How did the standard of good and evil come to be
I am of the inclination that the laws governing good and evil are a product of us being a social type of creature; one who needs a pack (sociological system) to survive.
To further the point, in order to survive, we needed to develop a type of governance, boundaries that can ensure our internal succes as group, to proliferate our existence.
What do you think.
To further the point, in order to survive, we needed to develop a type of governance, boundaries that can ensure our internal succes as group, to proliferate our existence.
What do you think.
Comments (11)
To the post, unless you live in Antarctica somehow or perhaps some isolated African jungle, it's called law and order and government. Already done lol.
Not at all. I'm saying we don't have to because it's already been done. Is it perfect? Not by far. Is it better than earlier systems factoring in the whole overpopulation thing? Absolutely and indisputably. It has mechanisms to correct itself when corruption rots and corrodes inner workings. Some of these are external of course.
If the objective is to produce something, it's either evil to produce nothing, or the objective itself is evil (producing would be counter-productive in the good-owed, greater scheme). If there is nothing, the only step forward is good, as evil would fail at stepping forward.
Good and evil are opposites that revolve around objectives, but can be thought in a subjective sense, using the terms are good and bad, where most associations are quality-determinate (i.e. this game is good; this game is bad).
Sounds satisfying.
But such narratives in the support of any local belief system around "good and evil" are susceptible to ironic and corrupt uses (ie. a means to many kinds of ends depending on who stands to gain) within the hierarchy of said culture. Wolves can be clothed in sheep skin, so to speak.
The narrative of good and evil lends power to the righteous in proportion to the degree everyone believes in and abides by it (or so pretends). It's as much a propaganda tool for monarchs as it is a means of keeping social order.