Good and Evil are only as honest as the moral code from which these ideas are born. Are things inherently good or evil? Is there a true and consistent definition for either? I think not. A moral code is just a set of values that man chooses to adopt and follow. It is dynamic, and exists to serve a people's needs. This is proven by the fact that there is no universal moral code to which every human feels obligated to adhere. Societies form definitions of morality as they are needed. The Greeks, for example, did not require the same laws as we do. So, because moral code is formed by human, it seems that morals are not inherently present. Without any teachings on the ethically acceptable, would a man grow up to understand that to eat another man is a unforgivable crime? Because there exists no place in which no ethical teaching is present, it is difficult to hypothesize, but a moral code has obviously been necessary for every society that has ever existed, so we must have been in need of such a thing. If we were ethical angels from birth, such a unwritten code would prove unnecessary.
Because our actions seem to need some direction, in the form of laws of ethics (to function in a society at least), it is obvious that such morals are not inherent in our being. The subjective entities "good" and "bad" stem from this code, and therefore are also invented by humans, and not naturally and objectively understood. We can only attempt to categorize actions under one of these labels based on what harms or benefits ourselves, or others. These are very vague judgments, and a lot more complicated than black or white. Therefore, I do not believe one can accurately say that something is objectively good or bad.
No comments:
Post a Comment