What is the ground for condemning an action though?
I believe that there isn’t anything unqualifiably evil, all evil that’s done is done out of a mistaken pursuit of something seen as good like power, wealth, etc at the expense of higher goods. So, evil is a turning away from goodness-as-such.
If there is nothing that’s goodness-as-such, how can we say certain actions are wrong? I am thinking in big picture terms, like genocide, murder, etc. If there isn’t a standard to appeal to, then good and evil are just what the majority of people agree upon, in which case it’s a Nietzchean dialectic of the will to power.
I don’t see condemning as a thing I need to do…pretty much ever? I hold myself to what I believe are high standards, my goal is to not cause harm to others, and to act from a place of genuine love and generosity and not insecurity or anger or fear. I don’t always succeed, but usually I can tell pretty quickly.
Like I’ve had interactions here where I did not react with love, I was too angry or hurt or traumatized, and after the fact I always feel…sick almost? It’s like that little part inside knows that wasn’t right to be so angry or so harsh. So, I try to do better the next time, when I read something and I feel anger and pain again…I say STOP, and I focus on the other person and building compassion for them, so I can respond from a place of compassion and not something less loving.
I believe actively working on our own internal deficiencies will ultimately eradicate “evil” or condemnable actions. I don’t think condemning actions then trying to avoid those actions works. We all know stealing is wrong, right? Who has never encountered that concept, it’s so accepted it’s literally illegal! People still steal. I don’t think the Enron guys could have been talked out of what they did with any amount of morality/condemning/etc. I think they all had much much much deeper problems that led them to be the type of person who could do an action that was so damaging to so many (and also so condemned).
I think condemning is easier than looking inside, and I think that’s part of why it’s such a staple of most religions. It’s easier to say: HERE ARE THE RULES than it is to say, “well why are you as a person someone who is struggling with xyz? why do you keep doing it? what in you needs to be healed?”
I meant condemning not in the sense of condemning a person, but an action. Maybe a better way to phrase it is, how do we agree that the Holocaust was morally wrong if there isn’t objective truth? You yourself note that stealing is agreed to be wrong, but why isn’t that evidence for objective truth?
How do you know what is wrong if there is no objective standard of good?
Edit: For me the central principle of morality is consent. The reason I believe this is because I believe humans have true moral agency as the result of being made in the image of God, and anything that violates this agency is wrong.
Yeah, I mean that’s the mythology behind the idea of original sin, the idea that we, for whatever reason, have this predilection for deciding that something is worth doing evil to obtain.
For me, my experience of Jesus infinite love, mercy, and forgiveness helps me forgive myself for mistakes, seek forgiveness from others, and in turn forgive them. Together we then try to heal and do better. I don’t know why it’s so hard for humans, but it is. I feel like my devotion opens me to grace from God that helps make those good choices easier. That’s just my path though. You have been inspiring to read about, I really appreciate your viewpoints.
Hee hee… I like Christian rock and sing alongs. So when I lived 2 minutes from a school with a church with good music I went practically every week until it got awkward that I wasn’t Christian and didn’t want to join. Saddest was losing friends who wanted to convert me
Nah. I think we can have a social contract that lets us denounce evil and set up rehab and corrections centres and a justice system without agreeing on a single objective truth.
In fact, as part of the reconciliation project, it would be cool if JT switched us over to healing circles and maybe also paid attention to the country with really low jail rates.
I say it is culturally agreed upon to be wrong, it is socially condemned, but I do not actually believe stealing is always wrong. If a parent who is homeless steals food to feed her children…is that wrong? I don’t think so. Is murder always wrong? Again, I’d say no! I think if I were attacked and in defending myself I killed my attacker…that would be ok morally. If I randomly decided to kill my husband for insurance money…that would not be ok morally, my motivation in that case would be greed, not survival. I think life is far too complex for absolutes.
I don’t think an objective standard is necessary to promoting individual goodness. I think stealing would be wrong for me right now in my life. I have lots of money and a husband who financially supports me, and worst case scenario I even have relatives I could ask for help if I had to. I have no reason to steal, if I stole…it would be out of malice or greed or any number of things. I also think it would be wrong if I did not give some of my money to charity, if someone with as much as me can’t give…who can? I am obligated and honored to be in a position to give. I don’t think someone making minimum wage has the same financial obligation to give that I do.
All I need to worry about is me, that’s what I can control, and I don’t need an overarching objective truth to do that!
Right? Like if we evaluated in the healing a mom who stole for her family … We could address the people who fail that family before she stole, and solve the problem.
If we find a mom who steals 6 million in company profits for her kids to live a better life, we can heal the broken part of her that makes her think she had such a lack and entitlement
Well, what I would say is that there’s a difference between murder (always wrong) and killing in self-defense. Murder is a subtype of killing humans.
And yes, context and intentionality matters so much! That’s why radical forgiveness is so important. No one can see the heart. One thing I love meditating on is how the core of each person, what it really means to be THAT person, is fundamentally unknowable by any other person. That’s a great mystery and part of why respecting the consent of others is so critical.
I’ll set the objective good element part because I think I’m letting that get in the way and arguing over it doesn’t accomplish anything.
At a practical level I think we see the same thing, the emphasis on both personal improvement and healing. Wouldn’t you say? I would rather prize what we share in common than divide us over something we see differently.
