > > child, because we are not born inherently good or evil. > > > To murder is bad. However the statement does not speak of a universal > > good. Murder in so many cases has been used in good ways. > > Euthanization has been used to end a suffering patients life. Abortion > > has been used to prevent a child from being born when childbirth could > > end a mothers life. To murder is bad in many cases but not all. The > > extreme case of the word murder means to kill another human being > > under conditions specifically covered in law. We can not define murder > > without discussing the implications. There are many instances where > > murder must be re-defined as a good not a bad. > > > A child is not born inherently good or evil. Human beings are unique > > in the power of our brain. We are able to quickly associate good and > > bad. These associations are learned from society, our elders and > > peers. A child that is born with no contact from these influences will > > associate good and evil with pain and suffering. A child with contact > > from these influences will be able to conceptualize good and evil and > > apply it to many different aspects of everyday life. > > > Finally, no universal good or evil will ever be agreed upon. There is > > no absolute good or bad that we must all follow. One concept can > > impede on another and we must accept those societies that have a > > rational way of thinking. Each society must continue to evolve these > > rules and change the commandments that were made centuries ago to fit > > the present day reality of life. To murder is bad, however we live in > > a civilized county in which many cases of murder are legal because > > they are good. No one is born inherently good or evil and our society > > must continue to define every aspect of what could be good or bad in > > order to teach our children and they to develop their own, more > > complete understanding to be taught to their children. > > > I challenge those of you who have read this to define an absolute good > > and evil. > > > Thanks, > > Ben Kaylor- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -
