I figured I’d write out a few things here while I’m keeping up with schedules and such. And I remembered a topic of particular interest.
How does one define that which is good and that which is evil?
I found, in my observations, that it shares the same answer with “how do you define that which is sane and that which is not?”. It depends on the majority.
See, if you go to a place where the local culture worships an overhead projector and you stand there saying “hey, that’s odd”, you would be wrong. At least to the local culture you would. And because they have the majority to enforce their beliefs, that sort of makes them right. It’s kind of unfair but there ya have it. The vocal majority rules.
I mean, seriously, if you look at something as widely accepted as Christianity from an objective point of view it all seems rather silly. If you are good, you get to sit on clouds with an old bearded guy and people who have wings after you die. But if you are bad, you go underground to where it’s super hot and a guy with bull horns pokes you with a trident. The only reason that may not seem weird, in my opinion, is because you may have grown up in a place where everyone says it’s not weird.
But how does this relate to what is good and what is evil? Well, ask yourself what you think is evil. But more importantly, ask yourself WHY you think it’s evil. Many people think it’s wrong to murder someone for any reason. But what about during war? Or in self defence? Or the death penalty? Depending on who you ask, killing people is ok in certain situations. So, to me, good and evil exists only within the paradigm of the vocal majority. If people say it’s good, it’s good. If people say it’s evil, it’s evil. It’s hard to say what is universally kind or unkind. Especially with the massive differences in cultures the world over.
Personally I think that people should be allowed to do what they want so long as it’s not hurting anyone or getting in their way.