<$BlogRSDUrl$>

It's only semi autobiographical

  • My Profile
  • Friday, August 22, 2003

    Once again I have been visited by that elusive Muse. In response to my post on the 20th, she has sent me a short message further exploring good and evil. Well thats religion students for you.

    Rather than quoting the entire message I've extracted the key points and replicated them here, complete with quotes, and my own personal additions. All credit still gos to Muse on this one though.

    First off, she states that "...natural law plays some part, it cannot be the only thing which defines good and evil..." pointing out that distinguished philosophers have noted "There is no such thing as an essential human nature."

    That is, since attitudes and views change so much culture to culture, there is no one "human nature" to compare different human behaviours to.

    One salient example given is that of homosexuality. In the Vatican City, it is seen as "evil" for want of a better word, since scriptures specificaly forbid it, whilst in ancient Greece, love between two men was seen as the highest form of love, spiritual and physical.

    Therefore, people can not be definitively defined as good or evil, however, by lookin at a balance between their acts, some definition could be found. One suggested way of doing this is utilitarianism, (the greatest good for the greatest number.) Another is to categorise the actual acts as intrinsicaly good or evil. Both these approaches obviously have drawbacks, and neither can be used to fully answer the question of "What is good?" or "What is evil?"

    Therefore, the Muse concludes that "All norms and values and definitions of good and evil are culturally relative and situational." Now, if that isn't an invitation, I dont know what is... You may not follow my line of thought here, but then, few people do, just trust me, ok?

    Now, I'm being tickled, and I'm going to play Risk.
    Comments: Post a Comment

    This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?